Is anybody interested in listening to points of view different from one's own?

[SimonDoom]

Here are some examples of necessary “late term” abortions that many pro-life politicians don’t want to consider:



"The medical reasons for an abortion in the second trimester include a diagnosis of fetal malformation or genetic anomaly," says Dr. Grossman. These can include:6

• Anencephaly, the absence of the brain and cranium above the base of the skull
• Limb-body wall complex, when the organs develop outside of the body cavity
• Chromosomopathy, a chromosomal disorder

https://www.parents.com/pregnancy/m...ing-as-late-term-abortion-here-are-the-facts/

(Thanks for posting the link, @Lazaran )

These issues are only discovered with thorough prenatal care.

Imagine being 28 or fewer weeks pregnant and having politicians demand that you have to carry your pregnancy to 40 weeks (full term) only to have it inevitably “die” upon delivery.

I don't disagree with that. I didn't say anything suggesting that I did.

 

[AlexBailey]

I don't disagree with that. I didn't say anything suggesting that I did.

In that post I was pointing out late term circumstances where a political anti-abortion restriction could conflict with a patient having access to proper medical care.

Some States have restrictions that don’t allow intervention if there is a beating heart. Medical care should be in the hands of doctors. It should not have political restrictions.

 

[SimonDoom]

I have no problem stipulating whatsoever that I wholeheartedly disagree with elective third term abortions. They should not occur. And they don't occur. Can you stipulate that you have no knowledge of and cannot find a single incidence of an elective third term abortion? And further, why do you think it is important to legislate for an incident that has never been known to occur?

We have common ground. No, I don't. I confess I'm not an expert. I don't think the number really matters. If the number of truly elective very late term abortions is extremely small to nonexistent, then it seems to me one could make the opposite argument: nobody should object to criminalizing it in the extremely rare case it arises. Criminalizing it won't actually impair anybody's meaningful rights; at most it will send a signal to those very small number of women to whom it might apply that they should make their decision before it's too late.

Let me be extremely clear: if I were a legislator, I would always want women at any point of their pregnancy to have the option to terminate if their lives were truly at stake. We may not disagree on this issue as much as you think.

 

[SimonDoom]

Some States have restrictions that don’t allow intervention if there is a beating heart. Medical care should be in the hands of doctors. It should not have political restrictions.

The only problem with this is that it's not possible. If the law says that doctors have the right to determine if medical conditions exist, then that's, in a sense, a form of political restriction. If what you mean is that you don't want politicians passing laws that attempt to micromanage abortion decisions, I completely agree.

 

[SimonDoom]

Delusional. Muslims generally don't live in peace with anyone and particularly not now.

They do here in the US. Look at polls about Muslims in the US. They live on average just as peaceably with their neighbors as anyone else. I've had friends and colleagues who are Muslim. They're as worthy to be Americans as anyone else. You need to get out more.

 

[Yarglenurp]

We have common ground. No, I don't. I confess I'm not an expert. I don't think the number really matters. If the number of truly elective very late term abortions is extremely small to nonexistent, then it seems to me one could make the opposite argument: nobody should object to criminalizing it in the extremely rare case it arises. Criminalizing it won't actually impair anybody's meaningful rights; at most it will send a signal to those very small number of women to whom it might apply that they should make their decision before it's too late.

Let me be extremely clear: if I were a legislator, I would always want women at any point of their pregnancy to have the option to terminate if their lives were truly at stake. We may not disagree on this issue as much as you think.

This view ignores the very real chilling effect that possible illegality has for a healthcare provider. Even if something is likely not illegal, I don’t want to risk giving the service if I’m afraid some eager AG is going to sue me over it. If it’s only a 5% chance of being illegal, but that 5% chance could set me back by 100k+ in legal fees and only yield about $2K in service fees, only a total moron would say yes to that. Since the average doc makes about $300-$500K, they’d have to be a special kind of moron to say yes to that. It won’t even matter that they would eventually win the case, they’d still be losing tons of money and time.

People don’t become doctors and nurses to get sued or imprisoned. They sure as shit don’t take on the job because they’re crazy risk-takers. Criminalizing any aspect of medical care makes everything close to that aspect untouchable to the average hospital.

 

[MiaBabe23]

DeThe only problem with this is that it's not possible. If the law says that doctors have the right to determine if medical conditions exist, then that's, in a sense, a form of political restriction. If what you mean is that you don't want politicians passing laws that attempt to micromanage abortion decisions, I completely agree.

