striktlymi:
1) Identify the problem.

The problem is the faulty fallopian tube and not the child.

striktlymi:
2) Recognize what is at stake.
3) Try to save the situation.
4) Hope for the best.

I will treat the above together...

Two lives are at stake here. That of the Mother and the Child. There are times where it is practically 'impossible' as defined in medicine to save both lives because of the nature of the problem. It is probable that:

a) The mother has a higher chance of making it through.
b) Both have a 50% chance each.
c) The chances of both Mother and Child are not so good.
d) etc

Irrespective of the chance of success for both, the bottom line still remains, ABORTION IS NOT AN OPTION!!! The options for the lady are:

i) Get Doctors who can help correct the problem i.e the faulty 'tube'. This procedure may ultimately lead to the death of the Child but the difference between this and abortion is that: Abortion seeks to terminate the life of the Child directly without having recourse to the problem.

In the event of an abortion the problem can reoccur in future because the real problem is left untreated while an innocent Child is rather mistook for the cause. If there is no proper definition for the cause of the problem then the brutal killing of the Child may result.

ii) Make a decision to carry the pregnancy to term and solve the problem with the fallopian tube after delivery. This is, if she survives. My mum made this choice. So too do I know a number of ladies who have done same. Some survived while others gladly gave their lives for their kids.

No one can tell the woman the option to go with. It is her prerogative to choose whatever option she wants. She can go with option 1 or 2, knowing fully well that the first option may lead to the death of the Child; which by implication may also mean that she may not be able to have babies in the future.

davidylan:

It may be rare to you but it is very real to those who have had to deal with it or to those who have had family deal with the perilous danger of having a growing baby kill you and/or eliminate your chances of ever having more children in future. I have noticed that the most vociferous anti-abortionists are men... luckily they never have to live through the real dangers of pregnancy and child birth.
Glioblastomas are rare too... it doesnt mean we should pretend it doesnt exist.

Nicely said David

striktlymi:

The problem is the faulty fallopian tube and not the child.



I will treat the above together...

Two lives are at stake here. That of the Mother and the Child. There are times where it is practically 'impossible' as defined in medicine to save both lives because of the nature of the problem. It is probable that:

a) The mother has a higher chance of making it through.
b) Both have a 50% chance each.
c) The chances of both Mother and Child are not so good.
d) etc

Irrespective of the chance of success for both, the bottom line still remains, ABORTION IS NOT AN OPTION!!! The options for the lady are:

i) Get Doctors who can help correct the problem i.e the faulty 'tube'. This procedure may ultimately lead to the death of the Child but the difference between this and abortion is that: Abortion seeks to terminate the life of the Child directly without having recourse to the problem.

In the event of an abortion the problem can reoccur in future because the real problem is left untreated while an innocent Child is rather mistook for the cause. If there is no proper definition for the cause of the problem then the brutal killing of the Child may result.

ii) Make a decision to carry the pregnancy to term and solve the problem with the fallopian tube after delivery. This is, if she survives. My mum made this choice. So too do I know a number of ladies who have done same. Some survived while others gladly gave their lives for their kids.

No one can tell the woman the option to go with. It is her prerogative to choose whatever option she wants. She can go with option 1 or 2, knowing fully well that the first option may lead to the death of the Child; which by implication may also mean that she may not be able to have babies in the future.

actually, its not as simple as that.
the uterus is designed to be the fetal home, not the fallopian tube or peritoneum. the uterus can expand to accomodate the growth of the fetus while the fallopian cant just do that, and this is where the problem lies.
in cases of ectopic pregnancy in fallopian tubes the growth of the baby will lead to definite rupture of the tube leading to fatal hemorrhage. in most cases the baby is already dead. there is nothing to save rather than perform exploratory laparotomy, remove the product of conception, repair the fallopian tube if its not damaged or cut it out.

the option of saving the baby does not arise rather the focus is no the mother.

in cases where the ectopic pregnancy is detected before the rupture, what you do is to milk out the fetus before it causes rupture and preserve the fallopian tube or u give medications that causes degeneration of the fetus without neccessarily performing surgery.

i'll discuss other types of ectopic pregnancy and their respective management apart from the fallopian tubes later

^The dude stritklymi thinks hes a big doctor. Like as if doctors are so stu.pid that they didnt try other options before considering abortion.

Stritklymi is extremely biased.

In all his writeups, nowhere has he referred to what would happen if the mother was on the verge of dying because of not aborting.

But then what can one expect? He is a christian after all.

