Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Extra Mayo

Four Weeks Ago Today.

Recommended Posts

nm

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

I've always thought that the state shouldn't be involved in deciding moral dilemmas for us. I guess you conservatives disagree. 

Statists. 

I’m okay with preventing the state from murdering innocent human beings. Some disagree.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this law is not passed could doctors perform emergency abortions when the life of the mother was at stake?   Or would those doctors be going to jail for murder?

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

nm

Planning is an exercise of power, and in a modern state much real power is suffused with boredom. The agents of planning are usually boring; the planning process is boring; the implementation of plans is always boring. In a democracy boredom works for bureaucracies and corporations as smell works for skunk. It keeps danger away. Power does not have to be exercised behind the scenes. It can be open. The audience is asleep. The modern world is forged amidst our inattention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, edluvar said:

If this law is not passed could doctors perform emergency abortions when the life of the mother was at stake?   Or would those doctors be going to jail for murder?

It would be murder, but legal murder under current laws and not relevant to OP.  The OP is about the legality of infanticide.  It appears most Democrats now support infanticide if the baby is not "wanted".

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, edluvar said:

If this law is not passed could doctors perform emergency abortions when the life of the mother was at stake?   Or would those doctors be going to jail for murder?

A baby survives a late term abortion, is delivered, alive and outside the womb.  How would killing the baby then save the mother?  I don't understand your question?

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, pokebball said:

A baby survives a late term abortion, is delivered, alive and outside the womb.  How would killing the baby then save the mother?  I don't understand your question?

Inconvenient truth for pro choicers is that the overwhelming majority of late term abortions aren’t due to the typical talking point of the mother’s life being in danger.  There are very few and exceptional medical issues that would necessitate abortion over delivery. The facts don’t support this logic and it’s happening to thousands of babies each year.

v0icAvfW.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, edluvar said:

If this law is not passed could doctors perform emergency abortions when the life of the mother was at stake?   Or would those doctors be going to jail for murder?

These are babies that survived an abortion and have been delivered alive. So now the Democrats want to be able to kill a new born baby. Pushing the envelope one step further. Do you agree with this? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, soupslam1 said:

These are babies that survived an abortion and have been delivered alive. So now the Democrats want to be able to kill a new born baby. Pushing the envelope one step further. Do you agree with this? 

Wtf.  Im against abortions personally however there are times when it’s necessary to save the mother.   Would this law be putting doctors in jail and risking mother’s lives?   If not I’m all for it.  

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, edluvar said:

Wtf.  Im against abortions personally however there are times when it’s necessary to save the mother.   Would this law be putting doctors in jail and risking mother’s lives?   If not I’m all for it.  

How can the mother’s life be at any more risk if the baby is already born? We are talking about killing a new born baby that survived an abortion attempt.  Are you in favor of that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, soupslam1 said:

These are babies that survived an abortion and have been delivered alive. So now the Democrats want to be able to kill a new born baby. Pushing the envelope one step further. Do you agree with this? 

 

35 minutes ago, soupslam1 said:

Help me understand how the Democrat party can be so callous as to favor murdering a live innocent infant. The very definition of evil. 

Maybe this thread should be merged with the prof who wants law enforcement murdered?  Although evil, it would at least be consistent.

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, soupslam1 said:

How can the mother’s life be at any more risk if the baby is already born? We are talking about killing a new born baby that survived an abortion attempt.  Are you in favor of that? 

 

1 hour ago, soupslam1 said:

Help me understand how the Democrat party can be so callous as to favor murdering a live innocent infant. The very definition of evil. 

You're not getting much reaction to this because I think most people know you are full of it. Where is there any bill looking to legalize infanticide? hint: There isn't. Where is there any lawmaker looking to legalize infanticide? hint There isn't. Even in this weird interview with the Virginia governor that you are talking about, isn't advocating killing a baby that survived an abortion. But I think you know that and are being dishonest. Here is a good rundown of what was going on in Virginia.

https://www.vox.com/2019/2/1/18205428/virginia-abortion-bill-kathy-tran-ralph-northam

I'm not defending the Tran bill or the governor but nowhere in the bill or any bill is there talk about legalizing infanticide. the governor's interview was confusing and he did a terrible job speaking so I am not defending him but they clarified after what he tried to mean. he was "focused on the tragic and extremely rare case in which a woman with a non viable pregnancy or severe fetal abnormalities went into labor." I am not sure why he talked about this from the question that was asked but until I see anyone actually pushing for this or a bill allowing this, this will just be a scare tactic to get votes.

