jaylectricity: Clearly the idea that this baby MIGHT be a better person than its mother is a sign of this mother's wickedness.

quizzicaldog.jpg

jaylectricity: Cagey B: jaylectricity: Clearly the idea that this baby MIGHT be a better person than its mother is a sign of this mother's wickedness.

quizzicaldog.jpg

Clearly this woman is a martyr who gave up her own life for the sake of this baby. What if this baby (who will grow up without a mother) turns out to be a devil-child? Wouldn't we rather have the mother alive and well?

I need to spend less time on the internet apparently, because I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or actually asking a question.

In any event, I'm not sure why I should be crying like a biatch about this, submitter.

she managed to pass on her childhood cancer oncogenes. way to go donny!

Ah, the old "why should I bother to accomplish anything myself, I'll depend on my child to do that". My sister in law subscribes to this belief system.

and this came into being the second coming of Christ.

I got as far down as the prom pic with the HUGE NOSE RING and had to click away to avoid rolling my eyes and snorting derisively. (Are we sure she died and didn't just run away to be Queen of the Cannibals?)

Wow, you farkers are sad people.

Can't imagine what kind of guilt this child will feel. Hope the rest of the family is able to help and not make it worse.

Surely the bioethical intricacies of this topic can be resolved with a snarky comment. Or picture. Meanwhile, I'll grab some popcorn.

FirstNationalBastard: Cagey B:

In any event, I'm not sure why I should be crying like a biatch about this, submitter.
.
Maybe because a selfish person decides to get pregnant and leave their child motherless, and the eventual burden of raising the child to others, even though they know they've got terminal cancer?

/really gets the dusty onions to make your vagina weep, eh Subby?

Can't tell if serious or not. FTA, she and her boyfriend were specifically told that the treatment would make her sterile; it did not. Second, she was given only a 30% chance of survival over the next 2 years. What the fark you want her to do? Abort the child, and MAYBE live for the next 2 years? Or at least give birth, and know that the child will be taken care of?

wonder what's going on in this thread.... *click*


....


Gonna go get some popcorn. BRB

Astrocytoma, huh? Spread out of the brain. So she could have a few more years of life while undergoing cancer treatment or give life to her child. Poor kid. Well, she made her decision, and I'm sure FARK will respect it as much as other decisions she could have made. It's her choice, right?

Another generation of trash,now with cancerous genes.

Because what the world needs now is more babies and widowed 19 year old fathers who can't support said babies. That's the answer to our problems. God says so.

natmar_76: Because what the world needs now is more babies and widowed 19 year old fathers who can't support said babies. That's the answer to our problems. God says so.

I heard Nathan is studying to be a carpenter. Perhaps his son will follow him into the profession.

jj325: Has anybody mentioned that getting pregnant when you have cancer might not have been a smart move?

Who's to say she knew she had cancer before getting preggers. Either way, at least she took responsibility for her actions in the way she thought best.

Now all we need is for the whackjobs of this country to turn her into some sort of martyr.

Quasar: Dust off that box of condoms next time, kids.

Thread. Ovar.

/this baby should have never been conceived in the first place
//oh, how great, the need to breed superceding the responsibility to take care of it
/cancer came too late

jj325: Has anybody mentioned that getting pregnant when you have cancer might not have been a smart move?

Well it seems like she and her boyfriend somehow translated "she might be infertile after treatment for her cancer" to "she is completely infertile as soon as her chemotherapy started". Maybe they should start teaching Logic in high school again.

i'll farking say it.

she could have lived, and then made another baby.

whats so complicated?

unless there was minimal guarantee she'd die even with treatment. DRTFA

jj325: Has anybody mentioned that getting pregnant when you have cancer might not have been a smart move?

Pretty much this. In all fairness though I didn't read the article, so I don't know which came first. However, if she did get pregnant while having cancer, that's pretty crappy to do to a child. I'm not sure why some people think that having a baby is some sort of accomplishment they need to do before they die. A better legacy is to not have children and thus not contribute to our rapidly growing unsustainable population, but I know that's crazy talk.

Quasar: Dust off that box of condoms next time, kids.

Kinky.

natmar_76: Because what the world needs now is more babies and widowed 19 year old fathers who can't support said babies. That's the answer to our problems. God says so.

(bearsrepeating.jpg)

---------------

Shirley Ujest: Another generation of trash,now with cancerous genes.

(slowclap.jpg)

What a bunch of cold assholes. (I know, welcome to fark)
These comments show that you all aren't pro-choice, you are pro-death.

The asshole is strong in this thread.

/yeah, yeah, welcome to fark

nitefallz: unless there was minimal guarantee she'd die even with treatment. DRTFA

FTA:
30% chance she might live 2 more years.

FirstNationalBastard: Cagey B:

In any event, I'm not sure why I should be crying like a biatch about this, submitter.
.
Maybe because a selfish person decides to get pregnant and leave their child motherless, and the eventual burden of raising the child to others, even though they know they've got terminal cancer?

/really gets the dusty onions to make your vagina weep, eh Subby?

No, a selfish person would choose to murder an innocent child.

nitefallz: unless there was minimal guarantee she'd die even with treatment. DRTFA

Well, READ it then.

Donnchadha: Know how I know you didn't RTFA?

Oh well. What shall we do to punish her, then? Give her brain cancer?

Donnchadha: dragonchild: jj325: Has anybody mentioned that getting pregnant when you have cancer might not have been a smart move?

Who's to say she knew she had cancer before getting preggers. Either way, at least she took responsibility for her actions in the way she thought best.

Now all we need is for the whackjobs of this country to turn her into some sort of martyr.

Know how I know you didn't RTFA?

She was diagnosed in October 2010, and the kid was born November 9th, 2011. Furthermore, there's the implications that her and her boyfriend figured the chemo and radiation had rendered her sterile, so there was no point in using birth control.

Ah so they were just irresponsible. I'm hoping it was at least not planned. However, I could totally see someone on death's door thinking it would be great to leave a baby as a legacy, especially a teenager.

Pregnant teen with facial piercings and cancer? She's better off dead.

nitefallz: i'll farking say it.

she could have lived, and then made another baby.

whats so complicated?

unless there was minimal guarantee she'd die even with treatment. DRTFA

Doctors gave her a 30% chance to live two more years but told her she'd be sterile. As a result the couple stopped using protection as I would wager most couples do who believe they can't have kids (how many men do you know who wrap it after a vasectomy even though there is still a chance they could impregnate their ladies?)

I don't mind that you didn't read the article so don't take my answer as snarky or derisive, but obviously a number of posters here didn't read it either and just want to knee jerk respond.

Jacka$$es.

tacojohn: What a bunch of cold assholes. (I know, welcome to fark)
These comments show that you all aren't pro-choice, you are pro-death.

Being pro-death is a choice no?