|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: "Partial-birth abortion" (misnomer alert) Update
|
Basket Case
Shipmate
# 1812
|
Posted
Today’s New York Times has the latest on an issue that we discussed here several months ago, & is an issue close to my heart, because of its potential to deeply hurt women, while supporters (deceitfully, IMHO) say they have the moral high ground.
Here is the link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/13/opinion/13mon2.html?th
but…you may have to register (free).
Here are the highlights, for those who don’t have the time or inclination to read the entire article:
Three federal judges across the breadth of the country ha ve now delivered a stinging rebuke to the potentially far-reaching assault by the White House and Congress on women's health and reproductive freedom, declaring the Partial Birth Abortion Act of 2003 to be unconstitutional.
In the latest ruling, last week in Nebraska, Judge Richard Kopf found that the politicians who crafted the statute erred by failing to provide any exception for instances where a woman's health is at stake…
quote:
He devoted much of his lengthy new decision to a meticulous review of the extensive, freshly amassed evidence. He refuted Congress's flimsy legislative "finding" that the ill-defined procedure it bans "is never necessary to protect the health of the mother," and therefore no exception was needed. Judge Kopf said the evidence, to the contrary, was "overwhelming."
Judge Kopf's decision was not unexpected. It largely echoed the ruling against the measure two weeks ago by Judge Richard Conway Casey in New York, and another in June by Judge Phyllis Hamilton in California.
The extreme nature of this assault on women's health and privacy should not be lost on voters. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
[ 21. September 2004, 21:17: Message edited by: RooK ]
Posts: 1157 | From: Pomo (basket) country | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
Indeed. It's shocking that it took so long for that filthy, wrong-headed legislation to be struck down.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
The Undiscovered Country
Shipmate
# 4811
|
Posted
Yeah let's let them suck a baby's head off instead. That's doesn't impinge on the baby's health or privacy does it? ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
--------------------
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable man adapts the world to himself. Therefore all hope of progress rests with the unreasonable man.
Posts: 1216 | From: Belfast | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
duchess
Ship's Blue Blooded Lady
# 2764
|
Posted
quote:
(5) However, substantial evidence presented at the Stenberg trial and overwhelming evidence presented and compiled at extensive congressional hearings, much of which was compiled after the district court hearing in Stenberg, and thus not included in the Stenberg trial record, demonstrates that a partial-birth abortion is never necessary to preserve the health of a woman, poses significant health risks to a woman upon whom the procedure is performed and is outside the standard of medical care.
Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003
More pro-life 411
This issue is a bit more complex than the NY Times article seems to let on.
[ 13. September 2004, 17:32: Message edited by: duchess ]
--------------------
♬♭ We're setting sail to the place on the map from which nobody has ever returned ♫♪♮
Ship of Fools-World Party
Posts: 11197 | From: Do you know the way? | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
I must disagree.
I think that most people are uncomfortable with the idea of abortion, but that most people are also understanding that These Things Happen. Religious people and others of good will can disagree on when life starts, but the old concept that it's when the fetus "quickens" is when it becomes human still holds for many, if not most. That's why there's not the outcry over early abortions that there is -- rightly, in my opinion -- over late-term abortion.
By the time a baby can live outside the uterus, killing it is no longer an abortion: it's infanticide. A woman who waits until that late date to get rid of it and the medical personnel who handle the procedure have overstepped a huge moral boundary.
By the time the baby's big enough that its skull has to be sucked empty so that the rest of the corpse can be extracted, it is no longer a question of "an assault on a woman's health and privacy." It is the loss of a human life, not just a potential life. And I think society has a legitimate interest in preserving that life. The woman who waits until viability to seek an abortion would do better to offer her baby for adoption.
Knowing that any middle ground or grey area is seldom allowed on this most volatile of issues, I await the deluge. But I truly don't understand how anyone can justify partial-birth abortion, by whatever name you care to call it.
Rossweisse // where's my helmet and flak jacket?
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
May I here add to my signature that I also pray for those who experience pain, hurt, anger, helplessness, bitterness, emptiness, loneliness and anxiety in the light of abortion.
Mary, pray!
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I agree with Rosseweisse. I am not sure a clump of cells counts as a full human life, so I'm not opposed to first trimester abortions. But after that there is no doubt in my mind that the fetus is a full fledged baby.
Zach
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
I don't think there are many people with the faintest capacity for emotion would have much to disagree with Rossweisse or Zach on their specific points.
What I disagree with is the insidious desire to get a piece of law, any piece of law, passed that includes the words "ban" and "abortion". There is no need to make a law against infanticide, so what should be done is to classify the casual use of this proceedure as infanticide. Instead of really working to get that done, it's being used as a thinly-veiled beach head legislation to begin an assault on the issue of all abortions.
