Micah Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share Posted January 8, 2011 aw boooooo.. this was all over Christian forums too. I don't want to be the one to mushy mud pie on the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominicansoul Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 i don't believe everything Snopes.com says! Geez.... it's not like God runs that website! hhahahaha They are not omniscient and all knowing... Read up on what they say about the "12 days of Christmas song." They got all of that wrong... Anyways, what matters about the picture, is that is obviously a human hand and not a "cluster of cells," but i'm sure pro-abortion murdering psychos out there will still insists that abortion is not murder, and that the baby isn't human and other such nonsense.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AudreyGrace Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 [quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1294502369' post='2197797'] [url="http://www.snopes.com/photos/medical/thehand.asp"]http://www.snopes.co...cal/thehand.asp[/url] "The baby did not reach out, Bruner says. The baby was anesthetised. The baby was not aware of what was going on." ~Sternhauser [/quote] eh. nevertheless, the sight of the hand in comparison to the doc's is still a touching picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark of the Cross Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1294470658' post='2197772'] I'm really proud and honored that the baby's middle name is my first name. God Bless him, the doctor, the nurse and the mother. Praise God!!!!! [/quote] The babies middle name is The? [quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1294503290' post='2197804'] Winchester speaks truth. I sleep on a layer of small animal skulls I have collected over the years. ~Sternhauser [/quote] You want to sleep on something really soft? Get a bed made from small Winchester skulls! [quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1294502369' post='2197797'] [url="http://www.snopes.co."]http://www.snopes.co.[/url] ..cal/thehand.asp "The baby did not reach out, Bruner says. The baby was anesthetised. The baby was not aware of what was going on." ~Sternhauser [/quote] I've seen that photo before, I can't remember the details which is pretty unlike me to forget (LOL) but I remember that the claims about it were controversial. Even the surgeon denied the article version. I agree with Stern on this one. Edited January 8, 2011 by Mark of the Cross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cherie Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1294502369' post='2197797'] [url="http://www.snopes.co."]http://www.snopes.co.[/url] ..cal/thehand.asp "The baby did not reach out, Bruner says. The baby was anesthetised. The baby was not aware of what was going on." ~Sternhauser [/quote] Interesting. The photographer had a very different side to the story. I worked at the PA Pro-Life Federation for a time, and Michael Clancy, the photographer, was the guest speaker at our annual banquet. There was a huge falling out over the photograph and whether or not it should be published. LIFE magazine had a posed picture of a baby at 24-weeks doing the same thing -- Michael Clancy caught this picture of Samuel doing it at [i]21 weeks, [/i]and this one [i]wasn't posed.[/i] This brought forth a whole slew of problems and accusations, etc. Why? Seems like it was all about money and whether or not Dr. Bruner would get to be on the cover of LIFE magazine. Because of Clancy's photo, he wouldn't. So you can see why he'd be mad about it. I find it interesting that Dr. Bruner says what you believed happened is based on your "political point of view." Really, now? You can find the controversy of the story here: [url="http://www.michaelclancy.com/story.html"]http://www.michaelcl....com/story.html[/url] According to Michael Clancy the child's hand came out of the opening. He did not "reach out" for the doctor's hand. HOWEVER, when the doctor's hand brushed by the baby's, he gripped it. I think it's rather dishonest for snopes to publish the "disclaimer" of Michael Clancy's as further reason to dismiss his side of the story. Edited January 8, 2011 by CherieMadame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 [quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1294515531' post='2197842'] The babies middle name is The? [/quote] I was going to make that joke until I saw Sternhauser getting angry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semper Catholic Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 It's pretty awesome that the baby was born completely healthy, considering that being born with spina bifida usually renders the afflicted person paralyzed. Medical advances are awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePenciledOne Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 [quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1294515531' post='2197842'] The babies middle name is The? [/quote] Um no.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='ThePenciledOne' timestamp='1294530643' post='2197888'] Um no.... [/quote] I think I just understood your name for the first time, like penciled into the book of life right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Micah' timestamp='1294531599' post='2197891'] I think I just understood your name for the first time, like penciled into the book of life right? [/quote] No. He was stabbed with a pencil in a fight in juvenile detention. He broke it off at skin level and killed the other inmate with the shard. There is still some pencil in his body they couldn't remove because of a high risk of nerve damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1294531919' post='2197895'] No. He was stabbed with a pencil in a fight in juvenile detention. He broke it off at skin level and killed the other inmate with the shard. There is still some pencil in his body they couldn't remove because of a high risk of nerve damage. [/quote] wow, hardcore. I've stabbed myself with a bic before, but that's just like super hardcore.. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/bounce.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Micah' timestamp='1294532117' post='2197896'] wow, hardcore. I've stabbed myself with a bic before, but that's just like super hardcore.. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/bounce.gif[/img] [/quote] That's how the penciled one rolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Normile Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) I never seen this story or heard of it before. I have read that in these surgical procedures they can not anesthicize the baby as it will kill the child. I do not know if this is the truth, I do know that my 3 month old son had to undergo a cat scan and needed to be put out as they can not get a baby to lie still for the scan, we needed a pediatric anesthicist and he had to be hooked up to all kinds of monitors and a team had to watch his vital signs, the anesthesia could have killed him was why it was such a big deal and demanded so much effort. We had to sign consent forms agreeing that we realized he could die or be affected in many other life changing ways such as retardation, paralyzed etc. it was a scary choice we had to make several times. ed Edited January 9, 2011 by Ed Normile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tally Marx Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Ed Normile' timestamp='1294534727' post='2197905'] I never seen this story or heard of it before. I have read that in these surgical procedures they can not anesthicize the baby as it will kill the child. I do not know if this is the truth, [/quote] True. General anesthesia cannot be used on a pregnant woman after twenty weeks gestation, or she will loose the child. The fetus cannot be anesthetized completely. Numbed? Yes. Local anesthesia? Yes. But even that is extremely dangerous: [url="http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM196511252732201"]http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM196511252732201[/url] And general anesthesia--putting the child to sleep so that it is completely unaware--would result in the death of the child. Edited January 9, 2011 by Tally Marx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 [quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1294502369' post='2197797'] http://www.snopes.com/photos/medical/thehand.asp "The baby did not reach out, Bruner says. The baby was anesthetised. The baby was not aware of what was going on." ~Sternhauser [/quote] I was gonna post it if no one else did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now