PAGAN 9JA:
Stritklymi is extremely biased.

In all his writeups, nowhere has he referred to what would happen if the mother was on the verge of dying because of not aborting.

But then what can one expect? He is a christian after all.

you have huge problems..

leggo:
you have huge problems..

your father. .

Image123:

i am a man like you oh wise one. Worship God. If you ever had to choose between sin and death, which would you choose?

BTW, i read that ectopic pregnancy is not certain death. i saw it on wiki, doc. Join me in prayers, would you?

You're fortunate, ectopic pregnancies are merely topics you read on wiki... for a woman it could mean the difference between life and death. That is why you have the luxury to wax lyrical about how all abortion is bad... it doesnt affect you so why should you care.

toluene12:

actually, its not as simple as that.
the uterus is designed to be the fetal home, not the fallopian tube or peritoneum. the uterus can expand to accomodate the growth of the fetus while the fallopian cant just do that, and this is where the problem lies.

You just reiterated one of my points. The problem is NOT the Child but the fallopian tube.

PS: I never said the fallopian tube is designed to accommodate the baby as you implied up there.

toluene12:
in cases of ectopic pregnancy in fallopian tubes the growth of the baby will lead to definite rupture of the tube leading to fatal hemorrhage. in most cases the baby is already dead. there is nothing to save rather than perform exploratory laparotomy, remove the product of conception, repair the fallopian tube if its not damaged or cut it out. the option of saving the baby does not arise rather the focus is no the mother.

I agree with the above! However, if the baby is already dead, there is no such thing as abortion. I believe the debate is on abortion.

toluene12:
in cases where the ectopic pregnancy is detected before the rupture, what you do is to milk out the fetus before it causes rupture and preserve the fallopian tube or u give medications that causes degeneration of the fetus without neccessarily performing surgery.

Now, the above is abortion and I maintain that it is grossly WRONG!!! A solution that focuses primarily on harming the child deliberately, is definitely not a solution worth considering. This is because, what you tag a solution up there, treats the child as the cause of the lady's problem and focuses on harming the child than solving the cause of the woman's problem.

toluene12:
i'll discuss other types of ectopic pregnancy and their respective management apart from the fallopian tubes later

You can go ahead, for the needs of the readers.

striktlymi:

Now this is a case of aportioning blame on the Child. Another WRONG!!!

Now this is a case of the simply stating the facts. Perhaps you would also oppose separating conjoined twins in cases were it will lead to certain death of one?

davidylan:

Now this is a case of the simply stating the facts. Perhaps you would also oppose separating conjoined twins in cases were it will lead to certain death of one?

That has nothing to do with my argument. I do not argue that trying to save life is wrong. I argue that the deliberate 'destruction' of life under the excuse of ectopic pregnancies is not acceptable.

striktlymi:

That has nothing to do with my argument. I do not argue that trying to save life is wrong. I argue that the deliberate 'destruction' of life under the excuse of ectopic pregnancies is not acceptable.

Well the deliberate destruction of one conjoined twin to save the life of at least one is not "acceptable" either. See, the problem is many of you approach this subject with very little perspective. In cases of ectopic pregnancies, the fetus must be destroyed to save the life and reproductive capability of the mother... there is very little wiggle room. Perhaps if you have EVER felt the excruciating pain that women go through with ectopic pregnancies, you wont be here pounding your fist about what is acceptable or not. I have very little regard for men who pontificate about issues they never have to experience. Perhaps you should ask for a woman's perspective first.

I find it very absurd considering those (especially in the US) who are vehemently pro-life are the same ones who favor capital punishment, support endless war and promulgate policies that are geared towards cutting benefits to the very lives they claim to stand for.

PAGAN 9JA:
Stritklymi is extremely biased.

In all his writeups, nowhere has he referred to what would happen if the mother was on the verge of dying because of not aborting.

But then what can one expect? He is a christian after all.

To get something clear...

My arguments, statements and firm beliefs regarding the ish of abortion have little or nothing to do with my faith as a Christian.

I would still argue or state my position in same manner concerning this topic if I am not a Christian. There is no logical argument that can refute the following FACTS:

1) Human life begins at conception.
2) The Mother's right to life does not supercede the Child's right to life.
3) The right to life of the Child does not supercede that of the mother.
4) Abortion which necessary implies the cutting short of the life of the Child is wrong in every case.
5) An argument for abortion necessarily implies an argument for murder.
6) If abortion can be excused then murder can in like manner be excused.
7) If murder is wrong in any case then abortion is wrong in every case.
Etc.

striktlymi:

To get something clear...

