1. Abortion legal up to the point of delivery.
2. "So help me God" when going under oath to be eliminated.
Who would have believed this would happen in our lifetime?
Printable View
1. Abortion legal up to the point of delivery.
2. "So help me God" when going under oath to be eliminated.
Who would have believed this would happen in our lifetime?
California university board wanted to strike the entire pledge b/c it's "racist". The only things in the pledge, "God" not being the issue, is the flag and America. I imagine that's the issue, that pledging to a racist country is a problem for them.
The extremes of both parties make it rough. No defense and would not even try to defend any of the issues you listed.
As you may know, I'm pro-choice but what that is is murder. Plain and simple. A baby is delivered, then "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." LINKQuote:
Originally Posted by badrose
After the child is born, it is no longer about anybody's reproductive rights. The child was BORN. The child was delivered. The child was a viable life. It is no longer anybody's decision whether or not that individual lives or not. To terminate is murder by even the loosest definition.
That’s what makes this scary...because it advocates a felony as a rights issue...smhQuote:
Originally Posted by Doc
He denies saying that. But advocates terminating a fetus that isn’t viable or suffers serious malformaties after a discussion between the mother and doctors. I do not believe a woman who carries to term would want to murder her child.
I am not pro abortion but I am pro choice when the mothers life is in serious danger, in the case of deformed fetuses, and rape or incest victims
Anyone who would abuse abortion procedures is dastardly but the law must be applied equally or not at all. God will judge the heart of those who have to go through an abortion, but sometimes it is unavoidable. Folks who deal with it up close and personal usually come to the same conclusion. Sometimes es the choice at birth must be made and one must really question what that choice would be if faced with such a situation.
My grandmother was saved by allowing her child to pass away in delivery. The decision was my grandfathers who told the doctor “we can have another child but I can’t have another her”
If that child had rights in the womb and the legal system was as it is today, the doctor could not have made the choice to fiulfill those wishes and both may have died. She surely would have. Now, without the law allowing a decision to abort to potentially save a mother’s life, a physician would expose himself to multiple legal problems and may not make the appropriate decision
I assure she was distraught over what happened. There are real world situations that are easy to overlook when it suits ones politics
If the bill dealt with issues such as risks to the mother then that's a different story, but as I understand it those laws are generally still in place and this doesn't relate to those situations, but rather makes termination elective rather than based on something like risk to the mother.
In essence it changes the situation you described and turns it on its head.
I haven't read the bill in Virginia or New York, but I find this trend, along with the almost pathological extremism we see right now on the Left, deeply disturbing. All but cheering Antifa people beating others into silence, trying to pass laws (at least on campuses but politicians have called for it too) restricting free speech, economic proposals that are on their face completely insane and unworkable, it's a heck of a time.
This is what it must have been like to live in the Weimar Republic, watching the middle fracture and move into the extremist camps.
Both extremes are equally culpable.
As far as my Christian perspective I have trouble with abortion as a form of birth control. And I would add to that, as God has said he knows someone even before they were in the mother’s womb, birth control in general.
I will not judge a person for either as I would have to judge myself guilty also. But the Christian must balance how we judge others against similar judgements which can be applied to us
But I seriously believe a woman who carries to term or near to it wants that child very much. I’d hesitate to judge them too harshly just to kick a political football across partisan lines. There are times aborting a fetus is appropriate and only a doctor and patient can make those decisions imo.
And I know for a fact that many who scream pro life the loudest among my family and friends do so out of guilt. Secrets are hard to keep and poorly kept ones sometimes hard to ignore
ad hominem, attacking the messenger for motives.It's a logical fallacy and means nothing. I agree there's a ton of hypocrisy in most moralizing, but it's not relevant to the question at hand even though I know it to be the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingcat
Second, it is IMO naive to think a woman who carries to term is going to only make sound decisions that takes the life of the child into account. Frankly you need to spend more time among the real losers of our society, b/c they are stunning in their decisions. I wouldn't put a law on the books that gives them complete control over a child's life whether born or unborn.
As I understand it the law in question doesn't say "in the event of the health of the mother" or "if there are serious defects" etc. It gives a woman a right to end that life even if it is healthy in every way and the doctor doesn't think there is any risk.
So you're putting up strawmen here, arguing against a law that isn't the law in question,as if the alternative to this law is to force a woman to have a pregnancy to term even if it risks her life, etc. That's just not the case.
And fwiw I don't scream pro-life. I'm pretty much in the middle on this issue, and it's not a hot button one for me. But I think even as a person who generally stays out of this issue, a law that allows a perfectly healthy baby to be terminated even if it is completely viable is disturbing.
The callousness of it is very disturbing, beyond the "abortion debate". The lack of humility of it, the sheer hubris that it takes to say it's OK to end that life as if we really know and understand life and when it begins and if we all carry an immortal soul is shocking and frightening. People with that much certainty are dangerous and destructive.
I am not arguing. I am stating exactly how I feel and what I believe. And I started on the premise that the gentleman denies saying that he supports abortion of a delivered fetus for any reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenBBN
And yes I do understand the law as it now stands. My post is really just an attempt to state my opinion on abortion in general. it would be a straw man argument if in fact II considered it arguing either way I guess. ;)
Now I am not 100 percent certain on the matter But I did read that "his critics claim" otherwise, and that "some say otherwise" which is not exactly validating the truth of it. Especially in light of this statement..
Northam, a former pediatric neurologist, was asked about those comments and said he couldn’t speak for Tran, but said that third-trimester abortions are done with “the consent of obviously the mother, with consent of the physician, multiple physicians by the way, and it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities or there may be a fetus that’s not viable.”
“So in this particular example if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen, 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.”
And his tweet on the matter...