It’s the difference between the law stating there is freedom to choose, as long as there’s not an independently viable life at stake, which is a medically and ethically individual decision, allowing a doctor and patient to decide individually what is best - and a law like the heartbeat law that is a blanket, politically driven decision that states regardless of what doctor and patient know is needed, they must be condemned to give birth to satisfy a particular group’s (misguided) religious/ patriarchal/ egotistical preferences.
Yes everything is ultimately political; but your approach, where the state decides, see those decisions taken to satisfy a legislator’s preference, not doctor and patient preference.
There’s a far wider gap than you realize between your position and mine, and I suspect an equally wide gap between yours and that of others explaining this to you

 

[YDB95]

If the number of truly elective very late term abortions is extremely small to nonexistent, then it seems to me one could make the opposite argument: nobody should object to criminalizing it in the extremely rare case it arises. Criminalizing it won't actually impair anybody's meaningful rights; at most it will send a signal to those very small number of women to whom it might apply that they should make their decision before it's too late.

In a vacuum, perhaps. But in the real world, that can only be seen in the context of 1) decades of propaganda designed to make women feel guilty about abortion, and 2) an all-too-successful campaign by the anti-choice movement to make the public think it's a common occurrence. Here as everywhere, context matters.

 

[Winter_Fare]

I'm assuming you're talking about the third trimester, the 7th 8th and 9th months.

Why do you believe women in the third trimester seek out abortions?

With all due respect, women can and do seek termination of pregnancy in the third trimester during healthy pregnancy. It is not common. But it is both my in experience from two decades of hospital nursing, and it is also documented in research.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9321603/

The fact is, some people don't know they are pregnant until after 26 weeks. Some people experience poor health care, relationship breakdown, abuse, mental health crises, substance misuse disorder, and all these myriad things unrelated to the baby's prognosis are relevant to a woman's life. Of course it happens. And yes, in theory a baby could be delivered instead of terminated, and yes, in the majority of cases it is. But some people do in fact choose elective fetacide and induction of labour

 

[jaF0]

We have common ground. No, I don't. I confess I'm not an expert. I don't think the number really matters. If the number of truly elective very late term abortions is extremely small to nonexistent, then it seems to me one could make the opposite argument: nobody should object to criminalizing it in the extremely rare case it arises. Criminalizing it won't actually impair anybody's meaningful rights; at most it will send a signal to those very small number of women to whom it might apply that they should make their decision before it's too late.

Let me be extremely clear: if I were a legislator, I would always want women at any point of their pregnancy to have the option to terminate if their lives were truly at stake. We may not disagree on this issue as much as you think.

The only problem with this is that it's not possible. If the law says that doctors have the right to determine if medical conditions exist, then that's, in a sense, a form of political restriction.

If what you mean is that you don't want politicians passing laws that attempt to micromanage abortion decisions, I completely agree.

So, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and flip-flopping in your own posts.

 

[adrina]

We have common ground. No, I don't. I confess I'm not an expert. I don't think the number really matters. If the number of truly elective very late term abortions is extremely small to nonexistent, then it seems to me one could make the opposite argument: nobody should object to criminalizing it in the extremely rare case it arises. Criminalizing it won't actually impair anybody's meaningful rights; at most it will send a signal to those very small number of women to whom it might apply that they should make their decision before it's too late.

Let me be extremely clear: if I were a legislator, I would always want women at any point of their pregnancy to have the option to terminate if their lives were truly at stake. We may not disagree on this issue as much as you think.

The problem is that when people focus on the existence (or lack thereof) of elective third trimester abortions and try to legislate them out of existence, it puts real and dangerous barriers to care in front of women who need a third term abortion because of health or fetal anomaly.

Abortion should be legislated no differently than any other medical treatment. No medical treatment is legislated as a crime. Nor should they be.

Most approach legislation to abortion as a moral issue - and that leaves women in danger.

 

[jaF0]

No medical treatment is legislated as a crime.

No legitimate medical treatment recognized and approved by professional medical organizations is.

Kind of an important distinction in the days of injecting disinfectants, horse dewormers and silicone butt lifts.