My arguments, statements and firm beliefs regarding the ish of abortion have little or nothing to do with my faith as a Christian.

I would still argue or state my position in same manner concerning this topic if I am not a Christian. There is no logical argument that can refute the following FACTS:

1) Human life begins at conception.
2) The Mother's right to life does not supercede the Child's right to life.
3) The right to life of the Child does not supercede that of the mother.
4) Abortion which necessary implies the cutting short of the life of the Child is wrong in every case.
5) An argument for abortion necessarily implies an argument for murder.
6) If abortion can be excused then murder can in like manner be excused.
7) If murder is wrong in any case then abortion is wrong in every case.
Etc.

Obviously you have never had to face such a gut-wrenching decision before... its ok to pontificate from a position of total ignorance. Try carrying a baby first then come tell us what you think.

striktlymi:

To get something clear...

My arguments, statements and firm beliefs regarding the ish of abortion have little or nothing to do with my faith as a Christian.

I would still argue or state my position in same manner concerning this topic if I am not a Christian. There is no logical argument that can refute the following FACTS:

1) Human life begins at conception.
2) The Mother's right to life does not supercede the Child's right to life.
3) The right to life of the Child does not supercede that of the mother.
4) Abortion which necessary implies the cutting short of the life of the Child is wrong in every case.
5) An argument for abortion necessarily implies an argument for murder.
6) If abortion can be excused then murder can in like manner be excused.
7) If murder is wrong in any case then abortion is wrong in every case.
Etc.

BULLSHYT!

yet you always spoke about the child. My question to you is, what would be the right course of action if the Mothers life is in danger and the only course of action would be abortion. what then?:

would you just sacrifice the mother and her 25-30 yrs of life and experience she has been through for a half-formed baby who has not yet seen the light of the world. is that sensible?

Answer me directly and dont beat about the bush.


I believe the mothers life is definitely more important and rightful than the life of a embryo in a womb.

davidylan:

Well the deliberate destruction of one conjoined twin to save the life of at least one is not "acceptable" either.

It is not acceptable!!!

davidylan:
See, the problem is many of you approach this subject with very little perspective.

Right back at ya!

davidylan:
In cases of ectopic pregnancies, the fetus must be destroyed to save the life and reproductive capability of the mother... there is very little wiggle room.

False!!!

1) Not every case of ectopic pregnancy leads to the 'destruction' of the fetus. There are cases where both mother and child have survived the ordeal.

2) Saving the reproductive capabilities and killing the child only implies one thing: You see the child as the cause of the problem. The reproductive organs you tried to save is actually what caused the problem in the first place and there is a good chance that the problem will continue because it has not been solved.

davidylan:
Perhaps if you have EVER felt the excruciating pain that women go through with ectopic pregnancies, you wont be here pounding your fist about what is acceptable or not.

I am sure you have had to go through that "excrutiating pain"...why not tell us the last time you got pregnant and had to go through such?

While you are at it, tell us why I have to have experienced something before I can have the right to talk about it? Also tell us why it is wrong to speak up for the unborn?


PS: Do you have any idea what abortion does to children? Have you experienced such, ever?? If you were aborted you won't be here "pounding your fist about what is acceptable or not".

davidylan:
I have very little regard for men who pontificate about issues they never have to experience. Perhaps you should ask for a woman's perspective first.

Similarly, I have very little regard for men who care less about the life of innocent children. I need not ask for any woman's perspective because I have experienced such in my family.

davidylan:

Obviously you have never had to face such a gut-wrenching decision before... its ok to pontificate from a position of total ignorance. Try carrying a baby first then come tell us what you think.

...and you know that because?

striktlymi:

It is not acceptable!!!

Laughable. Even if it means both twins will die since they both share an organ (like the heart or liver) which is grossly inadequate to sustain both lives? I marvel at how people can pound their fist on a table to declare something acceptable or not based solely on their own emotions.

striktlymi:
False!!!

1) Not every case of ectopic pregnancy leads to the 'destruction' of the fetus. There are cases where both mother and child have survived the ordeal.

2) Saving the reproductive capabilities and killing the child only implies one thing: You see the child as the cause of the problem. The reproductive organs you tried to save is actually what caused the problem in the first place and there is a good chance that the problem will continue because it has not been solved.

Perhaps we should read from the experts directly - this from the US national library of medicine website on ectopic pregnancies - Ectopic pregnancy is life-threatening. The pregnancy cannot continue to birth (term). The developing cells must be removed to save the mother's life.

