If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SeattlePI)   Defying all medical reason and a judge's order, Fort Worth hospital considers appeal because they 'have a duty to protect the fetus'   (seattlepi.com) divider line 344
    More: Followup, Hospital considers, duty to protect, pregnancy, fetus, John Peter Smith Hospital  
•       •       •

6676 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jan 2014 at 3:39 PM (30 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



344 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-25 08:22:46 PM

Gyrfalcon: namegoeshere: Universal Declaration of Death Act: (pdf)

"§ 1. [Determination of Death]. An individual who has sustained either (1)
irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible
cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead. A
determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical
standards."

There are no levels of dead. You are alive, or you are dead. Brain dead is dead.

That's fine, but that doesn't negate my larger point.


The inability to correctly define brain death and differentiate between brain death and severe brain damage is what is causing this  case and Jahi McMath's case to be such a f*cking nightmare. You said, "this woman isn't JUST* brain dead [... ] she is dead." and "But being "brain dead" is not the same thing as being dead but maintained on a heart-lung machine, " (*Emphasis mine) This implies that there is a difference between brain dead and dead, and that it is possible to be brain dead and alive. It is not.

Brain death is death. It is critical that we all be very clear on this point.
 
2014-01-25 08:27:27 PM

BetterMetalSnake: The only way to resolve this situation is to declare the fetus born. Suddenly its a Mexican and Republicans wont give 2 cents about its welfare.


This. They'll claim that it's an illegal immigrant and kick it across the border.
 
2014-01-25 08:29:55 PM
Well, I see in the time I spent leisurely composing my post, a passel of folks stepped up to point out the problems with the examples given in Amberleia's links. I'm gratified despite feeling a bit redundant.
 
2014-01-25 08:30:26 PM

namegoeshere: Gyrfalcon: namegoeshere: Universal Declaration of Death Act: (pdf)

"§ 1. [Determination of Death]. An individual who has sustained either (1)
irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible
cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead. A
determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical
standards."

There are no levels of dead. You are alive, or you are dead. Brain dead is dead.

That's fine, but that doesn't negate my larger point.

The inability to correctly define brain death and differentiate between brain death and severe brain damage is what is causing this  case and Jahi McMath's case to be such a f*cking nightmare. You said, "this woman isn't JUST* brain dead [... ] she is dead." and "But being "brain dead" is not the same thing as being dead but maintained on a heart-lung machine, " (*Emphasis mine) This implies that there is a difference between brain dead and dead, and that it is possible to be brain dead and alive. It is not.

Brain death is death. It is critical that we all be very clear on this point.


The point we need to be clear on is that a dead body can't support a live fetus.
 
2014-01-25 08:30:38 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: armor helix: I don't understand what the hospital hopes to get out of this.

They want to be viewed as compassionate.

/that's the joke


They want to sell their legal counsel's "a fetus is a person so abortion is murder" line of bullshiat. It's strictly political grandstanding.
 
2014-01-25 08:33:28 PM
Texas sucks.
 
2014-01-25 08:37:40 PM

Gyrfalcon: namegoeshere: Gyrfalcon: namegoeshere: Universal Declaration of Death Act: (pdf)

"§ 1. [Determination of Death]. An individual who has sustained either (1)
irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or (2) irreversible
cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead. A
determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical
standards."

There are no levels of dead. You are alive, or you are dead. Brain dead is dead.

That's fine, but that doesn't negate my larger point.

The inability to correctly define brain death and differentiate between brain death and severe brain damage is what is causing this  case and Jahi McMath's case to be such a f*cking nightmare. You said, "this woman isn't JUST* brain dead [... ] she is dead." and "But being "brain dead" is not the same thing as being dead but maintained on a heart-lung machine, " (*Emphasis mine) This implies that there is a difference between brain dead and dead, and that it is possible to be brain dead and alive. It is not.

Brain death is death. It is critical that we all be very clear on this point.

The point we need to be clear on is that a dead body can't support a live fetus.


AND that a brain dead patient is indeed a dead body.
 
2014-01-25 08:42:01 PM

TheDirtyNacho: It's Dr Mengele style care at this hospital it seems.

