• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

planned parenthood calls for post birth abortions-when abortion results in live birth

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JohnOfSheffield said:
Nice strawman.

You build your man out of straw and then proceed to fight it.

I'll just sit here and be amused by the crazy person who is fighting his own man of straw.
Click to expand...

what are you talking about.

PP was asked what to do with a baby born live.

People that think babies should be saved would come out and say the baby should be cared for.

Baby killing PP says its the womans choice. Just like the say its the womans choice to abort. It now should be the womans choice to murder.
 
michal1980 said:
what are you talking about.

PP was asked what to do with a baby born live.

People that think babies should be saved would come out and say the baby should be cared for.

Baby killing PP says its the womans choice. Just like the say its the womans choice to abort. It now should be the womans choice to murder.
Click to expand...

They said it was the woman and physician's choice, actually. Very different from just being the mother's choice, especially in the eyes of the law.

Get your facts straight. Troll.
 
michal1980 said:
what are you talking about.

PP was asked what to do with a baby born live.

People that think babies should be saved would come out and say the baby should be cared for.

Baby killing PP says its the womans choice. Just like the say its the womans choice to abort. It now should be the womans choice to murder.
Click to expand...

Another strawman.

If you can't argue against the actual facts, just make sheit up and argue against that.

This time you also added a non sequitur. You truly suck at this.
 
michal1980 said:
wow, off your med's.
Click to expand...

No, i did NOT say that that prolifers hate women, if you can show me where i did then i will concede that your argument is not a strawman but since i didn't say that prolifers hate women your argument IS a strawman.

That is what a strawman is, an argument made against a position never held.
 
First said:
They said it was the woman and physician's choice, actually. Very different from just being the mother's choice, especially in the eyes of the law.
Click to expand...

Actually that is basically the leftist party line on abortion. Abortion is a private decision between a woman and her doctor:

About 78% of Canadians believe that abortion is a private matter between a woman and her doctor
Click to expand...
http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/abortioninfo/misconce.shtml

Of course everyone knows when they say woman and her doctor they really mean woman.
 
First said:
No, when they say woman and doctor they really mean woman and doctor. That's the thinking person's interpretation.
Click to expand...

No its not. Just imagine the fit the left would throw if a woman couldn't get an abortion because a doctor said she didn't need one.
 
JohnOfSheffield said:
No, i did NOT say that that prolifers hate women, if you can show me where i did then i will concede that your argument is not a strawman but since i didn't say that prolifers hate women your argument IS a strawman.

That is what a strawman is, an argument made against a position never held.
Click to expand...

I misread what you wrote. my apology.
 
michal1980 said:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...-argues-right-post-birth-abortion_712198.html

I would call that murder.

but you know, its the mothers choice; so its cool
Click to expand...

Reading the transcript, they did get her dead to rights with one thing: once that baby is born alive, it stops being a fetus and starts being a patient.

I don't know how any one can argue that a living human being no longer in utero is still a fetus. It clears every reasonable pro-choice objection. The baby is no longer a "parasite" and the mother is no longer forced to carry it to term, it's not like they can reinstall it.
 
TerryMathews said:
Reading the transcript, they did get her dead to rights with one thing: once that baby is born alive, it stops being a fetus and starts being a patient.

I don't know how any one can argue that a living human being no longer in utero is still a fetus. It clears every reasonable pro-choice objection. The baby is no longer a "parasite" and the mother is no longer forced to carry it to term, it's not like they can reinstall it.
Click to expand...

The question is, when is a fetus born alive? Per the medical definition of human life that would mean that it has to have a fully active cerebral cortex because once a born human being doesn't have that it's not considered alive.

I'm fine with limiting abortions to week 24, using the exact same marker for human life as we do for born humans.
 
nehalem256 said:
No its not. Just imagine the fit the left would throw if a woman couldn't get an abortion because a doctor said she didn't need one.
Click to expand...

Coulda shoulda woulda didn't happen.

michal1980 said:
I watched the video.

There was a long pause between making it the womans choice, and adding in the dr.
Click to expand...

So the crux of your thinking's foundation lies in a "long" pause? Gee, this doesn't sound at all like thin or weak justification for an imagined PP position...

Oh you wingnuts, sooo funny.
 
Last edited:
JohnOfSheffield said:
The question is, when is a fetus born alive? Per the medical definition of human life that would mean that it has to have a fully active cerebral cortex because once a born human being doesn't have that it's not considered alive.

I'm fine with limiting abortions to week 24, using the exact same marker for human life as we do for born humans.
Click to expand...

The additional issue with a baby after birth is that ultimately it's a very personal, serious decision that needs to be made there. Fact is it's not hard to imagine a botched abortion (which is the entire context of the Florida discussion linked in the OP) resulting in the poor baby being mangled. Having to make a horrible decision with a doctor whether to keep said baby alive. Trying to codify into law that a mother must make only one decision in that scenario without leaving the circumstances open to interpretation by a physician is what PP seems to be arguing here. It's quite clear in that sense, based only on what I heard in this video. PP takes issue with the language signifying only one way to handle a botched abortion (of course, these are extraordinarily rare anyway, but still important).
 
From seeing the video it's sick as heck..... baby on the table alive and still kill it! It's murder at that point... And the worst part is now they are coming out and talking about it and thinking it is right in anyway.
 
First said:
Coulda shoulda woulda didn't happen.



So the crux of your thinking's foundation lies in a "long" pause? Gee, this doesn't sound at all like thin or weak justification for an imagined PP position at all...

Oh you wingnuts, sooo funny.
Click to expand...

wrong.

PP was asked if a baby born after a botched abortion should be given care.


P.S.

The only wing nuts are those that don't come out against PP and somehow think what this lady said was ok.

You just go into you sick minds and figure out how to justify killing babies.

PP answer "up to the woman, and her dr"

A humans answer "Yes"

PP is all about women choosing to kill unborn babies. Now they want women choosing to kill born babies.

I see now its too much to ask of the pro choice crowd to defend the right to live for kids after their born.
 
It appears that the chief response is to duck the question so I'll give a specific scenario. Premature birth survival rates are now over 50% between 24 and 26 weeks. What happens to the baby (no it's not a fetus) at that age and beyond?

Does PP suggest that it has no rights?
 
michal1980 said:
wrong.

PP was asked if a baby born after a botched abortion should be given care.
Click to expand...

.......And? What did they say? Quote them. I will freely admit I am wrong if PP said somewhere in that video that the decision-making for a botched abortion is entirely the mother's. I would strongly, strongly disagree with that.

P.S.

The only wing nuts are those that don't come out against PP and somehow think what this lady said was ok.

You just go into you sick minds and figure out how to justify killing babies.

PP answer "up to the woman, and her dr"

A humans answer "Yes"

PP is all about women choosing to kill unborn babies. Now they want women choosing to kill born babies.

I see now its too much to ask of the pro choice crowd to defend the right to live for kids after their born.
Click to expand...

You're not a very deep thinker.
 
*kjm said:
Week 24 they are a person..... sorry that is sick as hell! That's half term for gosh sakes.
Click to expand...

LOL, you have no clue what the cerebral cortex is, do you? Without it, you're not a person and a 24 week old fetus does NOT have an active cerebral cortex.

A born human being, say you or me, that would sustain injury to a degree where our cerebral cortex was no longer active beyond random impulse would be declared dead.

Let me, in no uncertain terms proclaim that without a cerebral cortex you are not a person AT ALL and that the activity in that part of the brain does not start until beyond week 25 (or at week 25).

Of course, if you consider a pet rock (which is pretty much what this fetus is at this time) a person then i can't help you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top