A US National Health Care System? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Brumar89 who wrote (6647)	4/10/2009 2:22:59 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) of 42652

I don't know what data thats based on. Or what difference it makes. Clearly Gianna Jessen's abortion involved a survivable and healthy "entity". Jessen was born a long time ago. Late term abortions are illegal or strictly controlled now. Where they are legal, they are only performed when the fetus is a disaster or the woman's life is at risk except for perhaps the occasional renegade doctor. Ergo you just don't have the issue of healthy, viable babies to worry about any more. Like I said earlier about your references to what has happened in the past, times have changed and they just don't drive the issue going forward. Whatever happened to Jessen is sad but irrelevant. In the here and now, we're talking about hopeless babies and/or life-threatened women. I will say I think its easier to accept late stage abortion if we convince ourselves it only kills "entities" that cant survive anyway. Yes, it's easier. If abortionists were killing healthy, viable fetuses willy-nilly I wouldn't take the position I do, either. Sounds like an argument for pain medication, not mercy killing. It's the same thing. They intersect at the point where you can't stop the suffering without giving a potentially fatal dose of pain meds. Those opposed to mercy killing oppose taking that risk. Some worry that this poor dying person will get addicted. How stupid is that? IMO, you do whatever you need to do stop the suffering and let the chips fall where they may. That means death almost all the time. Some poor baby born with his leg growing out of his ear does not need to suffer even for an hour while nature takes its course. That's just plain cruel. We don't shoot people with broken legs. I had a long discussion about abortion once with a colleague who was an identical twin born with only rudimentary legs. His brother was a hunk. I wouldn't advocate aborting over something as minor as that. But when the crack fetus has cerebral palsy, Down's syndrome, and no nose, it's ridiculous to make heroic efforts to keep it alive.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next