-=SENATE APPROVES 'PARTIAL BIRTH' BAN=-

[BadNewsBears]

Why the hell does everyone keep refering to "it" as a fetus. Damn its a fully developed child. I think after its develeped. "Developed defined as if at that instant the child was born would it have no problems " there shoulb be no abortion. WTF is it a missle launch! ABORT ABORT! My mom is a labor and delivery nurse at Henry Ford Hospital, in downtown Detroit. She thinks its absolutely disgusting.
Me thinks. Abortion doctors=The hit list

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Munchies
Why the hell does everyone keep refering to "it" as a fetus. Damn its a fully developed child. I think after its develeped. "Developed defined as if at that instant the child was born would it have no problems " there shoulb be no abortion. WTF is it a missle launch! ABORT ABORT! My mom is a labor and delivery nurse at Henry Ford Hospital, in downtown Detroit. She thinks its absolutely disgusting.
Me thinks. Abortion doctors=The hit list

Wonderful. Political discourse from illiterate 13 year olds.

 

[Wallydraigle]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Munchies
Why the hell does everyone keep refering to "it" as a fetus. Damn its a fully developed child. I think after its develeped. "Developed defined as if at that instant the child was born would it have no problems " there shoulb be no abortion. WTF is it a missle launch! ABORT ABORT! My mom is a labor and delivery nurse at Henry Ford Hospital, in downtown Detroit. She thinks its absolutely disgusting.
Me thinks. Abortion doctors=The hit list

Wonderful. Political discourse from illiterate 13 year olds.

Nice. Now call him a bible thumper and accuse him of flying a plane into a skyscraper.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

The AMA is one of the most morally bankrupt organizations in America. I'm a member of my local and state medical associations but I will NEVER pay AMA dues again. The AMA has been on both sides of cigarette smoking, chewing tobacco, HMOs, universal health coverage, AND partial birth abortion (intact D & X).

Would you ask an electrical engineer to build a bridge? How about a tax attorney to handle your death penalty appeal? Can you imagine a neurosurgeon or orthopedic surgeon giving recommendations on the best approach for evacuating a fungus ball from a lower lung lobe?

Well why on Earth would you favor the AMA over ACOG?

C. Everett Koop was a pediatric surgeon . . . the equivalent of a general surgeon for kids. He likely performed the same number of abortions as me . . . ZERO. Which makes neither of us qualified as an EXPERT on judging the medical necessity of an intact D & X. The experts say . . . it's infrequently used but may be the best procedure for particular cases.

Let's say you've got some serious nausea and vomiting going on . . . probably too much O'Reilly Report or Drudge. Anyway, I've got five choices . . . amongst many other options:

Phenergan PO by mouth (of course you are vomiting so you might not keep it down and relief may be an hour away), Phenergan PR per rectum (of course you might have diarrhea, absorption is variable, and relief may take up to an hour), Phenergan IV (rapid action but requires starting an IV), or Phenergan IM (onset in less than 20min but painful).

None are a medical necessity b/c I can always use other drugs . . . or do nothing but tell you to go home, drink plenty of fluids and eat some crackers or jello.

But since Congress is so filled with homophobes it would be perfectly reasonable for them to ban PR (per rectum) b/c that's naughty and it's not a necessity. I guess we should ban digital rectal exams (DRE), colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, enemas, and hemorrhoid treatment b/c those procedures also expose someone to rectal probing.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: lirion




Nice. Now call him a bible thumper and accuse him of flying a plane into a skyscraper.

Way to miss the point. The 9/11 terrorists believed so much in their religion that they were willing to kill scores of innocents along with themselves. They believed they were justified. The zealots goading the politicians believe so much they they are willing to let mothers die instead of having a potentially lethal condition rectified as safely as possible. I see no difference. As for "Munchies"(probably wouldn't know what to do with a bowl if someone jammed it in his mouth and lit it for him), the only two things I could get out of his post were that doctors who perform abortions should die and that the American education system is fvcked.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I believe the majority of intact D & X occur during the 2nd trimester.

The standard definition for prematurity is less than 37wks . . . of a 40wk pregnancy. 37wks is an arbitrary cutoff but it approximates developmental maturity. Some 35ers plop out looking for a warm tit . . . some 40ers may require resuscitation at birth and extensive hospital care before discharge home.

Viability stands around 23wks. Most 23ers will NEVER leave the hospital but many survive for some time and a small number may lead relatively normal lives.

