thessalonian Posted January 30, 2012 Posted January 30, 2012 Today I heard a commercial for Ron Paul on abortion. In it he spoke about how he accidently walked in to a hospital room in which a third tri baby was being aborted. It was dumped in to a bucket in the corner and ignored as if it didn't matter. They he talked about going in to the room he was supposed to go in to and a baby's life was trying to be saved. His commercial was touching on the surface. BUT WHY THE HELL DIDN'T HE STEP UP FOR THE BABY IN THE BUCKET AND DO SOMETHING!
Aloysius Posted January 31, 2012 Posted January 31, 2012 he was a young medical student at the time (I think, though I could have my timeline wrong, maybe he had just started practicing I'm not sure), and he was shocked and had not expected to see something like that. In any event, it's easy to sit here and say something like that in comfort, but on the same token why don't you break into abortion clinics and stop doctors from doing what they're doing? there was a whole group of doctors and hospital officials who would not have let him do anything about it.
FutureCarmeliteClaire Posted January 31, 2012 Posted January 31, 2012 [quote name='Aloysius' timestamp='1328020738' post='2378247'] he was a young medical student at the time (I think, though I could have my timeline wrong, maybe he had just started practicing I'm not sure), and he was shocked and had not expected to see something like that. In any event, it's easy to sit here and say something like that in comfort, but on the same token why don't you break into abortion clinics and stop doctors from doing what they're doing? there was a whole group of doctors and hospital officials who would not have let him do anything about it. [/quote] Yes.
thessalonian Posted January 31, 2012 Author Posted January 31, 2012 The baby was in the bucket still alive. He needed to step in.
4588686 Posted January 31, 2012 Posted January 31, 2012 [quote name='thessalonian' timestamp='1328047669' post='2378501'] The baby was in the bucket still alive. He needed to step in. [/quote] No it wasn't. If it was an abortion. If the baby was still alive then by definition the act was one of infanticide rather than abortion and quite illegal.
Winchester Posted January 31, 2012 Posted January 31, 2012 [quote name='thessalonian' timestamp='1328047669' post='2378501'] The baby was in the bucket still alive. He needed to step in. [/quote] Did he say he shouldn't have?
Aloysius Posted January 31, 2012 Posted January 31, 2012 Yeah, I think when he says it was able to cry he wasn't saying it was still able to cry by the time they put it in the bucket, sadly. Even so, you talk a big game but it just sounds sanctimonious and distasteful to me; again, it's a whole hospital full of doctors and hospital officials and you're a young new doctor with little to no say in anything, just beginning your carreer, you walk into the wrong room and you see something terrible and shocking that you didn't expect to see... what do you do? maybe he could have done something, maybe (from the way he described it we don't exactly know too many details), but ultimately to sit back and judge him this way is just distasteful... and I'm not saying this is you but I've seen this said other places where people have made this accusation in a blatantly politically motivated way (from people who didn't like Ron Paul already who want to find something to discredit him and are therefore willing to take this event and use it as a weapon) and that's even more distasteful. it was a shocking and unexpected situation over which he had no power. maybe, depending on the circumstances, there was a more morally virtuous course to take in which one sacrificed their whole career and possible got into a physical confrontation with doctors and hospital officials, possibly ended up in jail, maybe there was an option to do something like that. but obviously Ron wasn't telling this story to tell us how much of a superhero he was, but to tell us how shocking it was to see something like that as a young doctor.
bridgejumper Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 here's the link for anyone interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkAsLPrnJGc
KnightofChrist Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 [quote name='Aloysius' timestamp='1328049251' post='2378531'] Yeah, I think when he says it was able to cry he wasn't saying it was still able to cry by the time they put it in the bucket, sadly. Even so, you talk a big game but it just sounds sanctimonious and distasteful to me; again, it's a whole hospital full of doctors and hospital officials and you're a young new doctor with little to no say in anything, just beginning your carreer, you walk into the wrong room and you see something terrible and shocking that you didn't expect to see... what do you do? maybe he could have done something, maybe (from the way he described it we don't exactly know too many details), but ultimately to sit back and judge him this way is just distasteful... and I'm not saying this is you but I've seen this said other places where people have made this accusation in a blatantly politically motivated way (from people who didn't like Ron Paul already who want to find something to discredit him and are therefore willing to take this event and use it as a weapon) and that's even more distasteful. it was a shocking and unexpected situation over which he had no power. maybe, depending on the circumstances, there was a more morally virtuous course to take in which one sacrificed their whole career and possible got into a physical confrontation with doctors and hospital officials, possibly ended up in jail, maybe there was an option to do something like that. but obviously Ron wasn't telling this story to tell us how much of a superhero he was, but to tell us how shocking it was to see something like that as a young doctor. [/quote] Maybe Paul greatly err'd by leaving the baby in the trashcan/bucket. Crying or not, and yes he could have done something. He had the "power" to take the child out of the trashcan, he had the power to give the child medical attention. He had the power to try even if he would have been punished for it. It seems he made a great error and mistake where he should have done something and there is no excuse for it. However clearly the event had a great and positive impact on his pro-life beliefs and he has been a reasonably dependable pro-life congressman for many years. So good has come from his grave mistake.