 

[Yarglenurp]

With all due respect, women can and do seek termination of pregnancy in the third trimester during healthy pregnancy. It is not common. But it is both my in experience from two decades of hospital nursing, and it is also documented in research.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9321603/

The fact is, some people don't know they are pregnant until after 26 weeks. Some people experience poor health care, relationship breakdown, abuse, mental health crises, substance misuse disorder, and all these myriad things unrelated to the baby's prognosis are relevant to a woman's life. Of course it happens. And yes, in theory a baby could be delivered instead of terminated, and yes, in the majority of cases it is. But some people do in fact choose elective fetacide and induction of labour

I will go as far as saying, even if this is true, I see no reason to pass legislation to make anything about abortion illegal.

Just because “some people” do things I wouldn’t do or find distasteful doesn’t mean that the rest should be punished. We make shit illegal because doing it is harmful to the public at large, not because we personally don’t like it. If 10,000 women around me all aborted their third trimester pregnancies, my life and my family’s life would not be affected at all. It’s not my business, it’s not the government’s business.

 

[HisArpy]

The Western Empire did fall for lots of reasons, but the center of power had moved to Constantinople years before, and it got to the point where no one was left in Rome who could take the role of Emperor. Constantinople fell hundreds of years later when the Ottomans finally breached the Theodosian walls.

Pissed off citizenry was much earlier, but that was only one factor in the fall of the Republic.

It's all political dominoes. One thing leads to another, then to another, and another, until it all falls down.

Look around and tell me you don't see it right now. It's everywhere no matter which country you look at.

 

[HisArpy]

So, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and flip-flopping in your own posts.

He's trying to find that middle ground that I stumbled upon a few years ago. He's just not there yet. Close but not there yet.

 

[beckiefalwell]

Assuming you are referring to Trump, which businesses did he run into the ground, and how does that compare to his total number of businesses he has? Or more simply:

Total Trump businesses: ?
Successful Trump businesses: ?
Failed Trump businesses: ?

Fill in those figures to get a more quantifiable assessment of Trump's score for business success.

Last time I checked, the Trump Organization has around 500 businesses under its belt.

You left out inherited and under investigation and being sued and guilty of not paying contractors, etc.

 

[beckiefalwell]

He's trying to find that middle ground that I stumbled upon a few years ago. He's just not there yet. Close but not there yet.

So two Corinthians walk into a a bar...

 

[beckiefalwell]

So two Corinthians walk into a a bar...

The bartender says "if you're listening Russia."

 

[drusus]

It's all political dominoes. One thing leads to another, then to another, and another, until it all falls down.

Look around and tell me you don't see it right now. It's everywhere no matter which country you look at.

You could say that about pretty much anything in history, but the state of the world today has very little in common with the fall of the Western Empire.

If you look at the end of the Republic, Caesar broke the law and used a series of legal maneuvers to avoid prosecution. Then he used agents to encourage violent mobs to stir things up back in Rome and seized power to set himself up as Dictator. Sound familiar? Then again, he had a loyal army at his back and was magnanimous to those who had opposed him so that's not the same as today. That's the problem with deterministic history, it only works in hindsight.

 

[HisArpy]

You could say that about pretty much anything in history, but the state of the world today has very little in common with the fall of the Western Empire.

If you look at the end of the Republic, Caesar broke the law and used a series of legal maneuvers to avoid prosecution. Then he used agents to encourage violent mobs to stir things up back in Rome and seized power to set himself up as Dictator. Sound familiar? Then again, he had a loyal army at his back and was magnanimous to those who had opposed him so that's not the same as today. That's the problem with deterministic history, it only works in hindsight.

It does sound familiar. The problem as far as I see it, is that you're looking at only 1 person and I'm looking at more than 3 who actually did do that exact thing.

 

[beckiefalwell]

And don't get me started on the Mesozoic Era...

 

[drusus]

It does sound familiar. The problem as far as I see it, is that you're looking at only 1 person and I'm looking at more than 3 who actually did do that exact thing.

Which three people?

 

[HisArpy]

Which three people?

Look beyond Trump and on the other side of the aisle and you'll figure it out. IF, that is, you're honest with yourself.

 

[beckiefalwell]

Look beyond Trump and on the other side of the aisle and you'll figure it out. IF, that is, you're honest with yourself.

His fat ass is blocking my view.

 

[beckiefalwell]

Look beyond Trump and on the other side of the aisle and you'll figure it out. IF, that is, you're honest with yourself.

Why is DJT still tanking? Don't you clowns have any money? A new low for that stock today.