I could use terms like baby or child but it would not be accurate. A sperm, an egg, fertilized egg, implanted fertilized egg, zygote, fetus, and newborn are very distinct entities. Our society has chosen to extend rights to the newborn but few protections to the fetus.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

. . . American education system is fvcked.

I would agree with that one.

 

[0roo0roo]

fundies never find its enough to have the right to believe what they believe. they want to force their beliefs upon everyone. its ok when its done by your fundies of course.

frankly anyone that doesn't personally adopt children has little right to complain about abortion.

 

[Sketcher]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: lirion




Nice. Now call him a bible thumper and accuse him of flying a plane into a skyscraper.

Way to miss the point. The 9/11 terrorists believed so much in their religion that they were willing to kill scores of innocents along with themselves. They believed they were justified. The zealots goading the politicians believe so much they they are willing to let mothers die instead of having a potentially lethal condition rectified as safely as possible. I see no difference. As for "Munchies"(probably wouldn't know what to do with a bowl if someone jammed it in his mouth and lit it for him), the only two things I could get out of his post were that doctors who perform abortions should die and that the American education system is fvcked.

jaeger66, your ranting is extravagant and far reaching. If you truly cannot differentiate between 9/11 terrorists and Pro-Life supporters (whatever their moral guidance) then you're in over your head.

BaliBabyDoc is correct in assessing "This discussion has degraded to the level of Bush/Iraq dogmatic dichotomies.": If you can't refrain from sensational slander, please do not continue to post here. You've been asked several times to be considerate but you continue to disrespect this discussion with your anger and poor choice of examples.

 

[Ornery]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: lirion




Nice. Now call him a bible thumper and accuse him of flying a plane into a skyscraper.

Way to miss the point. The 9/11 terrorists believed so much in their religion that they were willing to kill scores of innocents along with themselves. They believed they were justified. The zealots goading the politicians believe so much they they are willing to let mothers die instead of having a potentially lethal condition rectified as safely as possible. I see no difference. As for "Munchies"(probably wouldn't know what to do with a bowl if someone jammed it in his mouth and lit it for him), the only two things I could get out of his post were that doctors who perform abortions should die and that the American education system is fvcked.

STFU, dumb ass. I never mentioned morals, religion or anything related. What an ASS! I'm not a member of any religion, because I think organized religion SUCKS. And what's that got to do with ANYTHING? I didn't bring it up, you did fvcktard. STFU!

 

[Ornery]

BaliBabyDoc wants to blow off the opinions of doctors who say PBA is never necessary for the woman's health. I can't imagine why you would expect Koop to perform abortions, though he may have. If he didn't think it was right, he wouldn't perform them, of course. His opinion was backed by 300 physician specialists as well as the AMA. Their opinion holds as much weight as anyone's in this matter, so argue all you want. It must REALLY suck when the baby's head accidently slips out during one of these abortions. I wonder if we'll have legislation to cover the care of the "child" in that event?

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Ornery
STFU, dumb ass. I never mentioned morals, religion or anything related. What an ASS! I'm not a member of any religion, because I think organized religion SUCKS. And what's that got to do with ANYTHING? I didn't bring it up, you did fvcktard. STFU!

What else am I to infer when you post links to conservative christian groups who have taken the AMA's statement out of context and then used it to support their position? If that's the best you can do, then my opinion of your motivations is not going to change.

 

[Ornery]

Funny thing is, no other sites bother quoting that info from the AMA, Koop or the 300 physician specialists. Gee, I wonder why that is?

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Sketcher


BaliBabyDoc is correct in assessing "This discussion has degraded to the level of Bush/Iraq dogmatic dichotomies.": If you can't refrain from sensational slander, please do not continue to post here. You've been asked several times to be considerate but you continue to disrespect this discussion with your anger and poor choice of examples.

If you don't like my posts, then either ignore them or start your own forum. I promise I'll stay far away. Until then, you opened the door by latching on to the moral outrage that the supporters of this nonsense bill are banking on. Don't complain when tactics that make a mockery of our government evoke extreme repsonses.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Ornery
Funny thing is, no other sites bother quoting that info from the AMA, Koop or the 300 physician specialists. Gee, I wonder why that is?

Because it's a narrow statement that has no meaning in the broader debate? You have been given example after example of why this is so.