Perhaps you know something you might like to share with US doctors? Quite sick of all the fist pounding rhetoric from the largely ignorant.

striktlymi:
I am sure you have had to go through that "excrutiating pain"...why not tell us the last time you got pregnant and had to go through such?

While you are at it, tell us why I have to have experienced something before I can have the right to talk about it? Also tell us why it is wrong to speak up for the unborn?

I may not have gone through the pain, but i have known quite a few who have. The question is, have you? Perhaps you should look into their eyes and tell them about how much you value the life of the unborn?

striktlymi:
PS: Do you have any idea what abortion does to children? Have you experienced such, ever?? If you were aborted you won't be here "pounding your fist about what is acceptable or not".

Last i checked, i have not been arguing about frivolous abortions which i am against. The point has been about abortions when the life of the mother is at risk. Do you have any idea what a ruptured fallopian tube from an ectopic pregnancy does to a woman?

striktlymi:
Similarly, I have very little regard for men who care less about the life of innocent children. I need not ask for any woman's perspective because I have experienced such in my family.

You are either confused or dishonestly conflating issues here. Again the point i have been arguing has not been about the life of all innocent children but about the dangers they pose to the life of the mother. I for one would support abortion in cases where my wife's life depends on it. You can keep pontificating in the dark all you want.

PAGAN 9JA:



BULLSHYT!

yet you always spoke about the child. My question to you is, what would be the right course of action if the Mothers life is in danger and the only course of action would be abortion. what then?:

Abortion is NEVER the only course of action. Can murder be the ONLY course of action in any case? If yes, one
example would do...

PAGAN 9JA:

would you just sacrifice the mother and her 25-30 yrs of life and experience she has been through for a half-formed baby who has not yet seen the light of the world. is that sensible?

Direct answer: The decision on what to do lies with the mother.

She has a number of options which excludes abortion.

Anyways, that argument has been refuted a number of times. A two year old is not a fully developed human being. Would it then be justifiable for a mother to sacrifice the two year old simply because she has more experinece than it does? Or the experience level is not the same? Of course not!

PAGAN 9JA:

Answer me directly and dont beat about the bush.


I believe the mothers life is definitely more important and rightful than the life of a embryo in a womb.

No ones life is greater, better or more valuable aka important than anothers. Every life is precious and should be preserved withing reasonable measures. The life of a zygote is no better than that of a one year old and it is certainly not less precious than the life of the mother.

davidylan:

Laughable. Even if it means both twins will die since they both share an organ (like the heart or liver) which is grossly inadequate to sustain both lives? I marvel at how people can pound their fist on a table to declare something acceptable or not based solely on their own emotions.



Perhaps we should read from the experts directly - this from the US national library of medicine website on ectopic pregnancies - Ectopic pregnancy is life-threatening. The pregnancy cannot continue to birth (term). The developing cells must be removed to save the mother's life.

Perhaps you know something you might like to share with US doctors? Quite sick of all the fist pounding rhetoric from the largely ignorant.



I may not have gone through the pain, but i have known quite a few who have. The question is, have you? Perhaps you should look into their eyes and tell them about how much you value the life of the unborn?



Last i checked, i have not been arguing about frivolous abortions which i am against. The point has been about abortions when the life of the mother is at risk. Do you have any idea what a ruptured fallopian tube from an ectopic pregnancy does to a woman?



You are either confused or dishonestly conflating issues here. Again the point i have been arguing has not been about the life of all innocent children but about the dangers they pose to the life of the mother. I for one would support abortion in cases where my wife's life depends on it. You can keep pontificating in the dark all you want.

Not ready to go round in circles with you!

striktlymi:

Abortion is NEVER the only course of action. Can murder be the ONLY cause of action in any case? If yes, one
example would do...

Direct answer: The decision on what to do lies with the mother.

She has a number of options which excludes abortion.

Kindly tell us what these other "number of options" are, especially in cases of ectopic pregnancies (such as development of a fetus in the abdomen for example). Be specific please. Kinda tired of the vague running around.

@striklymi
There's no sentiment in medicine, u do whats is practical to ensure preservation of life.
As at today there's no medical technology available that can help save a fetus implanted in the fallopian tube. Maybe tmrw but present medical practice teaches termination of any pregnancy embedded in the fallopian tube.

neither the mother nor the doctor has a choice over what to do. not even the anti abortionist.

