Debunking the Silent Scream

[Witsec7]

I guess with the new anti abortion fervor the Silent Scream is making the rounds again. Its a hot topic on a predominantly IFB forum I post on. Its apparent to me that after a quarter of a century after it was debunked the religionists still cling to its sensationalism. Its mostly males who post on the forum, and very few of them have any real grasp of reproductive biology. None will consider that the film is scientifically flawed, that abortion like other fields of reproductive medicine have advanced with the times, and that the film was actually manipulated to show frantic movement.

Gah these rabid antiabortionists make me crazy. Thanks for letting me vent.

[mschelseae]

I guess with the new anti abortion fervor the Silent Scream is making the rounds again. Its a hot topic on a predominantly IFB forum I post on. Its apparent to me that after a quarter of a century after it was debunked the religionists still cling to its sensationalism. Its mostly males who post on the forum, and very few of them have any real grasp of reproductive biology. None will consider that the film is scientifically flawed, that abortion like other fields of reproductive medicine have advanced with the times, and that the film was actually manipulated to show frantic movement.

Gah these rabid antiabortionists make me crazy. Thanks for letting me vent.

My boss just gave this huge speech on how evil and wrong abortion is. He's totally in favor of a mandatory ultrasound before one (which I think is kind of like rape in a way)

He called democrats the party of death :roll:

I can see how he'd feel so strongly about his convictions, he is a man after all, and knows all about child birth.

he also has a copy of TTUAC, apparently it was his grandmothers. He doesnt strike me as fundie, maybe fundie lite, but deffinitely conservative christain.

he knows I'm pretty liberal, and always apologizes after he comes off his soapbox, but I was tought from a young age to tolerate and respect other people's opinions.

i almost lost it when he said democrats are the party of death, lies, and destruction...

but he's my boss whaddaya gunna do. I personally believe in a womans right to choose, I wouldn't get one, but I don't think its my place to even THINK someone else shouldn't.

anyway thats just my thoughts, thanks for letting ME vent back :)

[emmiedahl]

Mschelseae, just curious, where the fuck do you find these people in Humboldt? I grew up there and I remember hippie paradise! Is there a conservative pocket I missed?

[duchess0592]

there are so many different controversy’s about abortion but really it boils down to this, when does a human receive rights?

[dramallama]

there are so many different controversy’s about abortion but really it boils down to this, when does a human receive rights?

When it's no longer living inside of another living person's body.

[Witsec7]

there are so many different controversy’s about abortion but really it boils down to this, when does a human receive rights?

Our government has determined that this occurs after birth. See if the rights of a US citizen were vested in a fetus prior to birth that would make the fetus benefits eligible while in the womb. Fetus's with diagnosed birth defects could then be receiving SS benefits while still in the mothers body. Also even a healthy fetus, would make the parent eligible for a child tax deduction even if it wasn't outside the womb.

[thoughtful]

I guess with the new anti abortion fervor the Silent Scream is making the rounds again. Its a hot topic on a predominantly IFB forum I post on. Its apparent to me that after a quarter of a century after it was debunked the religionists still cling to its sensationalism.

Thanks for alerting us -- I just went to check the IMDb listing, to make sure my description was still there.

When I looked at it a few months ago, the description was an alarmist statement about the horror of the fetus screaming in pain, complete with SOTDRT spelling.

I submitted a new description, and, am happy to say it was accepted. :D

[mschelseae]

Mschelseae, just curious, where the fuck do you find these people in Humboldt? I grew up there and I remember hippie paradise! Is there a conservative pocket I missed?

Shocking right????

What I do know is that there are a TON of cults out deep in the mountains, I've been out to those really far out areas, its a total trip, the people are so strange.

Also, like I said in some other post, when I worked at Ross I saw so many fundie women, and when I go out on Highway 36 sometimes I see all the kids playing on the green of their church. They're not in the city where all the tweeks are, the fundies live out in the rural areas. Even my boss lives like an hour away from the city.

HumCo has really changed, you've still got the standard homeless people, tweekers, and hippies, in the inner city areas, but I've started noticing a LOT of fundies, especially now that I'm paying attention.

You'd be surprised what goes on in these mountains now

ETA to add: I've heard some crazy crazy stories from people I've met around here with their encounters of crazy cults/fundies.

Also I'm like 90% sure that Boheimian Grove is kindof around here somewhere

[Austin]

This is a white paper produced by Planned Parenthood.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/ ... _03-02.pdf

Anti-choicers will dismiss it out of hand because it was not produced by someone on their team. However, the paper is authored by the following, who do not work for Planned Parenthood:

Sally Faith Dorfman, MD

Assistant Professor, Albert Einstein College of

Medicine,

Assistant Clinical Professor, Mount Sinai

Hart Peterson, MD

Chief of Pediatric Neurology, New York Hospital,

Clinical Professor of Neurology in Pediatrics, Cornell

University Medical Center

William Rashbaum, MD

Assistant Clinical Professor, Albert Einstein College

of Medicine

Seymour L. Romney, MD

Professor, Ob/Gyn, Director, Gynecological Cancer

Research, and former Chairman, Department of

Obstetrics and Gynecology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Allan Rosenfield, MD

Professor, Ob/Gyn and Public Health, Acting

Chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Director, Center for Population and Family Health,

College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University

Herbert G. Vaughan, Jr. MD

Professor of Neuroscience, Neurology and

Pediatrics, Director, Rose F. Kennedy Center for

Research in Mental Retardation and Human

Development, Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Ming-Neng Yeh, MD

Associate Clinical Professor, Dept. of Ob/Gyn

Ultrasound Laboratory, Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center

[duchess0592]

When it's no longer living inside of another living person's body.

Does that mean you don't agree with Conner and Laci's law in which a pregnant woman's murder is counted as two counts of murder one for the woman and one for the unborn child.

