• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge delays enforcement of Alabama abortion law until 2014

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,659
Reaction score
25,054
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
In the News:
Judge delays enforcement of Alabama abortion law until 2014
By Verna Gates, Reuters
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — A federal judge on Tuesday delayed until next year the enforcement of Alabama's new abortion law, which tightens restrictions on providers and, according to opponents, could force the closing of more than half of the state's abortion clinics.

The law, signed by Republican Gov. Robert Bentley in April, requires every doctor who performs an abortion at a clinic to have staff privileges at a local hospital and mandates the clinics meet the same facility standards as ambulatory care centers.

The law was set to go into effect Aug. 15.
read more:

Judge delays enforcement of Alabama abortion law until 2014 - U.S. News
 

Peter King

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
25,291
Reaction score
12,096
Location
Netherlands
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
it looks like this is a smart judge who will protect the legal right to have an abortion.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,631
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If a state can determine the credentials necessary for a doctor to perform any type of operation or procedure, and a state can determine the types of facilities and certified staffing levels at a hospital in that state, why can't a state determine that one of the criteria for a doctor operating at an abortion clinic is also to have accreditation at a local hospital and that the abortion clinic have strong facility standards?

As a patient, I may have the right to have a particular treatment but that doesn't mean that just anyone and anywhere can offer and perform that treatment. Why do those who favor abortion want to have second rate, second class doctors and facilities? Some appear to be just one step above that back alley you so like to refer to.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
If a state can determine the credentials necessary for a doctor to perform any type of operation or procedure, and a state can determine the types of facilities and certified staffing levels at a hospital in that state, why can't a state determine that one of the criteria for a doctor operating at an abortion clinic is also to have accreditation at a local hospital and that the abortion clinic have strong facility standards?

As a patient, I may have the right to have a particular treatment but that doesn't mean that just anyone and anywhere can offer and perform that treatment. Why do those who favor abortion want to have second rate, second class doctors and facilities? Some appear to be just one step above that back alley you so like to refer to.
For several reasons John. The first is that it is not "free" for a doctor to acquire "visiting rights" at a local hospital, hospitals charge a fee (monthly, annually, w/e). This costs the doctors and would increase prices for patients to offset the costs. In the second place, doctor's who perform abortions are usually already trained and accredited to do that type of medical procedure. The very few that aren't should be and that is something I would support.

The second question is why do you think abortion clinics don't have acceptable standards? States already do health inspections of all off-site medical facilities and only those which pass are allowed to continue to offer medical services.

The law is simply an attempt to make abortions as difficult to obtain as possible. They are not concerned about the welfare of the mother so much as preventing her access to abortion options.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,631
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
For several reasons John. The first is that it is not "free" for a doctor to acquire "visiting rights" at a local hospital, hospitals charge a fee (monthly, annually, w/e). This costs the doctors and would increase prices for patients to offset the costs. In the second place, doctor's who perform abortions are usually already trained and accredited to do that type of medical procedure. The very few that aren't should be and that is something I would support.

The second question is why do you think abortion clinics don't have acceptable standards? States already do health inspections of all off-site medical facilities and only those which pass are allowed to continue to offer medical services.

The law is simply an attempt to make abortions as difficult to obtain as possible. They are not concerned about the welfare of the mother so much as preventing her access to abortion options.
Perhaps so, but to me that's just an emotional response rather than a reasoned one. If a family practice physician pays the fees necessary for "visiting rights" to a local hospital, why can't an abortion doctor do the same? If a family practice physician does it so they can visit their patients in the local hospital why shouldn't an abortion doctor have to do the same? I'm sure not all abortions go without complications and some women get hospitalized after - why shouldn't the abortion doctor have to follow-up at the hospital the way a family doctor does?

Secondly, I didn't say the abortion clinics' facilities were currently substandard, but what's wrong with improving those standards going forward? The government here does it all the time, rewriting and reviewing health care delivery standards for all kinds of facilities.

I don't know the details of abortion clinics in Alabama, but perhaps they do have issues with low standards and substandard care. There may be an emotional component related to "restricting" abortion but there could just as easily be a hard-headed component of making sure the citizens of Alabama aren't subjected to some of the abortion clinic horror stories that are happening in other states, such as Pennsylvannia recently.