3000-5000 cases out of a population of 350,000,000 is an absurdly small annual incidence rate. It is certainly less than the rate at which regular surguries suffer complications, wherein patients die - that's murder too, right? I submit that many of these cases could qualify as simple triage - the doctor has to decide on who lives and who dies because of complications during delivery... which is probably what the overturned rulings are about.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
I find it interesting that a study has shown that the current low rate of crime the U.S. is currently enjoying has been partially attributed to the enactment of abortion rights.
It seems that if those babies were born they would have a high propensity towards crime since their parents do not want them and the bible thumping anti-abortioners can't put their money where their mouth is and adopt them.
To those that are anti-abortion: how many of you have adopted a crack baby lately?
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Equinas
Shipmate
# 2907
|
Posted
From the bill:
quote:
(A) Partial-birth abortion poses serious risks to the health of a woman undergoing the procedure. Those risks include, among other things: An increase in a woman's risk of suffering from cervical incompetence, a result of cervical dilation making it difficult or impossible for a woman to successfully carry a subsequent pregnancy to term; an increased risk of uterine rupture, abruption, amniotic fluid embolus, and trauma to the uterus as a result of converting the child to a footling breech position, a procedure which, according to a leading obstetrics textbook, `there are very few, if any, indications for * * * other than for delivery of a second twin'; and a risk of lacerations and secondary hemorrhaging due to the doctor blindly forcing a sharp instrument into the base of the unborn child's skull while he or she is lodged in the birth canal, an act which could result in severe bleeding, brings with it the threat of shock, and could ultimately result in maternal death.
If the health of the mother is really the goal of it rather than the death of the child, I suggest that a C-section might be the better choice if natural childbirth is contraindicated. The bill does not prohibit the emergency performance of the procedure in order to save the life of the mother, which I would assume happens when labor is advanced enough that an emergency C-section is no longer possible.
--------------------
Linda
Posts: 567 | From: Deep South, USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laura
General nuisance
# 10
|
Posted
Crikey, Mad Geo. These are researchers who aren't afraid to make a study the results of which are likely to piss off a lot of people.
I wonder what the actual breakdown re: abortion/race is. It was my understanding that educated women of means are far more likely to abort than ... non-educated women of ... non-means. But perhaps I am mistaken. I'd very much like to know more about the study's methodology.
--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm
Posts: 16883 | From: East Coast, USA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Equinas
Shipmate
# 2907
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
I submit that many of these cases could qualify as simple triage - the doctor has to decide on who lives and who dies because of complications during delivery... which is probably what the overturned rulings are about.
The language of the bill would permit such triage.
quote:
Sec. 1531. Partial-birth abortions prohibited
`(a) Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.
--------------------
Linda
Posts: 567 | From: Deep South, USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laura
General nuisance
# 10
|
Posted
Also, the study has to be either poorly constructed or over-constructed, because there's no way to design a study which would demonstrate that any one factor led to a 50% decline in crime -- there'd be no way to take into account the multiple confounding factors that would stem both from the time of the event hypothesized to have the effect, and from the time at which the reduction in crime occurred. Then there's the question of whether there really was a 50% reduction in crime, or whether reporting factors are influencing the data. Just to name a few problems I can think of off-hand.
--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm
Posts: 16883 | From: East Coast, USA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
The study is linked at the bottom of the page I provided. The study was later questioned and then the original authors rebuttled the questioners.
In other words, good economics science is being practiced by reputable sources on both sides.
Bottom line to me: it makes fucking sense.
If someone doesn't want a baby and is forced to have it and raise it, how fucked up is that kid gonna be?
[typo]
[ 13. September 2004, 18:58: Message edited by: .Mad Geo ]
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by .Mad Geo:
If someone doesn't want a baby and is forced to have it and raise it, how fucked up is that kid gonna be?
Are there no workhouses?
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Apparently not, since I have no idea what that is.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Equinas
Shipmate
# 2907
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by .Mad Geo:
Apparently not, since I have no idea what that is.
He's quoting Scrooge.
--------------------
Linda
Posts: 567 | From: Deep South, USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lurker McLurker™
Ship's stowaway
# 1384
|
Posted
Have you ever read Dickens? Especially Oliver Twist?
Workhouses were homes for poor people, where they would work for their food and board, usually in sweatshop-like conditions. They wouldn't be paid money.
--------------------
Just War Theory- a perversion of morality?
Posts: 5661 | From: Raxacoricofallapatorius | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by .Mad Geo:
Apparently not, since I have no idea what that is.
