Can you PLEASE quote what you are referring to when you post? Or the person you are responding to? It's very simple to do.
Dayton
Dayton is the reference.
I replied to Vegas.
I am neither for nor against. I have already declared that I find the premise of abortion being a juridical one and one about "baby vs fetus" rather misguided and counterproductive.Dayton is one of the strongest abortion opponents on DP and totally incapable of communicating any type of argument to support his opinions. He and Robert are very similar.
I think doctors can be very rational in such areas.
Conservative politicians though get very emotional in this area
I know for a fact medical doctors are very rational in all of these areas
So you've never known a doctor to make an irrational decision? I can say from personal experience that you are wrong.
Do you want to know why orthopedic surgeons in 2009 were recommending major surgeries for the same knee injuries that in 2004 they recommended noninvasive therapy?
Clearly, you are doing your very best to say the stupidest things possible.life and death decisions should be made as cold bloodedly as humanly possible.
Clearly, you are doing your very best to say the stupidest things possible.
Hippocratic Oath
“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 protect the environment which sustains us, in the knowledge that the continuing health of ourselves and our societies is dependent on a healthy planet.
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.”
The antithesis of your wrongheaded mindset.
Do you want to know how doctors get around the Hippocratic oath when it comes to recommending far, far more expensive surgeries than noninvasive therapies?
You find politicians more rational than doctors regarding medical issues?
How odd
God I hope a mother and doctor could decide to end the life of a newborn that was terminally ill and suffering with horrific deformities.
Only a monster would be against that
Why?.
Love and compassion. Ever heard of those human emotions?
life or death decisions should never be based on them.
life and death decisions should be made as cold bloodedly as humanly possible.
Maybe you need the surgery. Your knees sure didnt get better on their own. Lol
1) Politicians honest, corrupt, whichever are predictable.
2) Politicians do not hide behind the color of professional expertise.
3) Politicians do not think they're gods (no not even those of the Trumpian ilk).
Is that a question of some sort?
I am neither for nor against. I have already declared that I find the premise of abortion being a juridical one and one about "baby vs fetus" rather misguided and counterproductive.
Abortion should not be a political issue. Handing over the right to regulate biological functions to the government will have disastrous effects on society. Whether it is a totalitarian ban on abortion or a State funded breeding program does not matter. Government should stay out of our bodies.
I think that Pro Choicers as well as Pro Lifers agree that it would be better if no one had to have an abortion. The goal should thus be to create a society where sexual responsibility is incentivised.
Philosophical abstraction about whether abortion is murder or self-defense can be fun, but such discussion should remain philosophical and never be politicised. Politicians who want to regulate abortion rights do not really care about the unborn. Some of them are just imposing their own religious beliefs on the rest of society and most of them are just after maximising their own power since they get a kick from controlling others. Pro Choice politicians are the same; they do not really care about "women's rights" as much as they lust for control.
Abortion is an individual choice and a medical subject. Thus it should be up to each individual themselves to make the decision and up to to each indivudal abortion clinic to set their own limits and rules.
I really do not understand why Americans are so obsessed with this issue. Considering the whole notion of individual liberty that the nation was founded on, it strikes me as rather bizarre that America is the Western country most obsessed with abortion. Of course, it probably has its roots in religion.
Thank you for your input. It would be nice if more people on both sides could communicate about the issue without letting emotions override facts, but I disagree with some of the things you wrote.
You are absolutely correct that pro-choicers want to reduce the number of abortions, starting with teaching girls and boys responsibility. It seems to me anti-choicers, despite saying otherwise, oppose mandatory sex education in public and private schools and health teachers preaching abstinence, not the parents. But they are the same people who claim all it takes to prevent having unwanted pregnancies id doing what kids can't learn about without having the sex education at school.
I never had any kind of sex education in school and I've done just fine.
Why’re you trying to change the direction of the conversation now?Do you want to know how doctors get around the Hippocratic oath when it comes to recommending far, far more expensive surgeries than noninvasive therapies?
I suppose that ends the debate, everyone. Good job, Dayton.
Why’re you trying to change the direction of the conversation now?
Simply trying to point out that in some matters doctors opinion regarding a medical issue cannot be trusted.
But we all thought doctors were infallible. Thanks, Dayton.
Simply trying to point out that in some matters doctors opinion regarding a medical issue cannot be trusted.
I suppose that ends the debate, everyone. Good job, Dayton.
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?