I do hope the state medical board and law bar open investigations into the actions that have taken place here.


^^^^THIS^^^^

It's time for some malpractice charges to be brought.
 
2014-01-25 08:45:49 PM
I'm glad none of you farkers were that child.
 
2014-01-25 08:47:48 PM

Lydia_C: Well, I see in the time I spent leisurely composing my post, a passel of folks stepped up to point out the problems with the examples given in Amberleia's links. I'm gratified despite feeling a bit redundant.


It may help people who are on the fence if they see multiple people weighing in, so... don't feel so bad I guess?

Gyrfalcon: Alicious: RobertBruce: Since this has gone on so long already, let it go to 24 weeks, do a c-section and see what happens.

That is probably the plan already.

And when they do, and harvest a dead sack of deformed goo, who is going to take the blame then?


Forgive me for being selfish here but I am SO SO GLAD I cannot carry any fetus at all, at this point. I don't care if it's paranoia, if I were even just in a coma, much less brain dead, I would not want to be considered a mere incubator by the state. Whatever state that might be. UGH.
 
2014-01-25 08:47:50 PM

armor helix: I don't understand what the hospital hopes to get out of this.


The DA and legal counsel for the hospital are made up of vehemently anti-abortion lawyers who are active on the national scene. They are using this woman as a martyr for their cause. No matter the outcome. If she's taken off life support, it'll be because those liebrul baby murderers willed it through activist judges.

There are also people behind the scenes pulling the strings, just like with Schiavo.

 

jgk3: It's time for some malpractice charges to be brought.


You're assuming the attending physicians are the ones who started this. From all understanding, it was the hospital's legal council when it was brought before their ethics committee who started it.
 
2014-01-25 09:08:02 PM

Amberleia: I am pro-choice.  The well-being of a woman, mental, emotional, and physical, supercedes the rights of an unborn fetus.  However, in this case, the mother's well-being is irrelevant, as she's no longer living. Therefore, I believe the rights of the living fetus supercede the rights of a dead woman. If there's any chance of a viable infant being born, then, in my opinion, life support should be continued.

I haven't seen the evidence that the fetus isn't viable, though the reports state that the father's attorneys have such.  If this is true, then by all means end everything, but if there's any doubt at all, then I believe the fetus should be maintained until it is either born or all doubt in removed.


I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not a truly twisted fark or troll.

What, exactly, do you think it would be the husbands, lawyers, and doctor's motive to lie about the fetus?  If the fetus was healthy, why are all these people lying about its shape?
 
2014-01-25 09:11:09 PM

Chach: I'm glad none of you farkers were that child.


Yes, none of us were non-viable abnormal fetuses inside dead bodies, because we were actually born.
 
2014-01-25 09:11:11 PM

Chach: I'm glad none of you farkers were that child.


If you could call it that...which I wouldn't.
 
2014-01-25 09:18:49 PM

Chach: I'm glad none of you farkers were that child.


Yes, I'm very glad I wasn't gestated in rotting corpse and brought into the world for a short, painful life only to die within hours, if I even had that much of a life.
 
2014-01-25 09:20:46 PM
The family should sue for intentional cruelty, malicious medical malpractice, desecration of a corpse, and extortion.
The greedy, braindead farkwits who are inflicting this on the  family should foot the entire award - that family will win - from their own damned pockets.
 
2014-01-25 09:21:32 PM

Chach: I'm glad none of you farkers were that child.


Sweet farking Jesus.

A three digit troll account?

Is this for real, or is a mod backdating/renaming inactive accounts for troll use again?
 
2014-01-25 09:22:47 PM

Satanic_Hamster: Chach: I'm glad none of you farkers were that child.

Sweet farking Jesus.

A three digit troll account?

Is this for real, or is a mod backdating/renaming inactive accounts for troll use again?


Listen, noob, not everyone that disagrees with you is a troll.
 
2014-01-25 09:23:36 PM
I don't think I put enough bourbon in this hot toddy to deal with the continuation of this horror story.

/My state also has laws that override DNR when there's a pregnancy
//Have never been more grateful for lesbianism, Mirena, and a biologist girlfriend who is just as adamant as I am about not getting pregnant ever.
 
