I am going to tell you that passing a law that allows termination of a pregnancy up until the due date of the baby is BARBARIC! THAT IS so FUCKED UP!
..
Where the f is the outrage??????? :brow: — ArguingWAristotleTiff
A HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONER LICENSED, CERTIFIED, OR AUTHORIZED UNDER TITLE EIGHT OF THE EDUCATION LAW, ACTING WITHIN HIS OR HER LAWFUL SCOPE OF PRACTICE, MAY PERFORM AN ABORTION WHEN, ACCORDING TO THE PRACTITIONER'S REASONABLE AND GOOD FAITH PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT BASED ON THE FACTS OF THE PATIENT'S CASE: THE PATIENT IS WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR WEEKS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF PREGNANCY, OR THERE IS AN ABSENCE OF FETAL VIABILITY, OR THE ABORTION IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PATIENT'S LIFE OR HEALTH.
I suspect that the ACLJ isn't a reliable source of news. — Michael
The value of life. Is one more valuable than another? What makes someone alive? The world is absurd. — Waya
I didn't have the time to cite it to Baden satisfaction because of his obvious issue with Jay but anyway here is my citation for the NY law — ArguingWAristotleTiff
The proposed law in Virginia was to allow third term abortions to be performed by others not just Doctors. — ArguingWAristotleTiff
§ 18.2-74. When abortion or termination of pregnancy lawful after second trimester of pregnancy.
Notwithstanding any of the provisions of § 18.2-71 and in addition to the provisions of §§ 18.2-72 and 18.2-73, it shall be lawful for any physician licensed by the Board of Medicine to practice medicine and surgery to terminate or attempt to terminate a human pregnancy or aid or assist in the termination of a human pregnancy by performing an abortion or causing a miscarriage on any woman in a stage of pregnancy subsequent to the second trimester
§ 18.2-73. When abortion lawful during second trimester of pregnancy.
Notwithstanding any of the provisions of § 18.2-71 and in addition to the provisions of § 18.2-72, it shall be lawful for any physician licensed by the Board of Medicine to practice medicine and surgery, to terminate or attempt to terminate a human pregnancy or aid or assist in the termination of a human pregnancy by performing an abortion or causing a miscarriage on any woman during the second trimester of pregnancy and prior to the third trimester of pregnancy
Does this include mental health? and where does the line stand exactly? Does this mean that if the doctor and the patient deem the child a risk to the mother in terms of depression etc? Or is it talking strictly in the sense of physical risks? The term 'health' is very vague. I guess thats where the controversy probably lies. — Mr Phil O'Sophy
This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. The detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice altogether is apparent. Specific and direct harm medically diagnosable even in early pregnancy may be involved. Maternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by child care. There is also the distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically and otherwise, to care for it. In other cases, as in this one, the additional difficulties and continuing stigma of unwed motherhood may be involved. All these are factors the woman and her responsible physician necessarily will consider in consultation
This is just entering such weird vague and dangerous territory. — Mr Phil O'Sophy
When people are encompassed with fear they can make terrible decisions. Thinking that people will only make the decision to terminate the life of a child because of a purely rational approach is naive. This is inviting trouble. — Mr Phil O'Sophy
There may be risk, but it is never 100%, we don't have access to the future, and cannot know how things will turn out. — Mr Phil O'Sophy
The more people make these kind of decisions the more fractured society will become, and you will have a set of people horrified that the society they live in allows infanticide, which they consider a terribly moral wrong and no arguments will convince them otherwise, and the other set of people horrified that someone would try dictate their freedom and tell them what they can and can't do with their body. These are logs for a fire of violence. Civil war is coming to America. — Mr Phil O'Sophy
If I'm honest I'm probably starting to lean more towards 1. And I'd say its troubling bills like this that push me further in that direction. — Mr Phil O'Sophy
Where is the father in all of this? Why does a complete stranger (the doctor), have more of a say on the fate of the child than one of the parents of the child? — Mr Phil O'Sophy
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.