Ralph Northam
✔
@GovernorVA
I have devoted my life to caring for children and any insinuation otherwise is shameful and disgusting.
8,530
8:21 PM - Jan 30, 2019
And you may have examined it closer than me but no where do I read that the mother alone makes this decision, but that the doctor, or multiple doctors rather, explain to the mother that the infant is not viable or is severely malformed. Even then, and at the request of the mother, the baby can be resuscitated.
Correct if am I missing something. But I see nothing but innuendo in the report that relates to aborting a healthy normal fetus after delivery.
Please quote the Governor for me if I am wrong.
And no where did I attempt to shoot the messenger here, who is my good friend. But if the messenger you refer to is the writer of the article and the shooting is asking why the Governors clarification doesn't knock a hole in the article's intent.
And once again I am not even certain how I feel about the governors suggestion. I just had an opinion and shared it, with no malice toward you or anyone else. I have went back to make sure I didn't present myself in an antagonistic way, and Im satisfied I did not.
Perhaps, you just misunderstood my intent Chuck. I sure never meant to suggest anyone here was wrongly screaming pro life. But that there are actually people in my family that are what you would call activists in the pro life movement, refusing to accept any abortion as appropriate. Regardless of rape, incest, malformations, or danger to the mother. And who have either had or been a party to abortions when it was convenient and personal.
I have actually enjoyed the discussion and I think fairly questioned the article. But even thats a matter of opinion I guess.
I guess my question would be, if a baby is born with sever deformities or is not considered medically a viable life, should the law require that life continue?
I would have to know the definitions of those terms to form an opinion and Im not sure what I would do personally. Some deformities are very, very cruel, and if a life is not viable (or not one that can be prolonged for any length of time) Im not sure the mother after being informed by a group of experts shouldn't be able to make the decision to terminate in a humane way.
That is not pro abortion, but pro making the humane choice. A choice that has honestly been made by parents since time began.
I honestly dont know how I feel about it. It is sad regardless.
I likely have a bit of a different perspective as having euthanized to end suffering albeit animals, and thus have no issue with doing so. However I do have an issue with ending the life of a viable human, as well as a pet. I have been asked to euthanize liters post whelping and won't do it. Additionally I have a family member who has had THREE late term abortions (her first at age 16) for no other reason than birth control so the idea that it does not happen is a fallacy.
Personly I find the phrasing odd...womens reproductive health to be synomous to abortion. I would not think that terminating a pregnancy is "healthy" for a uterus. I also find the term "pro -abortion" odd. Who is pro abortion? What does pro abortion mean? Does that mean one gets pregnant so you can abort? The correct term is pro choice. And as a pro choice individual, I believe there should be some reasonable restriction or limitation. A viable child, even deformed, that is delivered live, is a living human and to terminate is murder. Liberals want to protect every human under the sun except a newborn. That is despicable. And they will call republicans deplorable. Talk about irony
We think alike on the matter Doc..Down syndrome or any defect that surgery or treatment might repair is not severe imo.
But aren't there also severe deformities that make life non-viable (severe pre natal microcephaly or anencephaly possibly)? The latter I know is only identifiable after birth. Not sure on the former
The question is not about a viable life..just the opposite.
"done in cases where there may be severe deformities or there may be a fetus that’s not viable.”
If you know a newborn will not survive but a few days in pain, will you still keep it alive as long as possible? That's the bottom line..and Im not sure how to answer myself.
As long as possible? No, but would I kill it? No. I would do everything possible to keep it from suffering, which is possible, but not terminate the life.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingcat
In his answer he said the doctors would resuscitate at the mothers request. Im not sure what that means but it sounds like the newborn is kept sedated. I probably would do the same as you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc
What I am not certain of is, if not doing everything possible to extend the child's non-viable life is any different.
I'm reminded of when our son Todd was close to the end and after exhausting seemingly every avenue to extend his life, The initial 12 hour brain stem surgery, multiple brain shunts, and a year of poking and prodding as well as almost pointless rehab that had made his life miserable, the doctors came to us and said they could give him a couple more weeks of life by doing a tracheotomy. We turned it down. But it was a gut wrenching day and remains etched in our memory forever.
There was an older African American nurse who had been a friend and willing servant to him at Kosair who kept saying in a loud voice, "leave that child alone, he has been through enough"
I can still hear her Angelic voice sometimes. Any and all choices sometimes are hard to make when someone you love is caught in the throes of hopeless suffering.
Todd passed a few hours later on Sept 19th. He was born on March 19th and lived 16 years and six months to the day.
He had the prayers of every Christian from every faith ever heard of over that year. I have no doubt some were answered but he passed in exactly the way the original specialist told us he would, and lived nearly to the day the year he gave us.
My faith was actually strengthened by it and my compassion and understanding for everyone we met in the place over that time in and out of KCH remains to this day. I love my God and I can assuredly tell everyone this, when some faith healer comes telling you of the miracles of healing he has seen, send him or her to places like that.
They have all forgotten to visit them. God bless the little children.
Not quite tongue but some Louisville fans and a few other I have met make me somewhat pro abortion. The world would be better off without some. Just would. I am not big on the death penalty cause we can be wrong. But some cases make my blood boil.
That said The governor at best was awkward in his statement. You could read that quote or hear him as I did and wonder what he was saying. It is not a out of left field interpretation to understand he killed or facilitated the killing of a deformed or retarded baby. I am not saying he did. But his comments raised the issue.
Are parents and doctors killing deformed, disabled babies? I voted for him and it is a little unsettling.
The Va delegate who introduced this bill clarified her position and tried to reframe the bill
Women need to have the big say. I get that. As technology improves our definition of life may well go back to a much younger or earlier stage life.