2014-01-25 09:32:07 PM

Strix occidentalis: I don't think I put enough bourbon in this hot toddy to deal with the continuation of this horror story.

/My state also has laws that override DNR when there's a pregnancy
//Have never been more grateful for lesbianism, Mirena, and a biologist girlfriend who is just as adamant as I am about not getting pregnant ever.


Why do you need Mirena if you're a lesbian? I mean, unless she's a pre-op transsexual, in which case lesbianism isn't something to be thankful as it won't prevent pregnancy in your situation...
 
2014-01-25 09:47:34 PM

MeanJean: Strix occidentalis: I don't think I put enough bourbon in this hot toddy to deal with the continuation of this horror story.

/My state also has laws that override DNR when there's a pregnancy
//Have never been more grateful for lesbianism, Mirena, and a biologist girlfriend who is just as adamant as I am about not getting pregnant ever.

Why do you need Mirena if you're a lesbian? I mean, unless she's a pre-op transsexual, in which case lesbianism isn't something to be thankful as it won't prevent pregnancy in your situation...


I had awful, heavy periods with cramps that were so bad I've mistaken them for appendicitis before, even on the pill.  The IUD has completely eliminated my period, which makes me a much happier camper.
 
2014-01-25 10:36:25 PM

hardinparamedic: armor helix: I don't understand what the hospital hopes to get out of this.

The DA and legal counsel for the hospital are made up of vehemently anti-abortion lawyers who are active on the national scene. They are using this woman as a martyr for their cause. No matter the outcome. If she's taken off life support, it'll be because those liebrul baby murderers willed it through activist judges.

There are also people behind the scenes pulling the strings, just like with Schiavo.

 jgk3: It's time for some malpractice charges to be brought.

You're assuming the attending physicians are the ones who started this. From all understanding, it was the hospital's legal council when it was brought before their ethics committee who started it.



Nonetheless, someone has to maintain the fluids, the machinery, the medical environment and run tests that contribute to this.

I find it hard to believe that medical staff would go along willingly, but thats why I think it should be thoroughly investigated - to find who played what role, and why.
 
2014-01-25 10:38:32 PM

MeanJean: Why do you need Mirena if you're a lesbian? I mean, unless she's a pre-op transsexual, in which case lesbianism isn't something to be thankful as it won't prevent pregnancy in your situation...


Some women take hormonal contraception for reproductive illnesses, such as endometriosis. My ex-wife could not even function without being on HCP for hers.
 
2014-01-25 10:46:20 PM

Strix occidentalis: I had awful, heavy periods with cramps that were so bad I've mistaken them for appendicitis before, even on the pill.  The IUD has completely eliminated my period, which makes me a much happier cramper.

 
2014-01-25 10:55:50 PM

swaniefrmreddeer: Godf*ckingdamnit, the fetus that they said wasn't viable. Pro-lifers are the most vile people on the planet.



Almost as vile as abortion doctors and those who kill their unborn children.
 
2014-01-25 10:57:11 PM

Truther: Almost as vile as abortion doctors and those who kill their unborn children.


Awww, how cute.
 
2014-01-25 11:00:13 PM

TV's Vinnie: What are these fundie sickos going to do? Stand around a wheezing ball of twisted flesh after it's born from an artificially-animated corpse and sing "Yes, Jesus loves me" while it gurgles and yowls itself to death?

I just don't see the slightest thing holy about this at all.

Religion that is used to dominate people instead of comfort them shouldn't be a Constitutional right.



Thank God you're not in charge!
 
2014-01-25 11:00:41 PM

hardinparamedic: Truther: Almost as vile as abortion doctors and those who kill their unborn children.

Awww, how cute.


And whose little alt is this? And so late in the day, come to support a story that has no supportability at ALL.
 
2014-01-25 11:11:39 PM
Hubris.  They are so bound to the concept that they are special and that God has a special plan for THEM that to believe that every fetus may not be a God's special snowflake for whom miracles occur would force them to believe that perhaps THEY are not God's special snowflake for whom miracles will occur.  The mind recoils and they start insisting on having dead women bear dead fetuses in a vain attempt to make the world fit their own preconceived notions allowing them to remain safe within their own ignorant certitude.  Hubris.
 