Even the option of the mother giving up her life for the baby does not even arise because the fetus has little to no chance of developing to the point that it could be born alive. The gestational age of viability in the fallopian tube before the tube ruptures is just too short to give the baby any chance of survival outside the mother's baby. Both will simply die.


95% of ectopic pregnancies implant in the fallopian tubes, the remaining 5% implant in the ovary, peritoneum or other abdominal organ.

You may have read in the news of a few extremely rare cases in which ectopic pregnancies go to term. There are a few important points to keep in mind when reading these stories. First, these cases usually involve a type of ectopic pregnancy called an "abdominal" pregnancy. In an abdominal pregnancy, the baby is not implanted in the uterus or the fallopian tubes but somewhere else in the abdomen, such as the liver or another organ with a good blood supply. The odds of such a pregnancy occurring and progressing to a point of being viable are less than 1 in a million.

Second, although an abdominal ectopic pregnancy could theoretically progress to a point of being able to deliver a live baby, the situation is rare and always extremely risky for the mother's health due to the likelihood of major hemorrhage and blood loss at delivery. Abdominal pregnancies are even more dangerous than ectopic pregnancies in the tubes -- mothers are eight times more likely to die after an abdominal pregnancy than after a tubal pregnancy.

there've been only 4 recorded cases of successful abdominal pregnancy worldwide and I've seen only a case of abdominal pregnancy. it was a stillbirth at 26 weeks. the mother was in excruciating pain and we had to do an emergency ex. lap to preserve the mother's life.

toluene12: @striklymi
There's no sentiment in medicine, u do whats is practical to ensure preservation of life.
As at today there's no medical technology available that can help save a fetus implanted in the fallopian tube. Maybe tmrw but present medical practice teaches termination of any pregnancy embedded in the fallopian tube.

neither the mother nor the doctor has a choice over what to do. not even the anti abortionist.

Even the option of the mother giving up her life for the baby does not even arise because the fetus has little to no chance of developing to the point that it could be born alive. The gestational age of viability in the fallopian tube before the tube ruptures is just too short to give the baby any chance of survival outside the mother's baby. Both will simply die.


95% of ectopic pregnancies implant in the fallopian tubes, the remaining 5% implant in the ovary, peritoneum or other abdominal organ.

You may have read in the news of a few extremely rare cases in which ectopic pregnancies go to term. There are a few important points to keep in mind when reading these stories. First, these cases usually involve a type of ectopic pregnancy called an "abdominal" pregnancy. In an abdominal pregnancy, the baby is not implanted in the uterus or the fallopian tubes but somewhere else in the abdomen, such as the liver or another organ with a good blood supply. The odds of such a pregnancy occurring and progressing to a point of being viable are less than 1 in a million.

Second, although an abdominal ectopic pregnancy could theoretically progress to a point of being able to deliver a live baby, the situation is rare and always extremely risky for the mother's health due to the likelihood of major hemorrhage and blood loss at delivery. Abdominal pregnancies are even more dangerous than ectopic pregnancies in the tubes -- mothers are eight times more likely to die after an abdominal pregnancy than after a tubal pregnancy.

there've been only 4 recorded cases of successful abdominal pregnancy worldwide and I've seen only a case of abdominal pregnancy. it was a stillbirth at 26 weeks. the mother was in excruciating pain and we had to do an emergency ex. lap to preserve the mother's life.

Nice to have the opinion of a medical practitioner... rather than all the vague bluster from those who prefer to build a seminary on one bible verse.

davidylan:

Kindly tell us what these other "number of options" are, especially in cases of ectopic pregnancies (such as development of a fetus in the abdomen for example). Be specific please. Kinda tired of the vague running around.

I have talked about the above before and like I said, I am not doing the "ring around the roses" with you.

striktlymi:

I have talked about the above before and like I said, I am not doing the "ring around the roses" with you.

I have read much of the thread, outside of the incoherent yelling about "numerous other options", i have not read anything substantive that you think a mother or doctor can do to bring an ectopic pregnancy to term without harming the mother. Specifics is all i have requested... not surprising that you can't provide any to be honest... preferring instead to hide under the "not doing the ring around the roses with you" excuse.

In the time taken to respond to my request, you could have simply stated one option. Toluene21 took the time to provide a fact-based medical assessment of the issues, perhaps you care to do the same outside of just yelling "abortion is wrong"?

PAGAN 9JA:



your father. .

i wish i could say the same to you, but we'll need a dna test..

toluene12: @striklymi
There's no sentiment in medicine, u do whats is practical to ensure preservation of life.