 

FYI this is most likely the type of thing he was talking about, the first woman in this story. I can't imagine going through something like that. It is heartbreakingly sad and I can't imagine how much harder it would have been if she was forced to carry her baby to term.https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, tspoke said:

 

You're not getting much reaction to this because I think most people know you are full of it. Where is there any bill looking to legalize infanticide? hint: There isn't. Where is there any lawmaker looking to legalize infanticide? hint There isn't. Even in this weird interview with the Virginia governor that you are talking about, isn't advocating killing a baby that survived an abortion. But I think you know that and are being dishonest. Here is a good rundown of what was going on in Virginia.

https://www.vox.com/2019/2/1/18205428/virginia-abortion-bill-kathy-tran-ralph-northam

I'm not defending the Tran bill or the governor but nowhere in the bill or any bill is there talk about legalizing infanticide. the governor's interview was confusing and he did a terrible job speaking so I am not defending him but they clarified after what he tried to mean. he was "focused on the tragic and extremely rare case in which a woman with a non viable pregnancy or severe fetal abnormalities went into labor." I am not sure why he talked about this from the question that was asked but until I see anyone actually pushing for this or a bill allowing this, this will just be a scare tactic to get votes.

 

FYI this is most likely the type of thing he was talking about, the first woman in this story. I can't imagine going through something like that. It is heartbreakingly sad and I can't imagine how much harder it would have been if she was forced to carry her baby to term.https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

 

LOL   You think proponents of this bill would use the word infanticide?  The legislation is what it is and does what it does.  Using comfy words doesn't make it moral and ethical.  This is perhaps the saddest legislation that has ever, ever, come out of anything US in my opinion.

Only a few Dems are trying to defend and rationalize the legislation.  I think that's why so few are not responding to the OP.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pokebball said:

LOL   You think proponents of this bill would use the word infanticide?  The legislation is what it is and does what it does.  Using comfy words doesn't make it moral and ethical.  This is perhaps the saddest legislation that has ever, ever, come out of anything US in my opinion.

Only a few Dems are trying to defend and rationalize the legislation.  I think that's why so few are not responding to the OP.

I didn't like the legislation(trying to repeal many of the laws that have restricted abortion but went too far from my limited reading of it) but there was nothing in it allowing for killing a baby after it was born or survived an abortion. Show me where it allowed it and you will change my mind. The up to the second of birth Q&A was a really bad look but I think even that was a mischaracterization. While maybe technically correct about the being legal up to the moment of birth I can't think of a medical reason that would cause it to be necessary at the moment of birth.

Are you in favor of forcing that mother in the CNN story to carry her baby to full term?  I beleive that is what this law and the governor were addressing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tspoke said:

I didn't like the legislation(trying to repeal many of the laws that have restricted abortion but went too far from my limited reading of it) but there was nothing in it allowing for killing a baby after it was born or survived an abortion. Show me where it allowed it and you will change my mind. The up to the second of birth Q&A was a really bad look but I think even that was a mischaracterization. While maybe technically correct about the being legal up to the moment of birth I can't think of a medical reason that would cause it to be necessary at the moment of birth.

Are you in favor of forcing that mother in the CNN story to carry her baby to full term?  I beleive that is what this law and the governor were addressing.

 comments Northam made on WTOP radio Wednesday when asked about the bill. 

"When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of obviously the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician, by the way," Northam said. "And it's done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that's non-viable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pokebball said:

 comments Northam made on WTOP radio Wednesday when asked about the bill. 

"When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of obviously the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician, by the way," Northam said. "And it's done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that's non-viable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

Which is the whole point of my original post. It was an awful confusing interview but it appears he was talking...nevermind. Just go read my original response and the articles in it. Considering the law didn't allow what you are inplying Northam is advocating,  I don't think he is actually advocating it. Show me in the bill where killing a baby after it is born is legalized.

I'm out of this discussion. Have a good weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...