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

[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.

 

[drusus]

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.

No need to be cryptic, just say who you mean.

 

[HisArpy]

No need to be cryptic, just say who you mean.

Do your own homework then come back and post what you think you found.

Then we can have a debate on the subject rather than letting the trolls trash the place.

 

[SimonDoom]

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.

I agree this is a good argument. The criminal law shouldn't go after phantom problems. On the one hand, I could reply that if late term elective abortions are rare, then what's wrong with banning them but leaving exceptions where the woman's life is in danger? On the other hand, that puts the burden of proof on the woman to prove her life is in danger, and it's easy to imagine that in a state where the law is strongly anti-choice and the infrastructure is set up to make things difficult for her the result could be that women whose lives are in danger face an unfair burden in proving the danger and are put at unnecessary risk. I would not support that.

I've been trying to dig up what the statistics are on late term abortions and have found it's difficult to find information that I regard as objective and reliable on both sides. If you have any cites I'll gladly look at them. I know late-term abortions are rare, but that's not the same thing as nonexistent.

 

[jaF0]

^^^ But only when the thing will never be 'born'.

 

[adrina]

I agree this is a good argument. The criminal law shouldn't go after phantom problems. On the one hand, I could reply that if late term elective abortions are rare, then what's wrong with banning them but leaving exceptions where the woman's life is in danger? On the other hand, that puts the burden of proof on the woman to prove her life is in danger, and it's easy to imagine that in a state where the law is strongly anti-choice and the infrastructure is set up to make things difficult for her the result could be that women whose lives are in danger face an unfair burden in proving the danger and are put at unnecessary risk. I would not support that.

I've been trying to dig up what the statistics are on late term abortions and have found it's difficult to find information that I regard as objective and reliable on both sides. If you have any cites I'll gladly look at them. I know late-term abortions are rare, but that's not the same thing as nonexistent.

I typically refer to the Guttmacher institute as they have a long history of collecting statistics. Yes they are pro-reproductive rights but their information is highly factual.

What you described in the first paragraph is exactly what has happened. We have well over 100 women in the states who banned abortion being rejected from ERs while in grave medical peril. The doctors have been made afraid to treat women with pregnancy complications.

 

[drusus]

Do your own homework then come back and post what you think you found.

Then we can have a debate on the subject rather than letting the trolls trash the place.

Why is it up to me to find something? Just say who you mean.