2014-01-25 11:13:11 PM

MechaPyx: Farking Canuck: MechaPyx: If the fetus is healthy and there's a chance it can be brought to term then you try and save it. That's the ethical thing to do.

No. It is never ethical to fark with a corpse.

If a living fetus can be removed from the corpse at the time of death that is justifiable. But otherwise it dies with the mother. That is life, death and the natural order of things.

We can do some pretty amazing things with medical science ... but turning corpses into incubators to pacify some religious whack-jobs is way over the line.

I agree with that. I might be ok with incubating if the fetus is really close and needs another week or two. I'm uncomfortable pulling the plug in that situation so I'd rather try incubating than just let it die but I'd feel pretty uncomfortable with it. Just thought of it has me kind of squicked.

What they're doing now is way over the line. I'm not 'grab your torch and pitchforks' outraged but they need to have some common sense slapped into them.


You should be. Everybody involved in the decision to keep this going needs to be lined up against a wall and shot.
 
2014-01-25 11:16:48 PM

Truther: TV's Vinnie: What are these fundie sickos going to do? Stand around a wheezing ball of twisted flesh after it's born from an artificially-animated corpse and sing "Yes, Jesus loves me" while it gurgles and yowls itself to death?

I just don't see the slightest thing holy about this at all.

Religion that is used to dominate people instead of comfort them shouldn't be a Constitutional right.


Thank God you're not in charge!


One word for ya: Jonestown
 
2014-01-25 11:20:42 PM

Gyrfalcon: hardinparamedic: Truther: Almost as vile as abortion doctors and those who kill their unborn children.

Awww, how cute.

And whose little alt is this? And so late in the day, come to support a story that has no supportability at ALL.


You, personally, may find the position of the hospital to be entirely unsupportable, but you are not considering the situation from the point of view of a person who is completely insane.
 
2014-01-25 11:26:36 PM

iq_in_binary: MechaPyx: Farking Canuck: MechaPyx: If the fetus is healthy and there's a chance it can be brought to term then you try and save it. That's the ethical thing to do.

No. It is never ethical to fark with a corpse.

If a living fetus can be removed from the corpse at the time of death that is justifiable. But otherwise it dies with the mother. That is life, death and the natural order of things.

We can do some pretty amazing things with medical science ... but turning corpses into incubators to pacify some religious whack-jobs is way over the line.

I agree with that. I might be ok with incubating if the fetus is really close and needs another week or two. I'm uncomfortable pulling the plug in that situation so I'd rather try incubating than just let it die but I'd feel pretty uncomfortable with it. Just thought of it has me kind of squicked.

What they're doing now is way over the line. I'm not 'grab your torch and pitchforks' outraged but they need to have some common sense slapped into them.

You should be. Everybody involved in the decision to keep this going needs to be lined up against a wall and shot.


That is simply not painful enough.

This story is a sort of odd combination of part of why I don't believe in hell and why I'm sad I don't.
 
2014-01-25 11:35:55 PM

Ehcks: iq_in_binary: MechaPyx: Farking Canuck: MechaPyx: If the fetus is healthy and there's a chance it can be brought to term then you try and save it. That's the ethical thing to do.

No. It is never ethical to fark with a corpse.

If a living fetus can be removed from the corpse at the time of death that is justifiable. But otherwise it dies with the mother. That is life, death and the natural order of things.

We can do some pretty amazing things with medical science ... but turning corpses into incubators to pacify some religious whack-jobs is way over the line.

I agree with that. I might be ok with incubating if the fetus is really close and needs another week or two. I'm uncomfortable pulling the plug in that situation so I'd rather try incubating than just let it die but I'd feel pretty uncomfortable with it. Just thought of it has me kind of squicked.

What they're doing now is way over the line. I'm not 'grab your torch and pitchforks' outraged but they need to have some common sense slapped into them.

You should be. Everybody involved in the decision to keep this going needs to be lined up against a wall and shot.

That is simply not painful enough.

This story is a sort of odd combination of part of why I don't believe in hell and why I'm sad I don't.


Pain shouldn't be the goal. Showing the rest of the religious twits that think this crap is ok what happens when they start getting uppity and thinking their religion means a flying fark is the goal. These sky-wizard worshipers need to start getting turfed.
 