Think "Oliver Twist".
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
duchess
Ship's Blue Blooded Lady
# 2764
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laura:
Crikey, Mad Geo. These are researchers who aren't afraid to make a study the results of which are likely to piss off a lot of people.
I wonder what the actual breakdown re: abortion/race is. It was my understanding that educated women of means are far more likely to abort than ... non-educated women of ... non-means. But perhaps I am mistaken. I'd very much like to know more about the study's methodology.
Abortion Statistics
* 40 MILLION ABORTIONS SINCE 1973
* 4,000 each day
Look at the reasons cited for abortions. Doesn't look like the majority of them are crack-babies.
[ 13. September 2004, 20:13: Message edited by: duchess ]
--------------------
♬♭ We're setting sail to the place on the map from which nobody has ever returned ♫♪♮
Ship of Fools-World Party
Posts: 11197 | From: Do you know the way? | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
Duchess, thanks for proving my point.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
duchess
Ship's Blue Blooded Lady
# 2764
|
Posted
The difference between you and me RooK, is that I think 40 million gone is a heart-breaking tragedy while you think it is a small number in the whole scheme of things and nothing to be concerned about.
--------------------
♬♭ We're setting sail to the place on the map from which nobody has ever returned ♫♪♮
Ship of Fools-World Party
Posts: 11197 | From: Do you know the way? | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by .Mad Geo:
To those that are anti-abortion: how many of you have adopted a crack baby lately?
I haven't, yet, though I came close a couple of years ago. However, I also take the necessary precautions (birth control, not actually smoking crack) to ensure that I don't end up with a crack baby.
Would that everyone else were as careful.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pax Romana
Shipmate
# 4653
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rossweisse:
By the time the baby's big enough that its skull has to be sucked empty so that the rest of the corpse can be extracted, it is no longer a question of "an assault on a woman's health and privacy." It is the loss of a human life, not just a potential life. And I think society has a legitimate interest in preserving that life. The woman who waits until viability to seek an abortion would do better to offer her baby for adoption.
Absolutely!
I just don't understand this at all.
Personally, I agree with the idea that we are human at the time of conception. But even if you don't believe that way, and a lot of people don't, how can anybody even THINK that it's okay to crush the head of a living, feeling, almost fully-formed baby???!
If the mother's life is really at stake, then why not perform a C-section at a point where it would be possible to save both the mother and the baby, do everything possible to save the life of the premature baby, and, if the parents don't want the baby, give it up for adoption to somebody who does want it.
Maybe the kid will turn out to be "fucked up" and maybe not. Any of us could have ended up being "fucked up," too, and some of us probably are, but we weren't killed by our parents as infants. We had a chance to at least have a life and to try at it. Which is the basic right of every human being on earth.
Pax Romana
--------------------
********************
I used to wake up at 4 A.M. and start sneezing, sometimes for five hours. I tried to find out what sort of allergy I had but finally came to the conclusion that it must be an allergy to consciousness.
James Thurber
Posts: 4598 | From: New York City | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Riv
Shipmate
# 3553
|
Posted
quote:
To those that are anti-abortion: how many of you have adopted a crack baby lately?
That's not a log I see there, is it MadGeo? I mean, I'll be completely impressed if your a happy adoptive father of two babies with congenital issues. That so?
quote:
3000-5000 cases out of a population of 350,000,000 is an absurdly small annual incidence rate.
Actually, Rook, the mainstream media only recently 'celebrated' the 1000th casualty from the ongoing War in Iraq. Seems the threshhold of anger over deaths-by-numbers is lower than you think... or not.
--------------------
"I don't know whether I like it, but it's what I meant." Ralph Vaughan Williams
"Riv, you've done a much better job communicating your passion than your point. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about." Tom Clune
Posts: 2749 | From: Too far South, USA. I really want to move. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
No Riv, I have chosen not to not have any kids at all, since I am not at all sure I wouldn't be one of the irresponsible parents I tend to detest. I also am in favor of freedom of choice, which is completely consistent with what I have espoused.
I would not want to tell a crackhead to keep their baby and make a criminal because I am not prepared to adopt it.
Riv, Duchess, et al, have you applied for your baby adoption yet?
P.S. Thanks to all for the Oliver Twist references.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Riv
Shipmate
# 3553
|
Posted
How are you for freedom of choice for those who are anti-abortion? Your linking an assumed adoption application with that position seems haughty, particularly for one who's opted out of child-rearing of any kind.
Where are the reliable stats for maternal mortality in childbirth these days? That stat never seems to be linked with the 'health of the mother' issue.
