Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (83462)	7/6/2000 12:50:16 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I understand your position. The Supreme Court understood it, too. It's a loser.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (83462)	7/6/2000 12:51:59 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Funny, I didn't see you state a position. Just a fact.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (83462)	7/6/2000 4:39:23 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

>As I said, the AMA has clearly stated that partial or live birth abortions are never<br><br> medically necessary. <<p><br> My, my sir- you lie. Here is is in black and white- the AMA wants an exception for life of the mother. Although you say this procedure is NEVER medically necessary. Fascinating. I wonder, sir, what else you may have lied about. I throw down my glove, sir.<p><br> >May 19, 1997 <p><br> The Honorable Rick Santorum <br><br> United States Senate <br><br> 120 Russell Senate Office Building <br><br> Washington, D.C. 20510 <p><br> Dear Senator Santorum: <p><br> The American Medical Association (AMA) is writing to support HR 1122, "The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act<br><br> of 1997," as amended. Although our general policy is to oppose legislation criminalizing medical practice<br><br> or procedure, the AMA has supported such legislation where the procedure was narrowly defined and not<br><br> medically indicated. HR 1122 now meets both those tests. <p><br> Our support of this legislation is based on three specific principles. First, the bill would allow a legitimate<br><br> exception where the life of the mother was endangered, thereby preserving the physician's judgment to<br><br> take any medically necessary steps to save the life of the mother. Second, the bill would clearly define the<br><br> prohibited procedure so that it is clear on the face of the legislation what act is to be banned. Finally, the<br><br> bill would give any accused physician the right to have his or her conduct reviewed by the State Medical<br><br> Board before a criminal trial commenced. In this manner, the bill would provide a formal role for valuable<br><br> medical peer determination in any enforcement proceeding. <p><br> The AMA believes that with these changes, physicians will be on notice as to the exact nature of the<br><br> prohibited conduct. <p><br> Thank you for the opportunity to work with you towards restricting a procedure we all agree is not good<br><br> medicine. <p><br> Sincerely, <p><br> P. John Seward, MD <br><br> Executive Vice President <br><br> American Medical Association <br> No wait- perhaps you're a quibbler, like your hero, W.J. Clinton.