2014-01-26 12:01:28 AM

armor helix: I don't understand what the hospital hopes to get out of this.


Luke Skywalker.
 
2014-01-26 12:21:40 AM

UseLessHuman: Hubris.  They are so bound to the concept that they are special and that God has a special plan for THEM that to believe that every fetus may not be a God's special snowflake for whom miracles occur would force them to believe that perhaps THEY are not God's special snowflake for whom miracles will occur.  The mind recoils and they start insisting on having dead women bear dead fetuses in a vain attempt to make the world fit their own preconceived notions allowing them to remain safe within their own ignorant certitude.  Hubris.


I'm actually an atheist, which is at least part of the reason I think that as long as there's a chance that a fetus is viable, then the mother should be kept alive by artificial means.  Death of the fetus isn't going to result in a heavenly reunion where the mother can hold and cherish her baby, despite what people on some of the boards are saying.

Also, I keep asking myself what I would want if it were me in that position. While under normal circumstances, I wouldn't choose life support, I would right now. I would want to give my unborn child every opportunity to have a life. It's odd in a way, as I had never planned on having biological children. I've provided foster care to hard-to-place kids and have hopes of adopting. I always figured that I could do more good taking in these unwanted kids and providing them a safe and loving home than I could by adding one more person to the mess that we call home.  Now, though, and maybe it's the pregnancy hormones, I would fight tooth and nail to prevent any harm from coming to my baby. If I had to choose between my baby's life and a few months of being kept artificially alive, I'd choose him every time.
 
2014-01-26 12:29:35 AM

Amberleia: I'm actually an atheist, which is at least part of the reason I think that as long as there's a chance that a fetus is viable, then the mother should be kept alive by artificial means. Death of the fetus isn't going to result in a heavenly reunion where the mother can hold and cherish her baby, despite what people on some of the boards are saying.

Also, I keep asking myself what I would want if it were me in that position. While under normal circumstances, I wouldn't choose life support, I would right now. I would want to give my unborn child every opportunity to have a life. It's odd in a way, as I had never planned on having biological children. I've provided foster care to hard-to-place kids and have hopes of adopting. I always figured that I could do more good taking in these unwanted kids and providing them a safe and loving home than I could by adding one more person to the mess that we call home. Now, though, and maybe it's the pregnancy hormones, I would fight tooth and nail to prevent any harm from coming to my baby. If I had to choose between my baby's life and a few months of being kept artificially alive, I'd choose him every time.


a) Mother is not alive and is not being "kept alive". The fetus is gestating inside a rotting corpse that is being pumped full of chemicals that no fetus should be exposed to.

b) What you would want is immaterial. The deceased mother, the father, and the mother's family have all made it clear that they do not want any of these horrific measures taken.

c) That choice you are talking about is pure fiction. The mother is not partially alive ... she is dead. The "baby" will not have a life ... it has suffered extreme damage starting with the loss of oxygen when its mother died (and was not discovered for an unknown amount of time). Current tests show significant damage to the lower extremities, the heart and the brain. If the fetus reaches a stage where it can feel pain then suffering through extreme pain will be its only experience for its entire short life.

This is repulsive political move by very, very sick people.
 
2014-01-26 12:38:21 AM
Something I have been curious about.

Most of the "pro-lifers" are religious. They believe in god, the devil, miracles, demonic possession, etc.

So doesn't it bother them that they are incubating a fetus inside a dead body? Is this not the recipe for demon-baby or the anti-christ??

The fact that people believe this kinda shiat makes me laugh ... but they usually take it pretty serious right?
 
2014-01-26 12:41:57 AM
After the judge ruled she should be taken off life support, why hasn't this happened yet?
 
2014-01-26 12:42:55 AM

voristrupp: After the judge ruled she should be taken off life support, why hasn't this happened yet?


The judge ruled for the life support to be removed on Monday.
 
2014-01-26 12:57:16 AM

hardinparamedic: You're assuming the attending physicians are the ones who started this. From all understanding, it was the hospital's legal council when it was brought before their ethics committee who started it.


