RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again

RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:44:37 PM)
quote: I understand the exceptions, and have no issue with them. What I have issue with is the stance that post-viability, one should have the option to arbitrarily terminate a life. Viability is currently defined around 23 weeks - sue me if I'm off a week or two in either direction, but it is near there if not there. That's where my support for the "it's my body" crowd ends. It's where I understand there may be complications that require an abortion later. Honestly, if you've ever watched the process on sonograms, it's hard not to form that belief at a much earlier stage. In 2003, from data collected in those areas that sufficiently reported gestational age, it was found that 6.2% of abortions were conducted from 13 to 15 weeks, 4.2% from 16 to 20 weeks, and 1.4% at or after 21 weeks.[12] Because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's annual study on abortion statistics does not calculate the exact gestational age for abortions performed past the 20th week, there are no precise data for the number of abortions performed after viability.[12] In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year. PP does not perform these late term abortions.

Marc2b -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:45:47 PM)
quote: Repeat after me. TITLE X FUNDS HAVE NEVER BEEN USED TO PAY FOR ABORTIONS. It works just like your local hospital does it. Title X funds are held in a separate account, and not used to pay for any abortion services... If you don't have a problem with your non-profit hospital doing it, what's your issue with non-profit planned parenthood doing it? The only difference is poor people make up 65-70% of Planned Parenthood's customers. I don't have an issue with Planned Parenthood doing it. My issue (well, one of them) is how worked up people get over theses issues... and the paths of non-thinking anger and hatred it leads them down.

Lucylastic -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:46:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Taz, here's a question. When (not if) they perfect a mechanical womb what will be the new limit of viability? Blastocyst? 4-cell stage? How do you think that will affect the law? if women arent the incubators, wheres the issue?

Marc2b -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:48:41 PM)
quote: Viability is a technical term Marc. It means when the fetus can survive outside the womb. I know what it means in this particular context but there are plenty of people who would not be "viable" without assistance. I do not think they should be judged disposable because of that. Slipery slope and all that.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:48:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Taz, here's a question. When (not if) they perfect a mechanical womb what will be the new limit of viability? Blastocyst? 4-cell stage? How do you think that will affect the law? if women arent the incubators, wheres the issue? Who will raise the children? Pregnancy is only part of the equation. After that, there are 18+/- years more work.

tazzygirl -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:49:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Taz, here's a question. When (not if) they perfect a mechanical womb what will be the new limit of viability? Blastocyst? 4-cell stage? How do you think that will affect the law? When they develop such a technology, then it becomes a state issue... and an issue that men will have a say in. At such a point, I dont believe abortion will be an issue anymore. But, my question to you... who will raise them?

tazzygirl -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:51:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b quote: Its not about when life begins... its about viability. Oh god, that is really callous... please tell me that you don't actually judge a person's worth by their viability. No one is speaking of a person's worth. If viability isnt an issue, why pull the plug on patients who are kept alive by machines?

Marc2b -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:52:02 PM)
quote: But, my question to you... who will raise them? The Christian Fundies... because with the advent of an artificial womb no sperm cell need ever be wasted.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:52:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b quote: Viability is a technical term Marc. It means when the fetus can survive outside the womb. I know what it means in this particular context but there are plenty of people who would not be "viable" without assistance. I do not think they should be judged disposable because of that. Slipery slope and all that. I didn't say without assistance. A premie can be viable but still need LOTS of care to survive. The threshhold of viability at this time is the time before which even with the best medical care available, the fetus just will not survive period. You do bring up an important point, though. There are those who would force a woman to carry to term every fetus that begins but if it is imperfect. Tough Shit. There is no funding for education, medical care, rehab etc. There are a lot of folks who are pro life until it is born. After that FUKUM.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:54:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Taz, here's a question. When (not if) they perfect a mechanical womb what will be the new limit of viability? Blastocyst? 4-cell stage? How do you think that will affect the law? When they develop such a technology, then it becomes a state issue... and an issue that men will have a say in. At such a point, I dont believe abortion will be an issue anymore. But, my question to you... who will raise them? LOL. Simultaneous post. I beat ya by 60 secs [8D]

Marc2b -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:55:00 PM)
quote: No one is speaking of a person's worth. If viability isnt an issue, why pull the plug on patients who are kept alive by machines? Why not pull the plug on them and end their life? If they can't live on their own, why keep them alive?