If there's an argument that hospitals won't give certain doctors privileges, that's a different story and subject to a different kind of lawsuit but the hospital's application of the law doesn't make the law either unreasonable or unconstitutional.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,465
Reaction score
20,323
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Perhaps so, but to me that's just an emotional response rather than a reasoned one. If a family practice physician pays the fees necessary for "visiting rights" to a local hospital, why can't an abortion doctor do the same? If a family practice physician does it so they can visit their patients in the local hospital why shouldn't an abortion doctor have to do the same? I'm sure not all abortions go without complications and some women get hospitalized after - why shouldn't the abortion doctor have to follow-up at the hospital the way a family doctor does?
First my response is not emotional, it is legal. You forget I am a lawyer, and understand Roe v. Wade and such laws as Alabama is attempting to enforce.

Second, most abortions do not require a hospital stay, only those that have complications might. Third, no hospital would prevent the patient's primary physician from visiting his patient or advising a resident physician on the patient's condition unless required by law. No "visitation" rights are necessary, that is simply professional courtesy.

Secondly, I didn't say the abortion clinics' facilities were currently substandard, but what's wrong with improving those standards going forward? The government here does it all the time, rewriting and reviewing health care delivery standards for all kinds of facilities.
If it aint broke, don't fix it. Have you ever been to an abortion clinic? I have been to several. They are typically clean, sterile environments, operated by typical medical professionals. If a clinic were "sub-standard" based on a regular health inspection then like any other place they would be required to close until they came up to spec.

Besides, your government RUNS all clinics. If Canada allows abortions (I don't know one way or the other at this point) it is the job of the government to maintain them and subsume the costs. Medicine in the USA is a private business, and any costs you demand of the Doctor will be transferred to the women seeking his help. That discriminates against the very women who need such services...the poor.

I don't know the details of abortion clinics in Alabama, but perhaps they do have issues with low standards and substandard care. There may be an emotional component related to "restricting" abortion but there could just as easily be a hard-headed component of making sure the citizens of Alabama aren't subjected to some of the abortion clinic horror stories that are happening in other states, such as Pennsylvannia recently.
There is no evidence of any problems with Alabama's few abortion clinics. As for the Pennsylvania issue? Sorry, but one horror story does not rise to the level of a pandemic. That is herd panic rather than looking at it closely to see if it is a blip or a real symptom of an ongoing problem.
 
Last edited:

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,659
Reaction score
25,054
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Perhaps so, but to me that's just an emotional response rather than a reasoned one. If a family practice physician pays the fees necessary for "visiting rights" to a local hospital, why can't an abortion doctor do the same? If a family practice physician does it so they can visit their patients in the local hospital why shouldn't an abortion doctor have to do the same? I'm sure not all abortions go without complications and some women get hospitalized after - why shouldn't the abortion doctor have to follow-up at the hospital the way a family doctor does?...
Actually the law requires the doctors to have "admitting privileges' to the local hospital but most of the abortion doctors are out of town physicians who partner with local doctors who have hospital admitting privileges.

Most Alabama clinics hire out-of-town physicians to perform abortions and partner with local doctors who have hospital admitting privileges to provide follow-up care.

Doctors at the clinics are often unable to obtain staff privileges because local hospitals oppose abortion or they live too far from the area, the lawsuit said.

The law "would unconstitutionally restrict the ability of Alabama women, including victims of rape and incest, to access safe and legal abortions,"
Judge delays enforcement of Alabama abortion law until 2014 - U.S. News
 

OKgrannie

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
4,309
Reaction score
3,292
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
Perhaps so, but to me that's just an emotional response rather than a reasoned one. If a family practice physician pays the fees necessary for "visiting rights" to a local hospital, why can't an abortion doctor do the same? If a family practice physician does it so they can visit their patients in the local hospital why shouldn't an abortion doctor have to do the same? I'm sure not all abortions go without complications and some women get hospitalized after - why shouldn't the abortion doctor have to follow-up at the hospital the way a family doctor does?
This requirement is just a TRAP law to attempt to close clinics. Hospitals, many of them operated by the Catholic Church, will often not allow privileges for abortion doctors. Also many abortion providers are traveling physicians, and hospitals will often not allow privileges for non-residents. There is no reason an abortion provider should have to have privileges at a local hospital, in the RARE event of complications, a woman will be taken to the emergency room.