--------------------
"I don't know whether I like it, but it's what I meant." Ralph Vaughan Williams
"Riv, you've done a much better job communicating your passion than your point. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about." Tom Clune
Posts: 2749 | From: Too far South, USA. I really want to move. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by duchess:
The difference between you and me RooK, is that I think 40 million gone is a heart-breaking tragedy while you think it is a small number in the whole scheme of things and nothing to be concerned about.
That's the classic mistake - assuming that I think any of those non-viable clusters of cells count as actually being people. Extrapolating your same logic, you let another person die every month that you don't get pregnant, you egg-wasting monster. The only argument you have against this is arbitrary, and you know it.
The Riv, your tangent seems like a salient one - except when you consider that the hyped figure of 1000 deaths includes that the majority occurred after Dubya pronounced victory.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Riv
Shipmate
# 3553
|
Posted
And the 3000+ that began the slaughter on September 11, 2001.
--------------------
"I don't know whether I like it, but it's what I meant." Ralph Vaughan Williams
"Riv, you've done a much better job communicating your passion than your point. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about." Tom Clune
Posts: 2749 | From: Too far South, USA. I really want to move. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
Riv, this tangent really belongs on the appropriate thread - where I can rip off your head without distraction.
No, wait - I see that you're sticking to just numbers now. Fine. Thousands of people versus millions of cells with human DNA. So what.
[ 13. September 2004, 21:11: Message edited by: RooK ]
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
How are you for freedom of choice for those who are anti-abortion? Your linking an assumed adoption application with that position seems haughty, particularly for one who's opted out of child-rearing of any kind.
Do I want them shut-up or something? Hell No. Free speech and freedom all the way baby.
Haughty? Pot Kettler.
Don't fuck with me, breeder. You're the one presumably telling people what they can or can't do with their own bodies and can't step up with the solution to the problem you are thereby creating.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Janine
The Endless Simmer
# 3337
|
Posted
So it's better to advocate the slaughter of everyone not born into optimum circumstances, than to pull for everyone who possibly can be born -- people already conceived -- to be born?
Who gets to decide what is optimum?
--------------------
I'm a Fundagelical Evangimentalist. What are you?
Take Me Home * My Heart * An hour with Rich Mullins *
Posts: 13788 | From: Below the Bible Belt | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
The side that advocates more freedom is how you decide. The side that advocates otherwise are being religious tyrants.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Janine:
So it's better to advocate the slaughter of everyone not born into optimum circumstances, than to pull for everyone who possibly can be born -- people already conceived -- to be born?
Culling some cells isn't a slaughter, unless you have some particularly morbid thoughts about exfoliants whenever you wash up.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by duchess:
I think 40 million gone is a heart-breaking tragedy while you think it is a small number in the whole scheme of things and nothing to be concerned about.
And what of those who think it is something to be concerned about, but choose to find another way to try to prevent it? Are there really people who can look at our current government and say it should be making choices for individuals?
Please, don't tell me. I have enough trouble sleeping as it is.
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by .Mad Geo:
The side that advocates otherwise are being religious tyrants.
Feel free to shove your sanctimonious bullshit up your ass sideways, dumbass. My anti-abortion stance has fuck-all to do with religion. So instead of failing miserably at reading my mind, go pleasure the pig you rode in on.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
So how do you justify trampling over other people's rights Erin?
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
What rights would I be trampling on, MadGeo? The right to pickle and/or dismember an innocent child? Wasn't aware that was a right.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
The right to determine for yourself if it is a child.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Huh. I wasn't aware that we had the right to determine who has the status of human. In that case, I've got a list and I'll be contacting my representative and senators shortly.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
Technically, before they're viable, embryos can easily be classified as a form of cancer.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Huh. I wasn't aware that we had the right to determine who has the status of human. In that case, I've got a list and I'll be contacting my representative and senators shortly.
Glad to hear it. You may want to refer them to "Roe versus Wade" while you're helping them come to their senses.
[crosspost]
[ 13. September 2004, 21:59: Message edited by: .Mad Geo ]
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
So, while I realize that we're having a grand old time here...
Is anyone even going to try to defend the notion that this legislation is anything other than using an extremely rare and atypical procedure as a means to validate the beginnings of an assault on the broader abortion issue?
Fine. I shall accept victory as graciously as ever.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Well done on your recent victory, Rook.
Well Done.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by .Mad Geo:
So how do you justify trampling over other people's rights Erin?
Which people's rights, though, MadGeo? The right of a woman to dispose of an inconvenient pregnancy at the last minute, or the right of a fully- or almost-fully developed child to be born?