I am not a lawyer, but I wonder if that could be construed as practicing medicine without a license?
 
2014-01-26 01:02:50 AM
This is disgusting. If a horror movie had been made with this plot, it would be getting lambasted as ridiculous, unrealistic and unfairly maligning the pro-life movement because even they could not be this inhumanly callous and bullheadedly ghoulish. This is just flat out grotesque. It's hard to believe that this could be some person being honestly misguided pushing this to happen, and not someone being pro-life because they are actually some sick Dexter type who is using the pro-life movement to further their goal of killing women and doing gross sick things to them. No one psychologically normal could think this is ok.
 
2014-01-26 01:06:29 AM

Farking Canuck: voristrupp: After the judge ruled she should be taken off life support, why hasn't this happened yet?

The judge ruled for the life support to be removed on Monday.


Judge ordered life support be removed by Monday at 5:00pm Central.  Hospital could have already removed support, but chooses to delay while they consider viability of appealing judge's decision.
 
2014-01-26 01:10:53 AM

Amberleia: If I had to choose between my baby's life and a few months of being kept artificially alive, I'd choose him every time.


Your choice is your own.  Why should the state force that choice upon other thoughtful loving families who do not wish it?
 
2014-01-26 01:49:54 AM

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: RsquaredW: Nabb1: Okay. I see. Ethically, I don't agree with the hospital. I just don't know enough about this particular case to really know if their actions give rise to other claims. And that is not to say I doubt it or anything. I mean I legitimately have barely a faint idea one way or the other.

So why comment arguing the other way?

It's a good way to get a very in depth explanation. That's one of the reasons I keep coming back here despite the BS and trolls. There are some very informed people here.


This. I've been waiting for this story to appear on Fark just so I could get more info about this case. The Jahi McMath thread informed me so much more than any other news source. Thanks Fark.

/wish I could afford Total Fark
 
2014-01-26 01:57:20 AM

hardinparamedic: vpb: I'm guessing that they aren't volunteering to pick up the tab for the hospital stay.

As I understand it, the chief legal counsel for the hospital is actually a prominent Anti-abortion attorney, and one of the people who helped draft the law in Texas that they are referring to when refusing to remove this poor woman's body from the ventilator. So they're basically using this woman as a "pro-life" martyr.

The thing about it is, if they are found to have misapplied or even blatantly lied to the family in the application of this law, the county is liable on the tune of millions of dollars to the family for negligence, malpractice, and even illegal human experimentation for what they have done here.


I'm a (pro-choice) Christian and I would sue the ever-loving shiat out of the hospital, the attorney (personally), and anyone remotely attached to this unholy mess. Your right to make a political statement does not ever trump the patient's right to make their own healthcare decisions--which this woman did, loud and clear as her parents and husband have stated repeatedly. This is no Schiavo case; this is absolutely against the farking law because THE WOMAN IS DEAD and the baby/fetus most likely is too, if the hospital's own report is to be believed (that's pretty much what 'not viable' means, last time I checked...).

Remind me again why Texas does not have its own tag and Florida does?
 
2014-01-26 01:59:08 AM

Nabb1: hardinparamedic: Nabb1: Wasn't this woman brain dead on arrival to the hospital? I was unaware of any allegations of malpractice leading to her condition as it is now.

They intentionally defied a legal and valid advanced directive without the consent of the family for no defensible reason. Even the courts have said that their argument under Texas Law was misapplied and poorly interpreted.

I don't see how they are on the hook for that if their assertion of that argument was not frivolous. Has the court sanctioned them or said it was a frivolous argument?


The article I read quoted the judge as saying that law does not apply because the patient is dead, so yep, they're on the hook. Which, if they appealed, they should lose because they should be on the hook.
 
2014-01-26 02:00:15 AM
I should clarify that the article I read yesterday is not the same one that was posted here on Fark.
 
2014-01-26 02:07:57 AM
Necromancy is bad. So sayeth the bible.
 
2014-01-26 02:28:32 AM

sheep snorter: Pro-life is actually Pro-birth.


These are the same people that have their frail 85 year old grandmother with advanced dementia undergo surgery and chemo for colon cancer, because 'we can't let granny die!'
 
Displayed 50 of 344 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report