Secondly, I didn't say the abortion clinics' facilities were currently substandard, but what's wrong with improving those standards going forward? The government here does it all the time, rewriting and reviewing health care delivery standards for all kinds of facilities.
More TRAP laws. Such regulations do nothing to improve the standard of care provided to women, but do much to close clinics. Regulating the size of the janitor's closet doesn't improve health care. There is no evidence that women are endangered by the present standards, abortion is much safer for women than childbirth.

I don't know the details of abortion clinics in Alabama, but perhaps they do have issues with low standards and substandard care. There may be an emotional component related to "restricting" abortion but there could just as easily be a hard-headed component of making sure the citizens of Alabama aren't subjected to some of the abortion clinic horror stories that are happening in other states, such as Pennsylvannia recently.
The incident in Pennsylvania was an incident of breaking the current law, not an incident of laws not being strict enough. Do statistics show that Alabama women are suffering more complications from abortion than other states? If so, investigation should happen. If not, we can safely assume an attempt to pass TRAP laws.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,631
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,659
Reaction score
25,054
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
"Out of town physicans" and "Travelling doctors"? That tells me a lot about the state of the segment of the profession that specializes in abortions.
Well, there is only one abortion clinic in all of Alabama.
As I have stated before abortions later than 13 weeks need specially trained abortion doctors.
Since so few abortions take place after 13 weeks some doctors fly in for those patients.
 
Last edited:

JayDubya

Struggler
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
17,181
Reaction score
4,037
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Where do we get all these ****ing illiterate people to elevate to the level of judge?

You'd think we would want people what could read words more gooder than that.
 

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,659
Reaction score
25,054
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, there is only one abortion clinic in all of Alabama.
As I have stated before abortions later than 13 weeks need specially trained abortion doctors.
Since so few abortions take place after 13 weeks some doctors fly in for those patients.

During 2009 in Alabama the percent of abortions ,weekly gestation was :
Under 8 weeks 60.4 %
9-13 weeks 30.7%
14-15 weeks 3.9%
16-17 weeks 2.6%
18-20 weeks 2.3 %
21 weeks or more 0.1 percent

Alabama Abortion Facts | Abort73.com
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,631
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
During 2009 in Alabama the percent of abortions ,weekly gestation was :
Under 8 weeks 60.4 %
9-13 weeks 30.7%
14-15 weeks 3.9%
16-17 weeks 2.6%
18-20 weeks 2.3 %
21 weeks or more 0.1 percent

Alabama Abortion Facts | Abort73.com
Gee, if every law covered 91% of the likely outcomes that would be considered a great success. Of the other 9%, how many would be what I'll call "lifestyle" choice abortions and not medically necessary abortions? In addition, if the "lesser" trained abortionists are performing 91% of the abortions in the state now, why can't a few of them or all of them get the advanced training necessary to perform the rest of the abortions?

Seems pretty odd to me that you'd want a state to have it's laws struck down to accomodate a very few situations and some out of state doctors. But then, liberals are all for grand laws that affect everyone to address small problems. Must have everyone conform to the prime directive.
 

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,659
Reaction score
25,054
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Gee, if every law covered 91% of the likely outcomes that would be considered a great success. Of the other 9%, how many would be what I'll call "lifestyle" choice abortions and not medically necessary abortions? In addition, if the "lesser" trained abortionists are performing 91% of the abortions in the state now, why can't a few of them or all of them get the advanced training necessary to perform the rest of the abortions?

Seems pretty odd to me that you'd want a state to have it's laws struck down to accomodate a very few situations and some out of state doctors. ...
Some genetic / fetal admormalies may be caught as early as 13 weeks gestion but most are not found until 18 to 20 weeks.
Many abnormalities show up during the 18 week gestation ultrasound. They measure the spaces along the spine, for some defects like spina bifitia and Down syndrome. Also an 18 week gestation ultrasound can determine heart problems , brain problems,and other problems such as organs that growing on the outside of the abdomen. If the ultrasound is abnormal more tests such as an amino fluid sample to take a closer genetic look at cells may be taken.

In the USA abortions are allowed up to between 22 and 24 weeks gestation for these fetal abnormalies.
Abortions after 24 weeks gestation are allowed for the extreme cases where the womans life or irreparble damage to a major bodily function will take place or where the fetus will not be viaible. It will be stillborn or would only live a few minutes or hours.

There are only four abortion doctors who perform legal abortions after viability in the USA.
The later the pregnancy the much higher the risk for the woman which is why her life or irreparable damage to a major bodilily function , or a non viaible fetus which risks the woman's life because of a high chance of infection are the extreme cases these doctors perform abortions.
 
