A while ago I was thinking through the whole dynamics on how partial birth abortions are performed.
Okay, so you have this mother that is supposedly in distress from this child and needs to have the child removed ASAP - to save her life.
So the doctor begins the abortion by inducing birth. Then he stops the birth "mid-stream" in order to take the time to turn the baby around, so it is coming out breach - feet first.
How long does that process take, and what effect does it have on the mother in distress?
Then he allows the birth to continue - but stops it short before the head emerges.
At this point, he kills the baby with a sharp object to the base of the skull. How much time does that take?
Alright, so we've done this partial birth and abortion ASAP to save the mother's life, but delayed it a couple of times in order to perform the murder? is that right?
And...this is my confusion - wouldn't the birth have happened a lot sooner if it has simply been allowed to run it's course with a live birth - and relieve the mother's distress more quickly?
And then - here is the real, real big confusion. Why was the murder necessary? If they had already begun an early birth, and the child was already on his way out...and within a few minutes the mother was going to be free of the child anyway...I don't get it. Why was the murder medically necessary?
I guess I have my own assumptions as to why partial birth abortion occurs despite its obvious nonsensical purpose. I base this assumption on those questions, as well as reports that near term babies are frequently placed in a freezer at the abortion clinic.
If the babies head is born, the child is considered a live birth. So if the child's head is jabbed after it comes out, then courts would presumabley agree that the child was murdered.
Therefore, the child must first be turned in the womb so that the head is the last to come out and can be easily stuck in its base prior to a completed birth. In this way, it's not considered murder. Right?
But why must the child be stuck in the head? Why not some other form of killing it while it is still in the mother's body?
It seems this method of murder is an attempt to keep many of the baby's tissues in good shape -undamaged by chemicals or tools. etc.
So what is the doctor's purpose in recommending and performing a partial birth abortion, when - if the mother is truly in distress - she would be relieved quicker without it, and there is no medical reason for the child to actually be killed?
I have to wonder about the freezers these children are placed in and the purpose of perserving their tissues. If my assumptions are correct, I come to the personal conclusion that this isn't about what's good for mother's or babies - it's about what's good for the Doctor and clinic financially. This is an industry, period.