Go blind and get arrested

[mowens]

George Tiller. At least get the name of the Villain right. 

Do your sources account for the other 25%?

I don't like abortion for reasons of any kind, most especially convenience. But, to say there is never any medical reason, even in late term, is incorrect, in my opinion.
And what difference does it make if a dead baby is removed through a C-section or a vagina, other than the fact that one involves more risk than the other?

[Smit]

If I ask you tell me what conditions would require that, you'll say. I'm not a doctor. We have already had this discussion. When I say that I asked a doctor you say that I'm talking to the wrong doctors.

If your doctors tell you there is "never" a reason then I call bullshit. People, especially doctors, who speak in absolutes have an agenda.

[beej]

But, to say there is never any medical reason, even in late term, is incorrect, in my opinion.

could you at least try and google an example of when late term abortion is necessary for the life of the mother? I'm not even saying a real world scenario. Heck just dream up some crazy scenario in your mind, a series of unfortunate events, and explain to me why in that scenario it would be necessary to save her life.

[beej]

People, especially doctors, who speak in absolutes have an agenda.

It took me a long time to get you guys to concede my original point.

If you take politics out of the mix, and listen to the doctors point of view

There are some doctors we don't trust. Which is why we need laws governing doctors.

So from a purely non political or religious view is there some point during a pregnancy when the fetus/baby should be allowed to be treated as a human being. And why is that point the correct one?

[Smit]

It took me a long time to get you guys to concede my original point.

I've no idea what you're talking about.

Your original analogy with the Downs syndrome person is deeply flawed for comparisons to late term abortions. That's why nobody replied. Well I shouldn't speak for everybody, but that's the way I saw it.

[neurosis]

. I know you're not a doctor. But we are a country that is governed by people who are elected by people who are not necessarily doctors.

Yes, and politicians writing laws about things they don't know about can some times be problematic. Gun laws?

Which begs the question, if so few doctors consider them medically necessary, doesn't that lend itself to the logic of making them illegal?

I look at this from the other direction. If they are so unnecessary, or uncommon, why prohibit it if it could save even one life?

You stated you have an opinion about abortion, is it a logical opinion? If you are not basing your opinion on politics or religion, then I'm guessing that it's logic. I just want to see what that logic is.

My opinion on abortion came long before I started following politics and I've never been religious. The same with my opinion on Gay marriage. I supported gay marriage since I was in my 20's before it was popular. (1990) I didn't have religion or politics influencing my opinion on these things then and my opinions on those things haven't changed.

I've talked about it in here before so there is nothing I can say that you haven't already read/heard. My opinion probably comes from a darker place due to my life experience where forcing mothers to have children they don't want doesn't always work out well for the child.

Where does the conversation really go from here?  How many weeks in to the pregnancy should be acceptable? To we make only some exceptions. Do we make all exceptions.

[beej]

I've no idea what you're talking about.

Your original analogy with the Downs syndrome person is deeply flawed for comparisons to late term abortions. That's why nobody replied. Well I shouldn't speak for everybody, but that's the way I saw it.

Neuro was saying that his view point was based on Doctor's views. (as though a doctor's view is more important than a laymen's view of medicine, fair enough) My Down syndrome post was just an example to show that one doctor may hold a different view than someone else might hold and therefore, a law would be required to govern the doctors to keep them from making a decision that society deems unethical. so the idea that this subject is controversial and should just be left in the hands of the doctors, is a foolish decision.

Neuro has said often that he wishes politics could be left out of the abortion debate. So I decided to ask questions about abortion outside of politics or religion.

And all I want to know is, at what point should a fetus/baby gain the protected status of a human being and why is that point correct, logically?

[mowens]

could you at least try and google an example of when late term abortion is necessary for the life of the mother? I'm not even saying a real world scenario. Heck just dream up some crazy scenario in your mind, a series of unfortunate events, and explain to me why in that scenario it would be necessary to save her life.

I have already done that. Tell me why a C-section is preferable for removing a dead baby from a womb than expulsion through the vagina? It's an abortion either way.

Maybe we should agree on terms and definitions before we continue?

[neurosis]

I've no idea what you're talking about.

Your original analogy with the Downs syndrome person is deeply flawed for comparisons to late term abortions. That's why nobody replied. Well I shouldn't speak for everybody, but that's the way I saw it.

I believe he was trying to start a philosophical discussion but I don't know how that's possible when it comes to this topic. We could throw out 100 hypotheticals and discuss the ethics of each one but at the end of the day, it's going to go right back to the same discussion it always is.

And there will be 5 people calling anyone pro choice a baby killer.

[Smit]

I believe he was trying to start a philosophical discussion but I don't know how that's possible when it comes to this topic. We could throw out 100 hypotheticals and discuss the ethics of each one but at the end of the day, it's going to go right back to the same discussion it always is.

And there will be 5 people calling anyone pro choice a baby killer.

I see. Yeah, that's why I also avoid the abortion/religion discussions for the most part.

On those topics, one man's logic is another man's bullshit. 

I will say, to the Downs syndrome anology, murder is a law that could be applied so maybe we don't need another one.

[neurosis]

Neuro was saying that his view point was based on Doctor's views. (as though a doctor's view is more important than a laymen's view of medicine, fair enough) My Down syndrome post was just an example to show that one doctor may hold a different view than someone else might hold and therefore, a law would be required to govern the doctors to keep them from making a decision that society deems unethical. so the idea that this subject is controversial and should just be left in the hands of the doctors, is a foolish decision.

Neuro has said often that he wishes politics could be left out of the abortion debate. So I decided to ask questions about abortion outside of politics or religion.

And all I want to know is, at what point should a fetus/baby gain the protected status of a human being and why is that point correct, logically?

I don't think that doctors make these decisions without the parent involved do they?

And if you don't trust a doctor to make medical decisions, who do you trust to make them?

[neurosis]

I will say, to the Downs syndrome anology, murder is a law that could be applied so maybe we don't need another one.

Yea.. that was why I didn't stay in that part of the conversation. It was a hypothetical. I've never heard of that happening and wouldn't think it would be legal.

[Incogneeto]

This post was about "Masturbation"

And you guys are doing a Great Job.  

[beej]

I have already done that. Tell me why a C-section is preferable for removing a dead baby from a womb than expulsion through the vagina?

I never said that, at all, and if that's what it sounded like I was saying, then I did a poor job of communicating. If a baby is dead, it should just be delivered in what ever is the least stressful method for the mother. No pro-life organziation that I know of would object to the termination of that pregnancy, given the fact that the baby has passed away. And I know from personal experience that Catholic Hospitals, though 100% pro-life will help a woman in that scenario. that is what I was attempting to say.

When I was talking about C-section, I was saying that if a woman comes to the emergency room in her 7th-9th month of pregnancy with some condition and the doctor says that the pregnancy is endangering her life, why not extract the baby through c-section, rather than aborting the baby. In what scenario would ending the baby's life also save the mother's life?

[beej]

I believe he was trying to start a philosophical discussion but I don't know how that's possible when it comes to this topic.

Why isn't it possible to have a philosophical discussion about abortion without politics or religion? I feel like i've been living up to my end of the deal. my questions have been open ended and I have not accused anyone of anything.