Last edited:

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,659
Reaction score
25,054
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
In 2008 there were only 5 doctors ho performed abortions after viabilty in the USA.
These were the extreme cases , the cases where the woman's life or irreparable damage to a major bodilily function would take place, or where the fetus would be be stillborn or would only live a few minutes or hours.

Kansas was one of a small handful of states that allowed abortions after viability in these extreme cases.
Dr Tiller was one of those late term doctors.
Doctors from all over the USA old send their patients with these problem pregnancies to DR. tiller.
Kansas keep a record of all abortions at or after 22 weeks gestation.
There were 321 abortions at or after 22 weeks gestation in Kansas in 2008.

192 were not viaible. The fetus had died in the womb but did not expell, would be stillborn or would only live a few hours or minutes.

The other 132 were because irreparable damage to a major bodilily function would take place if the pregnancy continued.

These cases are rare but they are life threatening.
 

Scrabaholic

misanthrope
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
21,247
Reaction score
15,516
Location
Near Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Gee, if every law covered 91% of the likely outcomes that would be considered a great success. Of the other 9%, how many would be what I'll call "lifestyle" choice abortions and not medically necessary abortions? In addition, if the "lesser" trained abortionists are performing 91% of the abortions in the state now, why can't a few of them or all of them get the advanced training necessary to perform the rest of the abortions?

Seems pretty odd to me that you'd want a state to have it's laws struck down to accomodate a very few situations and some out of state doctors. But then, liberals are all for grand laws that affect everyone to address small problems. Must have everyone conform to the prime directive.
You anti choicers are the ones wanting more laws. I, as a conservative, want the govt. OUT of the issue altogether.
 

nota bene

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
60,233
Reaction score
32,980
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
In 2008 there were only 5 doctors ho performed abortions after viabilty in the USA.
These were the extreme cases , the cases where the woman's life or irreparable damage to a major bodilily function would take place, or where the fetus would be be stillborn or would only live a few minutes or hours.

Kansas was one of a small handful of states that allowed abortions after viability in these extreme cases.
Dr Tiller was one of those late term doctors.
Doctors from all over the USA old send their patients with these problem pregnancies to DR. tiller.
Kansas keep a record of all abortions at or after 22 weeks gestation.
There were 321 abortions at or after 22 weeks gestation in Kansas in 2008.

192 were not viaible. The fetus had died in the womb but did not expell, would be stillborn or would only live a few hours or minutes.

The other 132 were because irreparable damage to a major bodilily function would take place if the pregnancy continued.

These cases are rare but they are life threatening.
Only God knows how many viable, healthy babies Tiller aborted. But we know for sure of some because of the medical records and software program his second opinion used. Neuhaus didn't even actually see some of the patients, just rubber-stamped her sig.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,631
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Some genetic / fetal admormalies may be caught as early as 13 weeks gestion but most are not found until 18 to 20 weeks.
Many abnormalities show up during the 18 week gestation ultrasound. They measure the spaces along the spine, for some defects like spina bifitia and Down syndrome. Also an 18 week gestation ultrasound can determine heart problems , brain problems,and other problems such as organs that growing on the outside of the abdomen. If the ultrasound is abnormal more tests such as an amino fluid sample to take a closer genetic look at cells may be taken.

In the USA abortions are allowed up to between 22 and 24 weeks gestation for these fetal abnormalies.
Abortions after 24 weeks gestation are allowed for the extreme cases where the womans life or irreparble damage to a major bodily function will take place or where the fetus will not be viaible. It will be stillborn or would only live a few minutes or hours.

There are only four abortion doctors who perform legal abortions after viability in the USA.
The later the pregnancy the much higher the risk for the woman which is why her life or irreparable damage to a major bodilily function , or a non viaible fetus which risks the woman's life because of a high chance of infection are the extreme cases these doctors perform abortions.
I'm very supportive of everything you've presented here - thanks for sharing.
 

polgara

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
20,215
Reaction score
17,786
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
Some genetic / fetal admormalies may be caught as early as 13 weeks gestion but most are not found until 18 to 20 weeks.
Many abnormalities show up during the 18 week gestation ultrasound. They measure the spaces along the spine, for some defects like spina bifitia and Down syndrome. Also an 18 week gestation ultrasound can determine heart problems , brain problems,and other problems such as organs that growing on the outside of the abdomen. If the ultrasound is abnormal more tests such as an amino fluid sample to take a closer genetic look at cells may be taken.

