If a women feels she would feel safer if her appendix would be removed for no reason we would not allow that.
No you did not at all answer any of my questions. And you reveal you have either an incredibly thin skin, or a very shallow argument. That's neither an answer nor an illustration. If the issue was purely objective and quantitative, you can claim that eliminating morality and religion is a proper course of action. But abortion and the granting and removing of the status of personhood is very subjective and loaded with uncertainty. At the foundation of the issue is the difference between murder and a simple excision of excess flesh. Such questions are wrapped in the morality of society. You cannot evade those aspects no matter how hard you try.
Rubbish is not an argument. Cosmetic surgery changes a defect. Self defense is not an argument if the safer action is childbirth - - - Updated - - - We should not believe doctors?
You can pretty much have anything done you want to unless what you want would kill you, there are plenty of people who have cosmetic surgery purely because they want to. and again I ask you the question, if allowing yourself to be raped is the safer option does that mean your right to defend yourself no longer exists, because that is basically what you are suggesting .. self-defence is based on the person involved, no on some third party decision. What is perceived is more relevant that what is actual. A woman wanting a breast enlargement can have as many doctors as she like telling her it would be unnecessary and safer not to have the surgery, that does not change the reality that it is her perception that is relevant.
The doctors would have to provide proof....they would have to show scientific evidence and research if they are going to claim that pregnancy underwent a miracle and now does not harm women in any way. Makes me wonder why women would have to keep something inside them that doesn't need them for life support anymore....??????
I know of no one who would suggest allowing yourself to be raped is the safer option . That is an opinion...not a scientific medical opinion.
No one is forcing anything on anyone. I, for one, am looking for the best possible possible -- most rational -- definition of the last limit for abortion. I don't think much of the reasoning that dominates most current debate. I think we can do better. I agree... but from the wish to reality... there may be a few hassles...
The nature of "personhood" is fictitious, phoney nonsense. The argument could be made that since infants are not self aware until near a year, then "personhood", or recognizance of oneself, does not occur until then, at least legally speaking. My own interpretation of it is that someone somewhere decided we needed a term to invest in each other a reduction of solidarity as a species, and thus the term "personhood" was invented. To be totally frank, I am not sure when "personhood" is quantified, or even how we can go about quantifying it. My baby girl is almost 7 months old. I can tell you this; she had personality the second she started moving in the womb. Does that quantify her as a person? I don't know, but to me it did. She was named before birth. She had an identity, before birth. Everything about her, fingerprints, number of egg cells, etc, was all determined, before birth. The beauty, imho, of human life, is not knowing why. It's the mystery. The seeking. Finding and creating answers for yourself. I doubt my ruminations on such an opaque and varied topic offer anything beyond the lucid musings of someone who doesn't have the answer, but I think that is the answer; we don't know, and never will.
Whatever. I'm not interested in verbal dueling. If you don't want to try to understand what I'm saying, that's OK with me. I'm not recruiting. I don't care whether you agree or not. I'm here to exchange ideas. If that's not your objective, then we don't have any reason to continue.
Wrong, statistics show that attempting to defend yourself against rape often results in greater injury and a higher risk of death. - https://sapac.umich.edu/article/52 that does not mean a person can not or should not defend themselves.
Yet I know of no law enforcement agency that suggests women do not defend themselves against rape. This is the crux of the matter. Should we follow the recommendations of the experts or not? I am simply stating that if a doctor performs a abortion on a late term pregnant woman and she dies and a team of doctors can clearly show the safer action would have been for her to proceed with childbirth then he should be sued and charged medical malparctice
Okay...thank you for sharing what you cannot see. As far as I am concerned...if a woman with a pregnancy in her own body decides she wants to terminate that pregnancy...she should be allowed to do so. We obviously differ on this.
Whether we follow the recommendations of experts or not when it relates to us as individuals is purely down to that person, and no a doctor would not be charged if that procedure were legal and the woman had consented to under going it, hence why we don't charge doctors when any patient dies under going a legal, consented to procedure.
They would have to be a god or a magician if they changed the whole pregnancy episode to cause no harm or damage to women.... Again, if the fetus has NO effect on the woman then why would it have to stay inside her at all..??..she should be able to have it removed and set on a shelf to grow on it's own...
And I respect the differing opinions. I have strongly defended a woman's right to choose on here and think these silly restrictions states make on first trimester abortions are unconstitutional and must be over turned. I also feel the Hyde amendment is a disgrace and should be repealed. But VERY late term abortions that are being done for no medical reason are a different thing all together. But I welcome honest debate on the issue - - - Updated - - - You seem to misunderstand me. I am saying if a doctor feels the woman would be more likely to die from an abortion than from proceeding with childbirth then the abortion should not be performed. I want to save women's lives. Don't you? - - - Updated - - - Actually we do. If a doctor performs a procedure that is INHERENTLY unsafe for the patient and the patient dies he can be charged.
I understand what you posted, I read your post #1 carefully, and thought it made some excellent points. I think it is a refreshingly rational presentation in this forum. I then asked you some obvious questions which delve to the next deeper layer of your approach. Questions which you did not even attempt to address. If you have answers, or questions, then I'm always interested in a rational discussion on this subject.
Thank you, Vegas...I appreciate where you are coming from. Just as a matter of interest... ...do you have any reliable information on how many "VERY late term abortions that are being done for no medical reason"... ...are actually being done. I am willing to accept it is above ZERO...and I understand your reluctance to accept even one...but I would like to know if there is any information on the real number. I just want to get an idea of what we are dealing with.
"""You seem to misunderstand me. I am saying if a doctor feels the woman would be more likely to die from an abortion than from proceeding with childbirth then the abortion should not be performed. I want to save women's lives. Don't you?""" So you are discussing one particular instance? Then you should've clarified. And, no, if a woman wants an abortion she should get one, they're legal. Just how would an abortion kill a woman ?
Your first post discussed only the question of medical diagnosis of the newborn. I replied... briefly. I was brief because I don't consider this to be a significant aspect of the OP. If you had asked further questions, perhaps we could have done something, but you have spent your time complaining about my answers. It would be more productive to simply ask straightforward questions. I will answer questions I understand.
I am discussing one particular and likely rare instance. In general a first trimester abortion is MUCH safer than childbirth. The science on this is very clear. In late term it becomes much more dangerous the longer she waits. For a D and E either a local anesthetic or general anesthesia is given to the woman. This always presents risks that might not be present in a natural childbirth. There MAY be times where a doctor says it is less dangerous to have the child than to have an abortion. I think if a doctor performs the abortion knowing those risks are SIGNIFICANTLY higher and the women dies then he should be held accountable. Doctors do not do things just because the patients want it if it puts them at high risk. Michael Jackson is an example of how giving a patient what they want might kill them. Just think about it. You can be STRONGLY pro choice (as I am) and still believe in this position.
Guttmacher says the total of very late term abortion is about 0.8% of them which is less than 1500. No one that I know of has ever examined a list of the reasons for those abortions but I would guess the vast majority are health of the mother or significant deformity of the fetus.