 

[AntaresVI]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Ornery
Funny thing is, no other sites bother quoting that info from the AMA, Koop or the 300 physician specialists. Gee, I wonder why that is?

Because it's a narrow statement that has no meaning in the broader debate? You have been given example after example of why this is so.

Care to cite examples of a "broader debate?"

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act will prohibit the procedure unless it is necessary to save the life of the mother which, according to the American Medical Association, the 600-member Physicians' Ad hoc Coalition for Truth (PHACT) as well as our nation's highly respected former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop that partial-birth abortion is never medically necessary.

seems pretty relevant to me. What would I know though, I'm only a student of the "fvcked" American education system. i think you need to look at what's being presented to you, stop accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being a religious zealot, and realize that this is vaild evidence that you are sidestepping instead of addressing.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Sketcher

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: lirion




Nice. Now call him a bible thumper and accuse him of flying a plane into a skyscraper.

Way to miss the point. The 9/11 terrorists believed so much in their religion that they were willing to kill scores of innocents along with themselves. They believed they were justified. The zealots goading the politicians believe so much they they are willing to let mothers die instead of having a potentially lethal condition rectified as safely as possible. I see no difference. As for "Munchies"(probably wouldn't know what to do with a bowl if someone jammed it in his mouth and lit it for him), the only two things I could get out of his post were that doctors who perform abortions should die and that the American education system is fvcked.

jaeger66, your ranting is extravagant and far reaching. If you truly cannot differentiate between 9/11 terrorists and Pro-Life supporters (whatever their moral guidance) then you're in over your head.

BaliBabyDoc is correct in assessing "This discussion has degraded to the level of Bush/Iraq dogmatic dichotomies.": If you can't refrain from sensational slander, please do not continue to post here. You've been asked several times to be considerate but you continue to disrespect this discussion with your anger and poor choice of examples.

This from the individual whose sole contribution to this thread is perhaps the oldest, tiredest, least accurate, and most sensational bit of pro-life propaganda......I'm honestly shocked that you resorted to something so obvious after all your lofty blather. I might also point out that you are in fact undermining the sense of civility in this thread you seem to be so intent on maintaining via the tone of chiding condescension you've chosen to adopt with me and others holding a viewpoint contrary to your own. I also note that you've allowed those on your own side to rant and be as obnoxious as they wish.

Again, quit being the den mother and address some of the points that I and others have made (most notably by BaliBabyDoc) or drop it.

And for starters, kindly differentiate between the 9/11 terrorists and a pro-lifer who would put a bullet in an abortion doc for us all since the difference is apparently so great. Seems to me they're both fanatics willing to kill the innocent for a "higher cause", but perhaps you can enlighten us.

 

[CaptnKirk]

To elFenix,
Seems you have nothing better to do than jump into conversations and dialouges and call people names if they don't agree with your 'Right Wing' Conservative thinking.

Think that anyone else out there in the world may know more than you do, have more experience than you do ?

Or do you just keep chanting the Limbaugh matra as you - like my brothers wife are too stupid to think for themselves.

These polititians are grandstanding because it gives them cover on a 'Feel Good' issue that is absolutely irrelivant in the real world.

Why don't we make Abortions Mandatory ! - and retroactive.

This administration and their policies are an embarrasment to our country.

But, granted - a very well organized vocal minority has succeded in taking over our countries government as the main stream of
thought didn't bother voting, as they were too disgusted to vote. less than 1/4 of ALL registered voters went to the polls,
so less than 1/8 of the voters put Dubya and his ilk into this position. Shame on us.

 

[AntaresVI]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
To elFenix,
Seems you have nothing better to do than jump into conversations and dialouges and call people names if they don't agree with your 'Right Wing' Conservative thinking.

Think that anyone else out there in the world may know more than you do, have more experience than you do ?

Or do you just keep chanting the Limbaugh matra as you - like my brothers wife are too stupid to think for themselves.

These polititians are grandstanding because it gives them cover on a 'Feel Good' issue that is absolutely irrelivant in the real world.

Why don't we make Abortions Mandatory ! - and retroactive.

This administration and their policies are an embarrasment to our country.

But, granted - a very well organized vocal minority has succeded in taking over our countries government as the main stream of
thought didn't bother voting, as they were too disgusted to vote. less than 1/4 of ALL registered voters went to the polls,
so less than 1/8 of the voters put Dubya and his ilk into this position. Shame on us.