Hillwilliam -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:55:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b quote: But, my question to you... who will raise them? The Christian Fundies... because with the advent of an artificial womb no sperm cell need ever be wasted. Do you really want those people raising children and forcing their dogma down impressionable throats? They breed like rabbits as it is.

StrangerThan -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:55:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan http://www.aclu.org/2008/06/30/the-8th-circuit-court-okays-south-dakota%E2%80%99s-political-interference-in-women%E2%80%99s-personal-medical-decision-making It's not just symbolic Ken. Damn, it is a pain making sure I find liberal sources so you folks will read them. But I consider the source, in both cases. Did you read the actual ruling? http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/08/06/053093P.pdf It's all about the doctors who perform abortions having to read a statement to the preganant woman. There is nothing in there about changing the legal definition of a human life. The case was all about whether it violated the Doctor's free speech rights to make them read a statement mandated by the state. That's because the challenge involved the law abridging the right to free speech or the right to not speak at all. It was not to challenge the language of the law itself. The court allowed the changes the language made to abortion counseling to stand. What the state effectively did as well, was establish in law that life begins at conception. Which Missouri also did, and Mississippi is likely to do. What that means in real terms, is that if RoevWade cracks at any point, abortion will be considered murder by default in those states. Additionally seven other states have trigger laws that will go into effect immediately upon a reversal of RvW to ban most abortions.

Lucylastic -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:56:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Taz, here's a question. When (not if) they perfect a mechanical womb what will be the new limit of viability? Blastocyst? 4-cell stage? How do you think that will affect the law? if women arent the incubators, wheres the issue? Who will raise the children? Pregnancy is only part of the equation. After that, there are 18+/- years more work. yes but abortion wont be the issue, that was my point.. beyond that..legally... to be decided up on when it becomes available. Being a parent never stops. it gets easier when they leave home ... but never stops

tazzygirl -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:56:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b quote: No one is speaking of a person's worth. If viability isnt an issue, why pull the plug on patients who are kept alive by machines? Why not pull the plug on them and end their life? If they can't live on their own, why keep them alive? They do. Thats my point.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:56:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b quote: No one is speaking of a person's worth. If viability isnt an issue, why pull the plug on patients who are kept alive by machines? Why not pull the plug on them and end their life? If they can't live on their own, why keep them alive? If there is no hope of recovery, I support doing just that. If I am hooked up to machines with no hope of recovery. PULL THE FUCKIN PLUG. If there are harvestable organs and parts, have at it.

tazzygirl -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:58:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b quote: But, my question to you... who will raise them? The Christian Fundies... because with the advent of an artificial womb no sperm cell need ever be wasted. Yeah, we have seen the effects of the Fundies raising adopted children. [8\|]

Marc2b -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:58:02 PM)
quote: I didn't say without assistance. A premie can be viable but still need LOTS of care to survive. The threshhold of viability at this time is the time before which even with the best medical care available, the fetus just will not survive period. Yes, but what is a womb but something that provides care and assistance?

Hillwilliam -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:58:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Taz, here's a question. When (not if) they perfect a mechanical womb what will be the new limit of viability? Blastocyst? 4-cell stage? How do you think that will affect the law? if women arent the incubators, wheres the issue? Who will raise the children? Pregnancy is only part of the equation. After that, there are 18+/- years more work. yes but abortion wont be the issue, that was my point.. beyond that..legally... to be decided up on when it becomes available. Being a parent never stops. it gets easier when they leave home ... but never stops Until they move back in with THEIR kids. [8D]

Hillwilliam -> RE: Religious Wrong gets smacked down again (8/31/2011 1:59:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b quote: I didn't say without assistance. A premie can be viable but still need LOTS of care to survive. The threshhold of viability at this time is the time before which even with the best medical care available, the fetus just will not survive period. Yes, but what is a womb but something that provides care and assistance? Our technology can't match it as yet. Like the brain.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125