The 51st Annual March for Life

[comana]

Public emotions? Life is a public emotion?

Do you want your life put up to a vote and public whims or rather defer to medical professionals? Because right now many states have decided they know better than doctors what is medically best for women. Since you are a man though, not you problem.

 

[BCP1928]

So for those of you pushing the "Pro-Choice" argument, let me ask you this

what should be the limitations to abortion? First trimester? Second? Partial-birth?

Abortion of a viable fetus has been illegal in, I think, 42 states and medically unethical in all of them since long before Roe v. Wade, so that pretty much cuts out the third trimester. Third trimester abortions are in any case pretty rare and almost always involve a serious medical emergency of some kind.

 

[DaisyDay]

Plenty of women have high risk pregnancies. They need the care that is required to support both mother and child.

Yes, they do. So why haven’t best practices for childbirth been mandated nationally? The US has the worst maternal mortality rate among developed nations and the states that have forced pregnancy laws have the highest maternal death rates. It is not rare for hemorrhages to be unnoticed and fatal or for hypertension to go unchecked.

The US has exemplary care for premature babies and ill infants- perhaps best in the world. Unfortunately this care is not extended to their mothers.

 

[DaisyDay]

So for those of you pushing the "Pro-Choice" argument, let me ask you this

what should be the limitations to abortion? First trimester? Second? Partial-birth?

For elective abortions, first trimester. For troubled pregnancies, whenever the doctors and patient determine to be best.

Partial birth abortions were done to spare the woman’s body when the fetus was unsalvageable but now we say let them suffer like God commanded after the apple incident.

 

[Merrill]

Let medical boards and specifically Obstetricians decide what limits are appropriate based on medical/scientific data and not public emotions. I would leave legislation out of it.

total cop-out answer

 

[comana]

total cop-out answer

I am not an obstetrician and therefore have no say when an abortion is appropriate or not. So if you want my honest answer to your arbitrary limits, then no limits legally. Medical professionals are capable of creating medically appropriate limits and exclusions for any procedures based on past and present standards of care. We don’t question their ability to create professional limits for other procedures and medical care so why get in the middle of this?

 

[Merrill]

I am not an obstetrician and therefore have no say when an abortion is appropriate or not. So if you want my honest answer to your arbitrary limits, then no limits legally. Medical professionals are capable of creating medically appropriate limits and exclusions for any procedures based on past and present standards of care. We don’t question their ability to create professional limits for other procedures and medical care so why get in the middle of this?

this gets into what James Lindsay describes as the cultish impulse to check with the ideological "experts" vs. trusting your own reason and ethics

like when Justice Jackson was asked what a woman was, and she said something o the effect of "I would have to ask a biologist"

obstetricians do not define medical ethics.

But more to the point: are you saying, in your personal opinion, that there should be no limits on abortion whatsoever? That the procedure should be available to any woman up until the moment of birth? Or do you think some limits are ethically, practically, or even medically warranted?

 

[Merrill]

For elective abortions, first trimester. For troubled pregnancies, whenever the doctors and patient determine to be best.

Partial birth abortions were done to spare the woman’s body when the fetus was unsalvageable but now we say let them suffer like God commanded after the apple incident.

What do you mean by "troubled pregnancies"?

 

[comana]

this gets into what James Lindsay describes as the cultish impulse to check with the ideological "experts" vs. trusting your own reason and ethics

like when Justice Jackson was asked what a woman was, and she said something o the effect of "I would have to ask a biologist"

obstetricians do not define medical ethics.

But more to the point: are you saying, in your personal opinion, that there should be no limits on abortion whatsoever? That the procedure should be available to any woman up until the moment of birth? Or do you think some limits are ethically, practically, or even medically warranted?

Medical doctors still use ethics in their decision making. A woman asking for an abortion of a viable fetus is not likely to get one for reasons other than med necessity. We have medical boards and accreditation associations that are better suited than law makers or voters to determine the bounds of ethical medical practice.
Ethically, viability is a reasonable limit. Legally, none.

 

[DaisyDay]

What do you mean by "troubled pregnancies"?

Where the pregnancy has gone awry: trisomy-19, ectopic pregnancy, placental abruption, premature water-breaking, eclampsia, renal disease, etc.

 

[NxNW]

No

Why not?

 

[NxNW]

I already addressed the issue. This isn’t about “emotional appeals.” It’s about protecting innocent life. I’ve been entirely consistent in my views. Womb to tomb.

Conception doesn't occur in the womb, so it's clear you have no understanding of even the most basic facts here.

 

[NxNW]

What about bodily autonomy? The fetus (baby) inside her body isn't her body. The developing baby does not deserve to die. What about he baby's autonomy? They are two bodies.

Maybe it should have considered the consequences before invading an innocent woman's body and attaching itself like a parasite.

 

[NxNW]

Like I said before, people can do what they want with their body, but once it involves someone else, it's no longer about THEM.

By this logic, you can't shoot a home invader, because you've stated that all life must be protected.

Or are there exceptions? If so, please list the circumstances that are necessary and sufficient to justify taking a life.

 

[NxNW]

What moral beliefs? That it’s wrong to terminate a pregnancy because it ends someone’s life? This is science. Science is pro life.

Utterly false.

 

[NxNW]

The law isn’t infallible. Remember slavery?

Nobody remembers slavery.

 

[NxNW]

Science says life begins at conception. That’s a fact.

This is a falsehood.

 

[NxNW]

I never said that. I'm just saying people- from conception until natural death- deserve to live and no one should give hindrance to it.

Any exceptions at all?

 

[NxNW]

Again, I'm not a doctor. I cannot answer that question.

If we trusted doctors, abortion would be legal everywhere. So this answer is a copout.

 

[NxNW]

So for those of you pushing the "Pro-Choice" argument, let me ask you this

what should be the limitations to abortion? First trimester? Second? Partial-birth?

Any reason whatsoever through 20 weeks, minimum.