I don't see a point to this. Care to actually say something next time? Shame on you for not organizing another vocal minority to oppose him if you didn;t like him so much - the fact is, he's the president now. Unless you do somethign to fix it, you have no right to complain about him only being voted for by 1/8th of the country.

 

[Ornery]

"Because it's a narrow statement that has no meaning in the broader debate?"


You are one clueless POS aren't you? One group of doctors says one thing, another group says the other. For some reason, you only consider valid the opinion of one group. Well, isn't that special?

Policies of Major Medical Societies

• "...[T]he College finds...very disturbing...any action by Congress that would supersede the medical judgment of trained physicians and that would criminalize medical procedures that may be necessary to save the life of a woman..."
  
  ...A select panel convened by ACOG could identify no circumstances under which this procedure, as defined above, would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman...

Even if the ACT passes, there will still be other ways to "save the life of the woman".

And damn it, I want to see some fvcking links to back up your gum flapping from now on, ya twit! :|

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: LeRocks

Care to cite examples of a "broader debate?"

The issue is whether a woman's medical care should be decided by her doctor or congress. The AMA's comment has no bearing on that, it's just that the prolifers have snipped it down to fit their agenda.

seems pretty relevant to me. What would I know though, I'm only a student of the "fvcked" American education system. i think you need to look at what's being presented to you, stop accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being a religious zealot, and realize that this is vaild evidence that you are sidestepping instead of addressing.

I'll hand it to you guys, you are really testing my limits by making me repost the same damn thing 100 times. Read the whole thread. If you don't feel like it, don't post. One last time:

The AMA comment is not wrong, but it is being twisted to support a postion. No, the partial birth(again remember that there is no such medical procedure) is not "necessary". It just happens to sometimes be the safest, least traumatic way. And as for the bill itself-IT BANS A PROCEDURE WHICH IS NOT PRACTICED. The actually practiced methods of collapsing the skull are not banned. And even if none of that were true, the SC already gave this claptrap the thumbs down once. So the only logical conclusion is that this bill is noise for the sake of making noise.

ALL of these points are expanded upon in great detail on this very page.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Ornery
"Because it's a narrow statement that has no meaning in the broader debate?"


You are one clueless POS aren't you? One group of doctors says one thing, another group says the other. For some reason, you only consider valid the opinion of one group. Well, isn't that special?

Policies of Major Medical Societies

• "...[T]he College finds...very disturbing...any action by Congress that would supersede the medical judgment of trained physicians and that would criminalize medical procedures that may be necessary to save the life of a woman..."
  
  ...A select panel convened by ACOG could identify no circumstances under which this procedure, as defined above, would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman...

Even if the ACT passes, there will still be other ways to "save the life of the woman".

BECAUSE YOU DAMNED CLUELESS MORON IT MAY BE THE BEST AND SAFEST WAY.


The Statement of Policy further reads that such legislation has the potential to outlaw other abortion techniques that are critical to the lives and health of American women. This was the second basis upon which the Supreme Court struck down the Nebraska law in the Stenberg case. Such "partial birth" laws are invariably overly broad or imprecisely drawn, frequently using terms ? such as "partial birth abortion" ? that are not recognized by the very constituency (physicians) whose conduct the law would criminalize. They purport to address a single procedure, yet describe elements of other procedures used in obstetrics and gynecology. Thus, even when legislators add an exception to a so-called "partial birth abortion" ban that includes protecting a woman's health, the ban may fail to have the necessary specificity to avoid encroaching on other safe and constitutionally protected medical procedures. For this reason, the ban would fail the two-part test outlined by the Supreme Court in the Stenberg decision.

http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/press_releases/nr02-13-02.cfm

Nobody is saying the AMA comments are wrong. But you fail to grasp the larger meaning, which I've kindly put in bold letters above.

 

[Ornery]

"THE BEST AND SAFEST WAY" to help gals like Nicole Brown Simpson, would be to suck her estranged husband's brains out before he killed her. However, like killing partially born infants, it is, and should be, against the law. In both cases, there are other ways to deal with it, though it may not be as easy, or safe. Such is life...

 

[CaptnKirk]

I fear that a 'Packed' court may not reject this Womans issue this time,

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Ugh, rarely am I led to audibly groan at some of your posts, Sketcher. Heh. Was cracking me up. I'm really surprised Fausto1 and jaeger66 have continued posting after being met with what amounts to juvenile jabs.

Somethin' tells me it's gonna get hot in here

Flamebait.