Pharmacy Mistakenly Gives Pregnant Woman Abortion Pill
[Pharmacy Mistakenly Gives Pregnant Woman Abortion
Pill: Safeway Mix-Up Could Cost Woman Her Unborn Child by Russell
Haythorn] "Ft. Lupton, Colo. -- She is six weeks pregnant and when she
went to the pharmacy to pick up an antibiotic her doctor had prescribed,
the pharmacist gave her an abortion drug by mistake.
Mareena Silva might lose her unborn child because of the prescription
drug error, which occurred last Thursday.
"I took it because I thought it was mine," Silva said.
Silva said the pharmacist at the Ft. Lupton Safeway gave her the
prescription of methotrexate. Methotrexate is used in chemotherapy
regimens to treat cancer, but it is also used to terminate early-stage
pregnancies.
After she took it, Silva started feeling nauseous..." Full text:
Pharmacy Mistakenly Gives Pregnant Woman Abortion Pill
Response to comment [from an atheist]: "It's sad."
Why is it sad? Ps 40:8.
"Because a woman who was having a baby lost that chance."
Why would a pro-abort respond with sadness? Jer 1:5. Do you care for wanted children more than unwanted children? Both are innocent. Did Safeway then distribute methotrexate to the other woman to kill her child off? Are you willing to pull child-killing chemical weapons off the shelf altogether?
"My sadness is for the mother, the father, and the entire family who were expecting a baby."
You were saddened. Therefore, you know it's wrong
to murder an innocent child (Ps
40:8). Safeway was also saddened: "We
have extended our sincere apologies to the customer..." They are sorry
that they attempted to murder the wrong child. They are unwilling to
pull the child-killing chemical weapons "...[W]e will continue to work
diligently to ensure our procedures and policies are being followed at
each of our pharmacies."
Are you also willing to override the part of you that told you killing
innocent children is wrong? We know Safeway's position. What about
yours?
[You were saddened. Therefore, you know it's wrong to murder an innocent child (Ps 40:8).] "Why listen to what I say when you can just invent what I think?"
Did I invent your statement: "It's sad."?
Are you willing to suppress what you know to be true (Ro 1:18).
[Are you willing to suppress what you know to be true (Ro 1:18).] "I'm done responding to people who want to tell me what I know."
Who are we to believe--God who gave you the ability to know right from wrong (Ps 40:8) or you--now backpedaling? Jer 17:9. Does God know your heart? Prov. 1:24–31. Are you telling us your conscience has been seared? 1 Ti 4:2.
Response to comment [from a Satanist]: "Bottomline, this is a tragic accident..."
Had the chemical attacked another baby in another womb it is less tragic? If so, why?
"I'd say that it [the chemical] didn't attack a baby, so the question's kind of moot."
Then what is "tragic"?
"Potential damage to the baby if it comes to term let alone what the mother's going through right now..."
That is tragic. What about the other baby who has not been attacked yet? Do you use the word "tragic" for the baby in womb number two? 1 Ti 4:2.
"Again, SD, these pills don't attack "babies," so phrasing the question like that is a non-starter from my perspective."
Any pill that attacks any baby in the womb --is this equally tragic? If yes, why. If no, why not? How is baby in womb number one different from baby in womb number two?
Response to comment [from a Jew]: "Since when can a pill cause the "abortion " of a six-week old fetus?"
Her doctor said that she could miscarry or her baby may suffer complications.
Response to comment [from a Christian]: [Draino]
You didn't like the big meat-a-ball-a, TomO?
"These pills aren't attacking infants, babies, children, fetuses, embryos of any kind..."
I asked if you support the use of abortifacients (e.g. the morning after pill) in general. Do you support the use of chemical weapons against children? :sleep:
"..."[C]hildren" aren't involved."
If children are not involved, what is "tragic"? Your word not mine.
"I already answered this question."
You clarified what you believed to be tragic: "...[P]otential damage to the baby if it comes to term let alone what the mother's going through right now..." If it is tragic for baby in womb one to be harmed, why is it not tragic for baby in womb two (awaiting the chemical weapon) to be harmed?
Response to comment [from a Christian]: "...Perhaps rex is "sad" because consent wasn't given by the unborn baby?"
Will he explain this sadness? He knows murder of the unborn is wrong (Ps 40:8, Jer 1:5) or he know murder of the unborn is wrong and he doesn't give a damn (1 Tim 4:2).
Response to comment [from an atheist]: "...[T]here are plenty of “anti-abortion” threads to be found on TOL . . . not one (that I've seen) uses a Biblical quotation that addresses abortion..."
Ex 20:13, Deut 24:16.
Response to comment [from a Christian]: "Sorry, withdrawn, site was overloaded for a moment."
'Pas de probleme'.
Welcome to intermission...
da..da da...da da..da da da da...
da..da da...da da..da da da da...
da..da da...da da..da da da da...
yea.... Intermission
ahhhhhhhh.......
ahhhhhhhhhhhh......
~ Offspring
"I said if the baby comes to term. These morning after pills don't effect children..."
Her doctor said that she may miscarry or the child may suffer complications.
"...[B]ut they do disrupt what may eventually become a child."
If there isn't a child in her womb, there is nothing "tragic" (your word not mine). You know damn well that there is a child in her womb and a threat has come upon him/her (Ro 1:18, 1 Ti 4:2).
"I don't consider a zygote a child or infant or baby..."
You do. That is why you used the word "tragic". I'm complimenting you, Satanist. God's law has been written on your Graniteheart® (Heb. 8:10; 10:16).
"...[A] zygote is not a child."
If you believed that, you would not say: "...[I]f the baby comes..." and "...[W]hat her child may go through..." as you did.
"Then you're not understanding what I wrote or deliberately trying to misrepresent it. Not my problem."
Your Graniteheart® just got two sizes smaller (Ro 1:18, 1 Ti 4:2).