And, once again, bear in mind that I'm not talking here about abortion in the first trimester. I'm not even talking about slightly later in a pregnancy if something like Tay-Sachs or a severe birth defect is discovered. (I prefer to leave those decisions to the parents, and keep government well out of it.) I'm talking about babies who would be viable if not killed halfway out of the uterus.
The folks who mentioned the c-section option have it right: if the baby can't be delivered safely, we DO have surgical techniques to take care of it! And there are adoptive parents lined up who would give anything to take home those other people's unwanted infants.
Rossweisse // who also couldn't deliver a full-term baby safely -- and had c-sections instead
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kyralessa
Shipmate
# 4568
|
Posted
As a strident, unapologetic opponent of abortion, I think this "partial-birth abortion" legislation was hypocritical and downright stupid.
If abortion is wrong, it's wrong. If it's OK, it's OK. Is it less wrong to kill someone by strangling or drowning than by stabbing fifty times with an ice pick? Murder is murder.
It's argued that partial-birth abortion is safer for the mother. I can believe it. If you're going to abort, it's got to be safer to extract the fetus nearly intact than to yank it out bit by bit; surely the latter increases the mother's risk of infection, among other things.
Partial-birth abortion is just as barbaric as any other kind of abortion. I'm not sure what those who passed the law thought they were accomplishing (beyond throwing an ineffectual bone). I think it would make more sense if we pro-lifers worked to outlaw all abortion rather than to make senseless distinctions of the sort that this dumb law made.
--------------------
In Orthodoxy, a child is considered an icon of the parents' love for each other.
I'm just glad all my other icons don't cry, crap, and spit up this much.
Posts: 1597 | From: St. Louis, MO | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Equinas
Shipmate
# 2907
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
So, while I realize that we're having a grand old time here...
Is anyone even going to try to defend the notion that this legislation is anything other than using an extremely rare and atypical procedure as a means to validate the beginnings of an assault on the broader abortion issue?
Fine. I shall accept victory as graciously as ever.
California Decision
The health issues start on page 31. The Act is producing something other than an assault on the broader abortion issue. The government is actually arguing that one repulsive procedure should/can be replaced by another, equally repulsive procedure. Hardly an actual assault on abortion, whatever the intent of the original sponsors of the bill. I'd much rather they had pushed for a ban on all late term abortions that aren't medically critical.
For those who don't care to read the link, the equally repulsive procedure referred to is D&E by disarticulation. Instead of piercing the skull and sucking out the brain, the child is cut up in the womb and scraped out. So, this law is not really limiting late-term abortions at all.
--------------------
Linda
Posts: 567 | From: Deep South, USA | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laura
General nuisance
# 10
|
Posted
I really don't see why there can't be a legal distinction between sucking out the brain of a full-term baby and a pre-twelve weeks abortion -- to me it is clear that the former can't be justified except in the case of actual impending maternal death that cannot be prevented by c-section; the latter is up to the individual's conscience. I fully support banning of abortion after an early point, that has to be a bit arbitrary by nature but recognizes the difference in status between an almost full-term child with actual physical pain capability and a small clump of cells that could easily miscarry and can't feel pain.
Anyway, for the assistance of Mad Geo in his abhorrent argument re: worthy life, I direct him again to A Christmas Carol: from a speech by the Ghost of Christmas Present:
quote:
``I see a vacant seat,'' replied the Ghost, ``in the poor chimney-corner, and a crutch without an owner, carefully preserved. If these shadows remain unaltered by the Future, the child will die.''
``No, no,'' said Scrooge. ``Oh, no, kind Spirit! say he will be spared.''
``If these shadows remain unaltered by the Future, none other of my race,'' returned the Ghost, ``will find him here. What then? If he be like to die, he had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.''
Scrooge hung his head to hear his own words quoted by the Spirit, and was overcome with penitence and grief.
``Man,'' said the Ghost, ``if man you be in heart, not adamant, forbear that wicked cant until you have discovered What the surplus is, and Where it is. Will you decide what men shall live, what men shall die? It may be, that in the sight of Heaven, you are more worthless and less fit to live than millions like this poor man's child. Oh God! to hear the Insect on the leaf pronouncing on the too much life among his hungry brothers in the dust!''
--------------------
Love is the only sane and satisfactory answer to the problem of human existence. - Erich Fromm
Posts: 16883 | From: East Coast, USA | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rossweisse
High Church Valkyrie
# 2349
|
Posted
Oh, well-done, Laura!
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Rossweisse // quietly applauding
--------------------
I'm not dead yet.
Posts: 15117 | From: Valhalla | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