[emmiedahl]

That's right, I do not agree with it.

From a Biblical standpoint, harm to a fetus is a property crime. I would be okay with that, but then again I do not want to legislate my religious sensibilities.

[Peas n carrots]

I watched the Silent Scream, and I still can't make out the so-called scream. I'm thinking it's more likely matrixing, like when people see a ghost or whatever in a windowpane or mirror, and it's really just their mind matrixing an indistinguishable image into something they recognize.

Really, is it just me or does anyone else NOT see the scream?

[Austin]

Does that mean you don't agree with Conner and Laci's law in which a pregnant woman's murder is counted as two counts of murder one for the woman and one for the unborn child.

I absolutely do not concur with that law and see it for the anti-choic end run that it was.

[snarkbillie]

I feel a little dumb, but what is this silent scream thing?

Edit: I just now saw the link to the white paper and read it. Thanks for linking to that!

[The Larch]

I feel a little dumb, but what is this silent scream thing?

I think they're talking about this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silent_Scream

Don't feel too dumb--I had never seen/heard of it and I couldn't find it on IMDb.

[duchess0592]

Our government has determined that this occurs after birth. See if the rights of a US citizen were vested in a fetus prior to birth that would make the fetus benefits eligible while in the womb. Fetus's with diagnosed birth defects could then be receiving SS benefits while still in the mothers body. Also even a healthy fetus, would make the parent eligible for a child tax deduction even if it wasn't outside the womb.

Some scientists disagree, if life begains at conseption then that life is protected.

http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8 ... onception/

[snarkbillie]

Some scientists disagree, if life begains at conseption then that life is protected.

http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8 ... onception/

what the fuck is "conseption"?

[ElphabaGalinda]

I guess with the new anti abortion fervor the Silent Scream is making the rounds again. Its a hot topic on a predominantly IFB forum I post on. Its apparent to me that after a quarter of a century after it was debunked the religionists still cling to its sensationalism. Its mostly males who post on the forum, and very few of them have any real grasp of reproductive biology. None will consider that the film is scientifically flawed, that abortion like other fields of reproductive medicine have advanced with the times, and that the film was actually manipulated to show frantic movement.

Gah these rabid antiabortionists make me crazy. Thanks for letting me vent.

I just ranted that same rant to a friend of mine. So THANK YOU! I don't understand why they continue to use something that is proven to be untrue. They probably don't even care that they're using something that isn't a real scientific fact and was manufactured and is inaccurate. Whenever they try to use an argument that isn't : because the Bible says so, they have to resort to inaccuracies.

My theory about why it may be doing the rounds again is that they wait until there are enough people who wouldn't have seen it originally, and they need new people to fool.

[emmiedahl]

Your side can of course find a handful of scientists willing to testify against the broadest evidence available, especially if you are willing to import them from France. Even if it is alive, it is at that point a parasite in the mother's body. Forcing her to carry the pregnancy would be like forcing you to give your kidney to someone else, and forcing you to pay all of the medical bills inherent in this. Anything to save a life, right? But we do not force people to share their organs with others.

All parasites are alive. Many things are alive but do not enjoy the full protection that we give to human beings.

Actually, several of those "scientists" said life begins at fertilization. You need to read the articles you cite.

[duchess0592]

Sorry I spelled it wrong ,conception

[contrary]

oh glory, is this thing still around? I thought it had been decisively debunked?

one of the things that gets me is the idea that a fetus at 12w gestation could make any purposeful movement. Even a two month old infant is still working on purposeful movement (ie, getting her hand into her mouth, and not socking herself in the eye). It's impossible that a fetus at negative 38 weeks behind a two month old infant could "run from" the equipment.

gah. among other things, of course...it's absurd.

[Witsec7]

Some scientists disagree, if life begains at conseption then that life is protected.

http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8 ... onception/

Conception isn't pregnancy. If it were all those fertilized ova in liquid nitrogen would be tax deductions, and a tissue culture tube would be considered a womb. Revisionist science doesn't work when people think it through.

[ellerigby]

Does that mean you don't agree with Conner and Laci's law in which a pregnant woman's murder is counted as two counts of murder one for the woman and one for the unborn child.

I don't either. While that case (and cases like it) are very, very sad, I do not believe that they should be charged as double murder. That's a slippery slope toward a fetus being declared a person and Roe being overruled. Until it's viable, I don't think a fetus should have rights.

Some states have sentencing statutes where a the murderer of a pregnant victim can face an aggravated sentence. I don't have a major issue with that, as it's based on the added heinousness of picking a particular victim who will have less ability to defend themselves (I'd imagine it would be hard to fight off an attacker while heavily pregnant...), such as a child, elderly person, or disabled person. Aggravate the sentence, sure, but don't count a fetus as a separate person.

[Boltingmadonna]

Thanks for posting the debunking. In my experience, though, it's usually pointless to give anti-abortion believers the facts. I remember a discussion I had with a right-wing Catholic woman who believed fetuses under 20 weeks could experience pain and have thoughts and feelings. I pointed out to her that without a developed nervous system, there could not be anything we would understand as pain, and that without a system of reference involving experiences and memories, there couldn't be self-awareness. She continued to insist that a fetus "wants" to be born and feels love, fear and other emotions. Her concluding argument basically amounted to "You can't prove my fantasies are wrong, and you're only saying that because you hate babies and are a horrible person, so there!" It's like trying to tell Twilight fans that vampires don't sparkle.

[emmiedahl]

I did not know when they developed pain responses until looking into it a few months ago. Actually, that was one of my biggest squicks with later-term abortion. I don't like the idea of any creature being in unnecessary pain. It's important that the facts get out there; if I did not know about this with my science background, it is safe to say most Americans are not aware.