It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Faith & Family => Topic started by: Libertas on August 08, 2013, 12:34:51 PM
-
Solon - No such thing as fetal pain.
http://weaselzippers.us/2013/08/08/salon-there-is-no-such-thing-as-fetal-pain/ (http://weaselzippers.us/2013/08/08/salon-there-is-no-such-thing-as-fetal-pain/)
I don't think libiot pain is real. Lets test it under similar conditions, eh? ::evilbat::
-
They say "the science" determines there's no "fetal" pain before 24 weeks, so laws restricting abortion after that time frame are not based on the science of embryology. They're claiming the "fetal" flinching during early testing is merely reflexive, not neurological response to pain.
But do they know for sure? Whatever happened to "if we can ________ just one child"?
“Real situations in real life are very different than what we’re hearing from politicians. The whole debate — the way the whole thing is framed — is very shaming to patients. Let’s bring respect back into it. Treat people with respect. Have compassion for patients. Do what’s right for them.”
But mostly, she says, it’s about letting doctors be doctors, and keeping politics out of it.
“Let us do our jobs. Let us take care of our patients.”
Conveniently ignoring the fact that the unborn child is a patient as well.
I hate these people.
-
Yeah, they really give us no reason to like anything about them, don't they. I'd like to inflict them with lots of reflexive flinching!
-
still a life
pain or not
-
still a life
pain or not
They can't win the debate on if its a human life or not. It is. So they change it to if that life feels pain as its snuffed.
I personally think we should take it. If a liberal doesn't feel pain when they die, then its okay to kill them, right?
-
still a life
pain or not
They can't win the debate on if its a human life or not. It is. So they change it to if that life feels pain as its snuffed.
I personally think we should take it. If a liberal doesn't feel pain when they die, then its okay to kill them, right?
Yup.
-
still a life
pain or not
They can't win the debate on if its a human life or not. It is. So they change it to if that life feels pain as its snuffed.
I personally think we should take it. If a liberal doesn't feel pain when they die, then its okay to kill them, right?
I'll take it.
These are the same people who used to say it was a blob of cells. They lost on that. They will on this.
-
OMG, it just gets worse and worse with these death-worshipping leftists!
“The Church can do better,” he writes. If Catholics want to appear “coherent and sensitive” when arguing against abortion, he argues, they should “revisit some ideas that have been largely unexplored, and perhaps prematurely shut down”—such as whether a child in the womb can be regarded an “unjust aggressor,” which might justify the use of lethal force to protect the mother when her life is in danger.
Camosy does not offer a firm answer to the moral question. In fact, in response to a reader’s comment, he writes:
“I am not ‘arguing for the direct targeting of the unborn child as an aggressor.’ I’m asking us to explore why, if at all, we should treat the cases [of unjust aggression]… differently from a prenatal child who threatens her mother’s life.”
http://weaselzippers.us/2013/08/16/fordham-university-professor-babies-can-be-aborted-as-unjust-aggressors/ (http://weaselzippers.us/2013/08/16/fordham-university-professor-babies-can-be-aborted-as-unjust-aggressors/)
Kinda like "guns kill people" not people...babies can threaten the life of the mother...
WTF?!?!?!
-
grasping at straws and sounding stupid
-
such as whether a child in the womb can be regarded an “unjust aggressor,” which might justify the use of lethal force to protect the mother when her life is in danger.
You know, its just like when you invite a stranger into your home, only you have a severe peanut allergy and he works at the peanut plant and his clothes are covered with peanut dust. Its well established law that you can shoot him then and there as an "unjust aggressor"
To be unjust you have to have moral agency to begin with . A Child has none, and he was invited into your womb the second you invited the father there. For practical considerations I support abortion in cases where the life of the mother is in danger - but legislatively that is difficult to arrange without providing loopholes in which one can just pronounce the mother's life in danger, and just ignore viable and reasonable alternatives that may save both mother and offspring. But yeah, if I had to choose between my wife and a child, I would choose my wife (and would want that choice open to me) With out my wife there is no chance more children will not be born and without her care my offspring will suffer. But I make the argument on that basis only. The child in the womb is innocent of any wrong doing, and it isn't a "Moral" decision ( I can easily see the moral argument that you place that decision in God's hands. do what you can, pray and hope. I am not one of God's favorites in this regard) Its a Sophie's Choice sort of thing, and its horrible. But sometimes that is the sort of crap you get. Pretending its some sort of "self defense " is simply absurd.