Agreed!

toluene12:
As at today there's no medical technology available that can help save a fetus implanted in the fallopian tube.

Agreed!

toluene12:
Maybe tmrw but present medical practice teaches termination of any pregnancy embedded in the fallopian tube.

That is not entirely correct! There are two options:

1) Terminate the pregnancy without attempting to solve the cause of the problem.

2) Correct the problem which incidentally may lead to the death of the child.

The first option is abortion; the second is not because the intention is not to kill the child but to correct the defect the lady may have. Abortion kills the child deliberately with malicious intent.

toluene12:
neither the mother nor the doctor has a choice over what to do. not even the anti abortionist.

The mother can decide on the two options above.

toluene12:
Even the option of the mother giving up her life for the baby does not even arise because the fetus has little to no chance of developing to the point that it could be born alive. The gestational age of viability in the fallopian tube before the tube ruptures is just too short to give the baby any chance of survival outside the mother's baby. Both will simply die.

Agreed but that is in the case where the fetus is lodged in the 'tube'.

toluene12:
95% of ectopic pregnancies implant in the fallopian tubes, the remaining 5% implant in the ovary, peritoneum or other abdominal organ.

You may have read in the news of a few extremely rare cases in which ectopic pregnancies go to term. There are a few important points to keep in mind when reading these stories. First, these cases usually involve a type of ectopic pregnancy called an "abdominal" pregnancy. In an abdominal pregnancy, the baby is not implanted in the uterus or the fallopian tubes but somewhere else in the abdomen, such as the liver or another organ with a good blood supply. The odds of such a pregnancy occurring and progressing to a point of being viable are less than 1 in a million.

I 'agree' though not sure of the stat you gave up there. Will verify when I get back to my 'lappy'.

toluene12:
Second, although an abdominal ectopic pregnancy could theoretically progress to a point of being able to deliver a live baby, the situation is rare and always extremely risky for the mother's health due to the likelihood of major hemorrhage and blood loss at delivery. Abdominal pregnancies are even more dangerous than ectopic pregnancies in the tubes -- mothers are eight times more likely to die after an abdominal pregnancy than after a tubal pregnancy.

there've been only 4 recorded cases of successful abdominal pregnancy worldwide and I've seen only a case of abdominal pregnancy. it was a stillbirth at 26 weeks. the mother was in excruciating pain and we had to do an emergency ex. lap to preserve the mother's life.

I do not agree completely! Will elaborate when I get my laptop.

striktlymi:
That is not entirely correct! There are two options:

1) Terminate the pregnancy without attempting to solve the cause of the problem.

2) Correct the problem which incidentally may lead to the death of the child.

The first option is abortion; the second is not because the intention is not to kill the child but to correct the defect the lady may have. Abortion kills the child deliberately with malicious intent.

Totally confused here. What does the above in highlights mean? How do you "correct the problem" of a fetus attached to the liver or fallopian tube for example?

davidylan:

You're fortunate, ectopic pregnancies are merely topics you read on wiki... for a woman it could mean the difference between life and death. That is why you have the luxury to wax lyrical about how all abortion is bad... it doesnt affect you so why should you care.

Wise one and caring one, you missed this. If you ever had to choose between sin and death, which would you choose?
Do you know of a certain thing called faith? i hope you still do.

Image123:

Wise one and caring one, you missed this. If you ever had to choose between sin and death, which would you choose?
Do you know of a certain thing called faith? i hope you still do.

Empty rhetoric. Paul knew of a certain thing called faith and yet still recommended some medicine for Timothy's stomach problems. A woman with an ectopic pregnancy needs immediate medical attention, not some ignorant mule playing away her life in the name of grossly misplaced "faith".

Murder is a sin... perhaps you also hate wars and abhor the death penalty? Afterall i'm sure you have faith that we should just let boko haram run riot on the nation and pray them away no?

Should babies who have congenital malformations that are incompatible with life (like babies with Tay-Sachs syndrome who normally never live beyond the age of 4) be left to develop to term?

Now I am with my laptop and ready to do this...

Before we continue, could you provide evidence for the following figures:

toluene12:
95% of ectopic pregnancies implant in the fallopian tubes, the remaining 5% implant in the ovary, peritoneum or other abdominal organ.

toluene12:
The odds of such a pregnancy occurring and progressing to a point of being viable are less than 1 in a million.

toluene12:
there've been only 4 recorded cases of successful abdominal pregnancy worldwide