thessalonian Posted February 2, 2012 Author Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1328047876' post='2378506'] No it wasn't. If it was an abortion. If the baby was still alive then by definition the act was one of infanticide rather than abortion and quite illegal. [/quote] Do you really think that every baby that is outside the womb after an abortion is assured of being dead? Listen to the add above. Sounds like infanticide to me. But I suppose if they are to avoid infanticide, they must, as the baby is being extracted crush the skull as they do. As long as it's little toe is in the womb it's not infanticide I guess. This baby he saw was clearly out of the womb and still alive and they dumpted it in a bucket by his account. Likely was alive in the bucket as well. Late termers don't die that quickly. I am glad that he went on to become a very good pro-life doctor and applaud him for that. But this episode disgusts me. No way I could leave that baby in a bucket, even when I was younger. Edited February 2, 2012 by thessalonian
Aloysius Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 When I said it was not alive by the time it was in the bucket I was saying it sounded like the doctors killed it before putting it in the bucket. Again, we don't have enough information. I even think "able to cry" may have been Dr. Paul's editorializing on the size of the infant he saw removed, not that he actually heard it cry. I don't know, maybe he heard it cry, or maybe he just saw how big it was and noted that a baby of that size is able to cry. In any event, from the description it was indeed my impression that the doctors had killed the baby before placing it in the bucket. Anyway, I'm not a fan of this whole sanctimony over how much you would've done if you had been there. #1 you don't know the details of the situation very well, and #2 you have no way of knowing how you'd be able to react in such a situation.
thessalonian Posted February 2, 2012 Author Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) And I don't appreciate your insulting post. . Edited February 2, 2012 by thessalonian
Ice_nine Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 There's such a thing called shock. I pray that God would give me the grace in any given situation to overcome shock with moral virtue, but then I'm entirely depending on God's grace and not my own faculties.
Aloysius Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) [quote name='thessalonian' timestamp='1328204244' post='2379610'] And I don't appreciate your insulting post. You sound a bit sanctimonious toward me yourself. [/quote] I am not above criticism. I don't think I'm any better than you. I'm just calling you out on your judgmental attitude here. And you're basically just saying that you're rubber and I'm glue, that I'm being sanctimonious because it makes you uncomfortable that I've called you out for a sanctimonious attitude here. Why not focus on the actual point I have raised, recognize my points about #1 the things we don't know about the situation and #2 the many other factors that were involved in the incident; points that I have made to illustrate to you that your declaration of how much better of a job you would've done in this situation is unrealistic and judgmental. Edited February 2, 2012 by Aloysius
Aloysius Posted February 2, 2012 Posted February 2, 2012 Anyway, I don't want any trouble here man, I'm not trying to insult you and if you feel insulted I apologize. I am specifically talking about the way you are talking about this specific incident, I'm not trying to insult you as a person or anything. I just think we need to step back and recognize how complicated the situation would have been and how it's far too simplistic to sit back and act like any of us would've been able to do anything else.
rkwright Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) Sounds like a lot of people are assuming he didn't do anything. What if he did speak up? What if he went over there to see the baby and by that time it was in fact dead. What if he couldn't get to it at all because of the set up of the room? The video doesn't say one way or another. Edited February 3, 2012 by rkwright
Era Might Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 [quote name='thessalonian' timestamp='1327961553' post='2377868']BUT WHY THE HELL DIDN'T HE STEP UP FOR THE BABY IN THE BUCKET AND DO SOMETHING! [/quote] Maybe he thought that if he helped him, the baby would go buy booze.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now