senator james lankford
conference call
abortion legality
life begins at conception
whether babies should suffer lack
On a conference-call with Lankford (R-OK), a constituent brought up Abortion
@mythociate (21437)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
April 27, 2022 10:44am CST
Senator Lankford had several people on a conference-call where he answered a few of our questions (I didn't have any questions and wasn't asked for comment ... "non-attorney spokesperson," or whatever ...)
https://www.lankford.senate.gov/
One of the questioners asked ... well, I don't know if he "asked" anything; more like he 'stated the opinion' that abortion should be legal up until the fetus has a heartbeat.
Lankford countered that with the widely-held opinion that life starts at conception. And one of the bases (basisses?) for that opinion was the fact that the fetus has DNA that is totally different than that of the mother (unlike other growths within her body ... I think I need to look for verification of that fact 
);
because My opinion is that abortion should be legal any time before the umbilical cord is cut. That's because my main focus is not on the preservation of Life, but on the prevention of Suffering. I think 'Would I rather die than -go through life without (whatever this baby will be born without ... their biological father and/or -mother, their eye(s), their limb(s), etc.)"
It should ultimately be the mother's choice, up to the cutting of the umbilical cord.
I remember rumors that--if my parents wanted to--they could legally kill me without getting in too much trouble ... but maybe that was just a scare-tactic to keep me from manifesting my hell-spawn powers too early 
);
because My opinion is that abortion should be legal any time before the umbilical cord is cut. That's because my main focus is not on the preservation of Life, but on the prevention of Suffering. I think 'Would I rather die than -go through life without (whatever this baby will be born without ... their biological father and/or -mother, their eye(s), their limb(s), etc.)"
It should ultimately be the mother's choice, up to the cutting of the umbilical cord.
I remember rumors that--if my parents wanted to--they could legally kill me without getting in too much trouble ... but maybe that was just a scare-tactic to keep me from manifesting my hell-spawn powers too early 2 people like this
2 responses
@sulynsi (2671)
• Canada
27 Apr 22
There are so many opinions and perspectives, aren't there?
Such an emotionally charged issue. All those 'what if' scenarios that make you question your judgment.
For myself, God's word provides a way to measure 'right' or 'wrong'
Here's what I consider in this matter:
'I praise you because in an awe-inspiring way I am wonderfully made.
Your works are wonderful,
I know this very well.
My bones were not hidden from you
When I was made in secret,
When I was woven in the depths of the earth.
Your eyes even saw me as an embryo;
All its parts were written in your book
Regarding the days when they were formed,
Before any of them existed.' Psalm 139 vs 14-16
I find it fascinating that the psalmist David refers to the embryonic stage (which according to medical sources is the third through the eighth week from conception) he even poetically refers to the DNA - how 'all the parts were in writing' and 'before any of them existed, or before any human was aware of them.
1 person likes this
@mythociate (21437)
• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
27 Apr 22
Yeah, but what if the baby WON'T be "wonderfully made"? Will the child's life be WORTH the suffering they'll have to go through?
1 person likes this
@mythociate (21437)
• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
28 Apr 22
@sulynsi Yes. And it's a decision that is the mother's right to make.
1 person likes this
@sulynsi (2671)
• Canada
28 Apr 22
@mythociate ...and this mother would choose to let the pregnancy take its course - deciding if my child is viable or not viable or whether or not their life would be a good one is WAAAAYYY above my pay grade.
Just as a side note, I know of cases where doctors were certain that a child would be terribly disabled and advised a termination, and yet, because of conscience, the mother decided not to terminate - and the child turned out perfectly normal.
My sister should have been 'disabled' based on certain indicators - she was not. I'm glad my mum didn't abort her.
One other consideration, and I'm saying this for myself, that if I decided to become pregnant, I accepted a risk - a risk that things may not go as I hoped - I accepted the responsibility of a life, however that life shows up. I think that sober responsibility is ignored - we live in a 'rights' society - but those rights may overlap or clash with someone else's.
1 person likes this
@sabtraversa (13097)
• Italy
27 Apr 22
It's a struggle between the right to live and the right to live decently, and they're both fair.
At 5 months the fetus is "viable", i.e. able to survive outside the womb, so I'm afraid it'd be too late beyond that. The fetus develops a heartbeat after about 5/6 weeks, in comparison. Then I'd agree with you, abortion must not taken lightly but there are cases where it's reasonable and performed for the wellbeing of both mother and potential new life.
1 person likes this
