- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 24,826
- Reaction score
- 8,345
- Location
- Northern New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/31/politics/ralph-northam-third-trimester-abortion/index.html
"[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that's nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen," Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. "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."
I didn't see a thread on this, so please merge if there is one...
This is just absolutely shocking to me. I know people have their views on abortion, and where it should be limited to. Usually around the end of the first trimester. NY State just passed a bill that allows the life to be destroyed right up to birth. And, incredibly, those that voted for this felt the need to actually cheer at this horror. My God, what evil have we brought upon this country?
Speaking as someone who is nominally pro-choice, I think this bill, and the philosophy behind it is truly the first step on the short road to legalized infanticide. And where making such a claim a few short years ago may have been morally shocking to most people, I am given to wonder if the coming generation of pro-choice advocates will care if parents choose to snuff out the life of their children even after birth.
Lol that is the ONLY time we should have power to take 'life', oh, and the death penalty, oh and when some guy is selling ciggies for 50 cents and some diminutive cop is threatened by him, oh and when it's a journalist saying mean things about another government, oh and when we think the people being bombed may or may not be terrorist, but those are the ONLY times, bro.Does the State have a say in a family's decision to take someone off of life support?
Speaking as someone who is nominally pro-choice, I think this bill and the philosophy behind it is truly the first step on the short road to legalized infanticide. And where making such a claim a few short years ago may have been morally shocking to most people, I am given to wonder if the coming generation of pro-choice advocates will care if parents choose to snuff out the life of their children even after birth.
It's funny, every right wing idiot ran with this nonsense. He said no such thing, I actually listened. He was clearly talking about a baby being born with severe health issues and the parents and the doctors deciding together how to proceed.
Posted this on another thread about this, but some religious people are really sick.
They would rather see a sick baby with no quality of life
Speaking as someone who is nominally pro-choice, I think this bill and the philosophy behind it is truly the first step on the short road to legalized infanticide. And where making such a claim a few short years ago may have been morally shocking to most people, I am given to wonder if the coming generation of pro-choice advocates will care if parents choose to snuff out the life of their children even after birth.
It's funny, every right wing idiot ran with this nonsense. He said no such thing, I actually listened. Even the bolded word does not say kiil the baby. He was clearly talking about a baby being born with severe health issues and the parents and the doctors deciding together how to proceed, meaning, do they continue life support or take extraordinary measures to keep the baby alive that has no quality of life
Posted this on another thread about this, but some religious people are really sick. They are against pulling life support of brain dead people, they should just be stuck in this vegetative state forever,. They would rather see a sick baby with no quality of life suffer immensely by being artificially kept alive than the doctors pulling life support, they would rather see a baby born than a mother die from complications from the pregnancy due to health concerns. THey fight against assisted suicide for terminally ill patients and would rather have them die a slow, painful death where they wither away to bone and in the end ultimately die from overdose of the pain medications anyway
Truly sick people
That is what the Governor of Virginia seems to be saying, that if the infant is born, the mother can still "have a conversation" with the doctor about, what is by any definition I know of, committing a murder.
But, now, we have States that are actually legalizing killing that life, right up until birth. Is that what the pro abortion people always wanted? Well, you've now got that in this country now.
You act like this is a common occurrence when the VAST MAJORITY (over 98%) of abortions are done before 24 weeks. Go right on ahead and name for us the amount of abortions that happened at the 9 1/2 month mark and why if you are soo concerned with "legalized infanticide". Can you get anymore melodramatic and hyperbolic there? Wait, I'm sure you can.
Let me be clear Praxas. I am not referring to abortion as "legalized infanticide" (though perhaps I should if I am talking about a perfectly healthy fetus at the 9 1/2 month mark). What I am referring to is the right of parents to end the lives of their children post-birth.
To get to your point of the 98% of abortions being prior to the 24-week mark, to say that a morally abhorrent legal right is rarely exercised is no argument for the allowance of that right in the first place, Praxas. If there was a law on the books that allowed parents to kill their children up until, say, two years of age, would the fact that the right is rarely exercised by the parents be a good justification for that right to remain in place? My question to you, Praxas, is what is your guiding principle as to whether or not human life is worthy of protection by the state? Is there any instance in which you would say that a woman should be refused the right to abort her unborn child if the unborn child is past the viability stage even up until the point of birth? And if you answer in the negative, what is your moral argument against infanticide?
you really think that this is what this is about? You're naïve pal. That's how they sell it to you sheep, but the bill says nothing about restrictions on the health of the baby you fool!
Tim-
This is not what the Governor is talking about.
He is explicitly saying that the baby is born nonviable or has deformities that would lead to death.
Put his statements in the context of having a DNR order for a stillborn child and if that child is resuscitated what the next medical steps should be and that also includes palliative care.
These are issues between a family and their doctor and the State has no business sticking it's nose in there to make people who have zero skin in the game feel better about themselves.
Gosnell's crimes are being legalized and the left cheers.
It's disgusting. And would it surprise you to learn the Democratic Virginia House of Delegates that would allow the termination of a pregnancy up to 40 weeks old, is also the chief patrons of a bill that would protect the lives of “fall cankerworms” during certain months. Think about that for a minute, a damn worm they want to protect but a baby not so much.
This is not what the Governor is talking about.
He is explicitly saying that the baby is born nonviable or has deformities that would lead to death.
Put his statements in the context of having a DNR order for a stillborn child and if that child is resuscitated what the next medical steps should be and that also includes palliative care.
These are issues between a family and their doctor and the State has no business sticking it's nose in there to make people who have zero skin in the game feel better about themselves.
Gosnell's crimes are being legalized and the left cheers.
It's disgusting. And would it surprise you to learn the Democratic Virginia House of Delegates that would allow the termination of a pregnancy up to 40 weeks old, is also the chief patrons of a bill that would protect the lives of “fall cankerworms” during certain months. Think about that for a minute, a damn worm they want to protect but a baby not so much.
That's the great thing about these so-called christians. They don't mind lying to further their cause.....
If abortions are outlawed, there will be more, not less, Gosnells.
There is no need for this bill. People should just wait until after the birth, claim religious beliefs, and deny medical assistance to their grown children like many Christian fundamentalists do.
Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?