In the USA abortions are allowed up to between 22 and 24 weeks gestation for these fetal abnormalies.
Abortions after 24 weeks gestation are allowed for the extreme cases where the womans life or irreparble damage to a major bodily function will take place or where the fetus will not be viaible. It will be stillborn or would only live a few minutes or hours.

There are only four abortion doctors who perform legal abortions after viability in the USA.
The later the pregnancy the much higher the risk for the woman which is why her life or irreparable damage to a major bodilily function , or a non viaible fetus which risks the woman's life because of a high chance of infection are the extreme cases these doctors perform abortions.
Greetings, Minnie. :2wave:

Thanks for your excellent post. I certainly learned things I didn't know. :thumbs:
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,631
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
In 2008 there were only 5 doctors ho performed abortions after viabilty in the USA.
These were the extreme cases , the cases where the woman's life or irreparable damage to a major bodilily function would take place, or where the fetus would be be stillborn or would only live a few minutes or hours.

Kansas was one of a small handful of states that allowed abortions after viability in these extreme cases.
Dr Tiller was one of those late term doctors.
Doctors from all over the USA old send their patients with these problem pregnancies to DR. tiller.
Kansas keep a record of all abortions at or after 22 weeks gestation.
There were 321 abortions at or after 22 weeks gestation in Kansas in 2008.

192 were not viaible. The fetus had died in the womb but did not expell, would be stillborn or would only live a few hours or minutes.

The other 132 were because irreparable damage to a major bodilily function would take place if the pregnancy continued.

These cases are rare but they are life threatening.
I would support all of what you've presented here as well - I have no problem with abortions in such cases. I'm not the type of person that would insist on a woman dying in order to bring a child to term or that would insist upon a child coming to term if they would likely die during delivery or shortly thereafter or would be so catastrophically physically and/or mentally impaired that even a marginally normal life would not be possible.

I find it troubling that America would want to legislate these kinds of things or that there would be such difficulty in trying to find accommodations for these circumstances. I appreciate Canada's approach which is not to legislate any rights or restrictions related to abortion and that may be a better approach than what seems to be the never ending drama/trauma in the US.

Thanks for sharing the detail you've presented above - much appreciated.
 

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,659
Reaction score
25,054
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Only God knows how many viable, healthy babies Tiller aborted. ....
We do know how many viabile fetuses were aborted.
There were 132 abortions of viaible fetus that were aborted in 2008.
The patients were recommended for abortions by their OB/GYNs because the pregnancies were deemed to be extreme cases where irreparable damage would take place to a major bodilily function if the pregnancy continued.

Some people including you may disagree but Dr Tiller was found not guilty of any illegal abortions.
 
Last edited:

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,631
Reaction score
20,383
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You anti choicers are the ones wanting more laws. I, as a conservative, want the govt. OUT of the issue altogether.
I'm not anti-choice, any more so than you would be considered pro-abortion. Denigrading people by calling names simply because you disagree with their views provides no light on the subject. In fact, I agree with your last comment, that the government should be out of the issue altogether.
 

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,659
Reaction score
25,054
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Greetings, Minnie. :2wave:

Thanks for your excellent post. I certainly learned things I didn't know. :thumbs:
Greeting polgara.:2wave:
Thanks for your kind words.
 

Scrabaholic

misanthrope
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
21,247
Reaction score
15,516
Location
Near Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm not anti-choice, any more so than you would be considered pro-abortion. Denigrading people by calling names simply because you disagree with their views provides no light on the subject. In fact, I agree with your last comment, that the government should be out of the issue altogether.
There was no name calling any more than anyone calling me pro choice is name calling. :roll:

If you are pro choice, then why did you say this:

"Just to be clear, as well, I never argued that all fetuses successfully develop into the fullness of human beings yet I'd defy you to point out an occasion where a fetus developed into something that was not human. As for your argument that humans make these kinds of decisions all the time, I would simply point out that there was a time in your country when the same voices of authority adjudged that blacks weren't fully human nor did they have the rights other humans had. There was a time when such blacks could be easily disposed of. In that case, saner more decent heads prevailed over time and it could very well be that saner more decent heads will prevail in the abortion issue as well."

That seems to be saying you want abortion to be made illegal.
 
Top Bottom