Page 18 of 22 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 217

Thread: Roe v Wade

  1. #171
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    9,458
    I don't believe you get clean outcomes no matter what. You can put more limits but then it is quite likely doctors will be unwilling to treat women who are at risk of severe complications etc..
    Trees don't grow on money

  2. #172
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    292
    Pro-choice here with nothing else to add.

  3. #173
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,122
    '
    Quote Originally Posted by catherine View Post
    As a person who has Catholicism in her DNA (but not on the books), I understand the argument that all life is sacred. This is why I believe:

    • All life is sacred, particularly life that is already here. The lives of the poor and disenfranchised, the lives of the cattle, birds and fish that we depend on for our lives, the trees and plants that sustain us, the microscopic life under the soil that supports everything else. I don't think human life is so special that we can consider our specie as the only "sacred" one.
    • No one wants an abortion. DH was saying "oh, pro-abortionists are going to have a protest"--I told him, "NO ONE is 'pro-abortion.' No one WANTS to have an abortion." I have been in that position and when it is your decision to make it tears you up. But it is YOUR decision. If we're going religious here, God gave us the gift of discernment. That means there is very little black or white in these complex issues, and it should be up to the woman, ultimately, to discern for herself what the outcome should be.
      [*]Politically speaking, it's interesting that Republicans are all about deregulation until it comes to the lives of women. I believe perceptions are greatly exaggerated by "pro-life" people--the numbers of late-term abortions, the attitudes of women, i.e.,"Hey, today I think I'll go have a manicure and an abortion," the very fuzzy line between what is a "baby" and what is a cluster of non-sentient cells.


    I was just going to something to this effect too….

  4. #174
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    14,544
    They're all about book banning--at least one knuckle-dragging Tennessee legislator is OK with book burning, even.

  5. #175
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    9,458
    some of them might even be ok with witch burning, even
    Trees don't grow on money

  6. #176
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    14,544
    Quote Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore View Post
    some of them might even be ok with witch burning, even
    Alito's Sir Matthew Hale certainly was. I know "what goes around comes around," but this is ridiculous.

  7. #177
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    5,033
    DH often says when describing an idiot that the best part of that person got left on the sheets. It's all pretty random who comes to be and who doesn't anyway.

  8. #178
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    8,307
    Quote Originally Posted by iris lilies View Post
    While I think there’s not many physicians who will perform a third trimester abortion, I don’t know that they are any more “subject to medical review” than any other abortion.

    I watched a documentary on late term abortions a couple of years ago and it was reasonably evenhanded, and it showed that yes many late term abortions are due to identified health problems of the fetus, but some are not. At least one case the physician who performs late terms abortion told the woman from Europe “nope, I won’t do that.”
    That would seem to indicate that the physician was not willing to do an abortion on a viable fetus without a medical reason. It sounds like "should be between the woman and her doctor" worked to achieve what most of us would consider the "correct" outcome. No government involvement required.

  9. #179
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    8,307
    What are the current rules/laws regarding forcing parents to do something like donate a kidney to a child that will die without that transplant? Or a life saving blood transfusion where the parent and kid have a rare blood-type and no other suitable blood donor can be found. Would that parent be forced to make the donation and, if not willing, charged with homocide if he/she said "nope. Not doing it."

  10. #180
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Always logged in
    Posts
    21,973
    Quote Originally Posted by jp1 View Post
    That would seem to indicate that the physician was not willing to do an abortion on a viable fetus without a medical reason. It sounds like "should be between the woman and her doctor" worked to achieve what most of us would consider the "correct" outcome. No government involvement required.
    Yes that was my take on it, and from what I vaguely remember it was a healthy fetus and the woman was from France. There are doctors who would do it however, that guy in Pittsburgh would have done the deed for the right money.

    Then, there are plenty of doctors who do perfectly awful things for the money. I think of all the cosmetics surgery horror shows paraded on Instagram.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •