How would you solve the abortion issue?

[Frank Apisa]

What does it say? Can you post the current oath?

Hippocratic Oath, Modern version - Bioethics - Guides at Johns Hopkins University


HIPPOCRATIC OATH, MODERN VERSION


I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.

I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

 

[RamFel]

Calling people murderers and is all well and good, but how would you solve the issue? Pretend that you have the ability to enact law.

I don't really need to pretend, but I know that you cannot reduce abortion to zero. The way some want to do it is by increments while continuing to abort! And there seems to be nothing we can do to stem the demand, but the flood of demands is as big as it is because the left have left has left the doors to abortion wide open. No wonder we have such a Huge problem!

So the only way we can solve the problem is to shut the door by shutting those doors and put planned parenthood out of business. Once people get used to the idea, our problems will minimize.

 

[tosca1]

What does it say? Can you post the current oath?

Hippocratic Oath: Modern Version

I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.

I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.




—Written in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, and used in many medical schools today.



NOVA | The Hippocratic Oath Today

 

[Bodi]

Calling people murderers and is all well and good, but how would you solve the issue? Pretend that you have the ability to enact law.

There is no issue... the law is good just the way that it is.

 

[distraff]

Calling people murderers and is all well and good, but how would you solve the issue? Pretend that you have the ability to enact law.

I would start out with a thought experiment. What if we had a fully formed adult in a womb (assuming no medical issues from this happening). Would it be ok for the mother to have the adult killed in order to avoid pregnancy? This will help decide whether right to life supersedes right to body.

 

[Amadeus]

I would start out with a thought experiment. What if we had a fully formed adult in a womb (assuming no medical issues from this happening). Would it be ok for the mother to have the adult killed in order to avoid pregnancy? This will help decide whether right to life supersedes right to body.

Sorry, only in the cartoons would having an adult inside your uterus not cause medical complications. If you're going to go this route, lets change it so that a baby is growing inside a man's penis.

 

[matchlight]

The only solution is (for the upteenth time): Recognize and HONOR women's existing Constitutional rights such as:

(a) "EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW";

Where has the Supreme Court ever held that the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause guarantees a right to abortion? Or maybe that is just a product of your imagination.

(b) "CAN'T BE DENIED LIFE, "LIBERTY", and "PROPERTY" WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW;

There is no basis for the assertion that abortion is a liberty interest guaranteed against the states by the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause. That was what the Court decreed in Roe v. Wade, without every offering even a shred of legal reasoning to support its decree. In the Court's decisions applying the doctrine known as "substantive due process," only a select group of rights the Court views as "fundamental" qualify for heightened protection. See Washington v. Glucksberg; see also Justice Scalia's explanation in Lawrence v. Texas.

Starting with Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992, the Court dropped the claim made in Roe that the right to abortion is fundamental. That is the reason state abortion laws have not been reviewed under the Court's extremely demanding "strict scrutiny" standard for twenty-three years now. They are reviewed under a somewhat less demanding "undue burden" standard the Court cooked up just for abortion laws in Casey.

(c) And last, but not least, "THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY".

The Constitution may imply a general right to personal privacy. But even assuming it does, the assertion in Roe that it encompasses a right to abortion is only that--a bare assertion not supported by any legal reasoning.

Definitions: 1) Liberty (include but are not limited to): the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges.

Whose definition is that? Your own? In what decision has the Supreme Court ever defined the "liberty" protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clauses in that way? Please cite the case and quote the text. In his dissenting opinion in Obergefell, Justice Thomas explored that exact question in detail, tracing what the due process right to "liberty" was understood to mean in the law from the time of Magna Charta all the way to the Fourteenth Amendment and beyond. His conclusions do not come within a mile of supporting your assertion about what it means.

Women and their Medical Providers' relationships are protected by the Constitution via the Fourteen Amendment. Among the provisions within the 14th Amendment is the Right to Privacy

That is the slop that was asserted without any explanation whatever in Roe, one of the most notoriously arbitrary decisions in the Supreme Court's history. The Court pruned Roe back considerably in Casey, although it could not muster the political will to overrule the sorry thing outright. It no longer seems to be willing to locate a right to privacy in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. If you think otherwise, please cite the language where the Court has made that claim since Roe.

which is imperative for the Fourteen Amendment to be valid.

What on earth are you talking about? The Fourteenth Amendment's validity does not depend on an assertion in a single Supreme Court decision in 1973 that it is the location of a right to privacy. The Court in earlier decisions had located that right in various parts of the Bill of Rights, without affecting the Fourteenth Amendment's validity one iota.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Hippocratic Oath, Modern version - Bioethics - Guides at Johns Hopkins University


HIPPOCRATIC OATH, MODERN VERSION


I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.

I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

Exactly. Nothing in there about abortion.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Hippocratic Oath: Modern Version

I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.

I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.




—Written in 1964 by Louis Lasagna, Academic Dean of the School of Medicine at Tufts University, and used in many medical schools today.



NOVA | The Hippocratic Oath Today

Nothing in there about abortion, so I don't know why you brought it up.

 

[Scrabaholic]

I would start out with a thought experiment. What if we had a fully formed adult in a womb (assuming no medical issues from this happening). Would it be ok for the mother to have the adult killed in order to avoid pregnancy? This will help decide whether right to life supersedes right to body.

You mean avoid gestation. A woman has and should retain the right to have anything removed from her UTERUS that she so chooses.

 

[calamity]

Sorry, only in the cartoons would having an adult inside your uterus not cause medical complications. If you're going to go this route, lets change it so that a baby is growing inside a man's penis.

If that were the case, there would be a purple pill available, sold over the counter and advertised on TV, which gets rid of it....and, men would say it was good.

 

[Grand Mal]

Calling people murderers and is all well and good, but how would you solve the issue? Pretend that you have the ability to enact law.

I'd leave it alone. The issue is solved. More laws aren't needed.

 

[Grand Mal]

I don't know if that's causally accurate, but I won't argue the point. Education is never a bad thing as long as it's comprehensive and meets the cultural and societal needs and wants of the parents of the children being educated.

That said, abortion has been dropping in the United States over the past number of years from highs around 1.6 million annually to around 1 million annually. That almost assuredly has some relationship to greater education and/or availability of birth control measures for young women and teens. But I'd also suggest that it's quite possible that young people are changing in their attitudes towards sex and the seriousness of the act and its potential consequences and there's also a general decrease in American acceptance of abortion in all its forms and those societal changes may be reflected directly in young peoples' views of abortion as well.

As noted previously, it's a complex issue and for me it's a moral one and one related to self respect and self determination. Legislation has no place in the equation, in my view. As noted, here in Canada we have no abortion legislation and I and the vast majority of Canadians are just fine with leaving the matter up to a willing doctor and his/her patient to discuss and determine the most appropriate course of action for the patient. That doesn't change, however, what we can do outside of legislation to reduce the need for abortion services in the first place.

Damn, every now and then you express solid liberal values. Keep up the good work.

 

[Bodi]

I would start out with a thought experiment. What if we had a fully formed adult in a womb (assuming no medical issues from this happening). Would it be ok for the mother to have the adult killed in order to avoid pregnancy? This will help decide whether right to life supersedes right to body.

Fully formed adults are not attached to the females womb. Thought Experiment fail.

 

[tosca1]

Nothing in there about abortion, so I don't know why you brought it up.

Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks.
But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty.
Above all, I must not play at God.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks.
But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty.
Above all, I must not play at God.

That doesn't say s/he can't do an abortion.

BTW, doctors play "at God" all the time when they cure illnesses or do surgery.

 

[HowardBThiname]

Above all, I must not play at God.

But, isn't that what you're doing when you seek to force women to carry unwanted pregnancies?

 

[CanadaJohn]

Your don't have the authority to make an admission on my behalf.

If a dog pees on your leg, do you need the dog to give you authority to recognize the pee on your leg?

 

[CanadaJohn]

Damn, every now and then you express solid liberal values. Keep up the good work.

Actually, I express solid Canadian conservative values on a regular basis. Those values involve respect for the individual and the desire to keep government out of the personal lives and choices of individual citizens. Those values also involve keeping the government out of our pockets and keeping government small and limited. Those aren't inconsistent values. Liberals, unfortunately, too often want to legislate in areas of personal lives and choices and establish controls on those lives and choices - that's where we part, since to do so is to disrespect the two values I outlined above.

 

[joG]

Fully formed adults are not attached to the females womb. Thought Experiment fail.

Actually, the viability test comes very close to the thought experiment.

 

[tosca1]

"Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks.

But it may also be within my power to take a life;

this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty.

Above all, I must not play at God."

That doesn't say s/he can't do an abortion.

BTW, doctors play "at God" all the time when they cure illnesses or do surgery.

:roll:

What are you on about physicians healing people? Healing people isn't playing God. It's a skill.
There were physicians in ancient time! An Apostle was a physician!

It's about dealing with matters of life and death! Giving and taking of life! There is that fine line. You don't play God!




Same kind of juvenile reasoning I've seen from others.
Just like the silly rebuttal......"Abortion" and "Same Sex Marriage" aren't specifically mentioned in the Bible, either!

I quoted only that particular part, thinking perhaps it was overlooked. Apparently not.

Obviously, the statement from the oath is too deep for you. What more can I say?
Bye, Scrabaholic....I've already spent enough time responding to juvenile povs.

 

[tosca1]

But, isn't that what you're doing when you seek to force women to carry unwanted pregnancies?

:roll:

Do we kill women? Do they automatically die? No.
Furthermore, it's encouraging mothers to kill their own children for whatever reasons (mostly frivolous reasons), that flies against what's only natural!

CHILD BEARING IS A NATURAL PROCESS THAT COMES WITH BEING FEMALE! The rationale of most people here reflect how deeply some harbor this immature and "bratty" sense of entitlement, so much so that they can only give such silly rationalization!

You pro-choice women have a big snitty problem with the fact that your body is designed to carry and raise children in your womb -
well, boo-hoo-hoo for you! GROW UP and use your brains, for crying out loud! You're a shameful lot that discredit us all women!



Such silly response.



Refer to my response to Scrabaholic #171. It also applies to you.


Bye for now, Howard....until you've got something worth responding to.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Sorry, only in the cartoons would having an adult inside your uterus not cause medical complications. If you're going to go this route, lets change it so that a baby is growing inside a man's penis.

Point, set, match!

 

[HowardBThiname]

:roll:

Do we kill women? Do they automatically die? No.

Until modern medicine, quite a few died in childbirth - but that's not my point, you emphatically stated that "Above all, you must not play God." Those were YOUR words and now you're trying to backpedal and justify playing God.

Furthermore, it's encouraging mothers to kill their own children for whatever reasons (mostly frivolous reasons), that flies against what's only natural!

I don't buy that for a minute. Making abortion legal and available (in the early stage) gives women who cannot afford to financially or emotionally carry a pregnancy to term, a safe alternative. No woman who wants a child is going to abort unless she's the victim of rape or the fetus is damaged. Stating that it's encouragement is baloney.

CHILD BEARING IS A NATURAL PROCESS THAT COMES WITH BEING FEMALE! The rationale of most people here reflect how deeply some harbor this immature and "bratty" sense of entitlement, so much so that they can only give such silly rationalization!

It's a natural process that results in a child - unfortunately - sometimes it's a very bad idea to bring a child into the mix.

You pro-choice women have a big snitty problem with the fact that your body is designed to carry and raise children in your womb -
well, boo-hoo-hoo for you! GROW UP and use your brains, for crying out loud! You're a shameful lot that discredit us all women!

I'm not a pro-choice woman. I'm a pro-choice man who will fight for women to always have a safe and legal alternative to forced pregnancy. I respect women a great deal more than you do, it appears.

You, on the other hand, are free to give birth to a dozen babies. No one's stopping you. More power to you.

But, you're certainly trying to "play God" by restricting other women when you have not walked a mile in their shoes. You're being self-righteous, controlling and judgmental. All things a Christian should not be.

Until a woman gives birth - a fetus is an EXTENSION of her body. Her fetus is not yet a person and it's not an extension of YOUR body, so you're playing god by trying to force her to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.

Why not let her make her decision and let God decide her fate?

 

[Frank Apisa]

Until modern medicine, quite a few died in childbirth - but that's not my point, you emphatically stated that "Above all, you must not play God." Those were YOUR words and now you're trying to backpedal and justify playing God.



I don't buy that for a minute. Making abortion legal and available (in the early stage) gives women who cannot afford to financially or emotionally carry a pregnancy to term, a safe alternative. No woman who wants a child is going to abort unless she's the victim of rape or the fetus is damaged. Stating that it's encouragement is baloney.



It's a natural process that results in a child - unfortunately - sometimes it's a very bad idea to bring a child into the mix.



I'm not a pro-choice woman. I'm a pro-choice man who will fight for women to always have a safe and legal alternative to forced pregnancy. I respect women a great deal more than you do, it appears.

You, on the other hand, are free to give birth to a dozen babies. No one's stopping you. More power to you.

But, you're certainly trying to "play God" by restricting other women when you have not walked a mile in their shoes. You're being self-righteous, controlling and judgmental. All things a Christian should not be.

Until a woman gives birth - a fetus is an EXTENSION of her body. Her fetus is not yet a person and it's not an extension of YOUR body, so you're playing god by trying to force her to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.

Why not let her make her decision and let God decide her fate?

I agree with everything you said here, Howard. I also am a pro-choice man who will fight for women to always have a safe and legal alternative to forced pregnancy.

If a woman decides to end a pregnancy occurring in her own body...she should have the right to do so. It becomes an issue she and her doctor decide...not a legislature.