[andi*pandi]

Originally posted by chabig:
Kerry just doesn't have any standards that he is willing to impose on others.
Chris

You want your government to impose standards on you? Really? Or is it that you want your standards imposed on others?

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by slow moe:
Actually we're a representative republic.

regardless. the underlying ideology is still "democracy".

[itai195]

Originally posted by slow moe:
Hitler's euthanasia initiative killed based on how someone perceived a health condition. If a physician perceived you as mentally ill, you were killed. Didn't matter if you were or not. If that's how you were perceived to be, then you were killed. That sounds an awful like someone perceiving Cindy as being to sick to have her baby, and so is told it would be best if she had an abortion. Meanwhile Susan, who has the same health condition as Cindy but lives in different state, is perceived to be just fine and has her baby. Now you go explain to Cindy about how a health exception has nothing to with Hitlerianism or eugenics.

And here I thought you refuse to play the 'moral equivalency' game.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by slow moe:
Hitler's euthanasia initiative killed based on how someone perceived a health condition. If a physician perceived you as mentally ill, you were killed. Didn't matter if you were or not. If that's how you were perceived to be, then you were killed. That sounds an awful like someone perceiving Cindy as being to sick to have her baby, and so is told it would be best if she had an abortion. Meanwhile Susan, who has the same health condition as Cindy but lives in different state, is perceived to be just fine and has her baby. Now you go explain to Cindy about how a health exception has nothing to with Hitlerianism or eugenics.

So instead you'd rather have a position that completely ignores the health risk to the mother? That makes no sense. You're saying that Hitler would kill you if you weren't healthy, and that's somehow analogous to the Kerry/Clinton position that would permit a physician to save you? Uh-huh.

But go on with your Hitler analogies. You wouldn't want to challenge anyone's stereotypes of conservatives.

[slow moe]

Saving the life of the mother is admirable, and not even an issue.

The health exception, such as Kerry wants, is vague. Under it, someone who wants a late-term abortion and has say strip throat, or severe headaches, or chronic fatigue, etc. etc., could get one. Who's to say they can't, and who is ultimately going to make that decision: doctor, patient, courts? Because the mother's life isn't at risk; it cheapens the debate, is a type of infanticide, and sets up a decision making process that could be lifted right out of Nazi Germany. I'll say it a thousand times if I have to.

[coolmacdude]

Originally posted by slow moe:
KERRY said he voted against the bill because it didn't include a health exception, not a life of the mother expection, a health exception.

This "health exception" being pandered about is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. How can a health exception be relevant to partial birth abortion? In partial birth, the baby is born first and then killed, so any health issues resulting from the birth have already arisen. Whether the baby remains alive or not after the birth is going to have no subsequent impact on the health of the mother. If you ask me, this is a lame ass excuse used to pacify the uninformed on this issue.

[Spliffdaddy]

*SMACK* *DOWN*

[BRussell]

Originally posted by coolmacdude:
This "health exception" being pandered about is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. How can a health exception be relevant to partial birth abortion? In partial birth, the baby is born first and then killed, so any health issues resulting from the birth have already arisen. Whether the baby remains alive or not after the birth is going to have no subsequent impact on the health of the mother. If you ask me, this is a lame ass excuse used to pacify the uninformed on this issue.

The uninformed Supreme Court disagrees with you. They struck down a "partial-birth abortion" law a few years ago in large part because it lacked a health exception. It's very likely that this one that Kerry opposed will also be struck down for the same reason.

The primary reason for this procedure is hydrocephalus, in which the fetus's head is enlarged and it will never live. It can't possibly be delivered vaginally, because the head can be larger than an adults'. So they pull it partially out and drain the fluid from the head, killing it in the process. Sometimes other procedures like a c-section could be very dangerous.

[coolmacdude]

Originally posted by BRussell:
The primary reason for this procedure is hydrocephalus, in which the fetus's head is enlarged and it will never live. It can't possibly be delivered vaginally, because the head can be larger than an adults'. So they pull it partially out and drain the fluid from the head, killing it in the process.

I guess not being a doctor, I still don't understand that.

The incision made to drain the head of fluid is usually done at the back of the neck. That implies that most of the head would already have to be out. If that is the case, how can issues relating to the deliverability of the head be pertinent?

Originally posted by BRussell:
Sometimes other procedures like a c-section could be very dangerous.

The c-section is a very common procedure performed thousands of times a year. It very rarely results in serious complications for the mother. I fail to see why killing the baby is a better solution than the mother just having to undergo some discomfort with that.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by coolmacdude:
I guess not being a doctor, I still don't understand that.

The incision made to drain the head of fluid is usually done at the back of the neck. That implies that most of the head would already have to be out. If that is the case, how can issues relating to the deliverability of the head be pertinent?

They can't get the head out because it's too big. Their heads can be a foot or more in diameter, twice as big as your head. So they put the baby in breach position, deliver it as much as possible, and then go into the neck and through the spinal column to drain the fluid in the head.

The c-section is a very common procedure performed thousands of times a year. It very rarely results in serious complications for the mother. I fail to see why killing the baby is a better solution than the mother just having to undergo some discomfort with that.

Yes, but it's also major surgery, unlike the abortion. We can't predict what kinds of weird things can happen in individual cases. What if the mother is allergic to the anesthesia? What if she has high blood pressure or has some other condition that makes the surgery a big risk? What if it's in the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night and they can't delay and they don't have the facilities to perform the surgery? Who knows what could happen? You can't go from the typical, ideal cases and generalize them to all possibilities.

[Spliffdaddy]

I think the 7 or so abortions performed annually for reasons other than convenience/birth control are not likely to become matters in a legal dispute.

[coolmacdude]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
I think the 7 or so abortions performed annually for reasons other than convenience/birth control are not likely to become matters in a legal dispute.

That's what is dumb about this health exception thing. No one is really using that as a reason at face value. It's just about finding an out to deflect the serious ethical issues associated with partial birth in general.

[coolmacdude]

Originally posted by BRussell:
They can't get the head out because it's too big. Their heads can be a foot or more in diameter, twice as big as your head. So they put the baby in breach position, deliver it as much as possible, and then go into the neck and through the spinal column to drain the fluid in the head.

OK that makes sense, However, I still don't feel this issue is anywhere near as important as it's being played.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by coolmacdude:
I guess not being a doctor, I still don't understand that.

The incision made to drain the head of fluid is usually done at the back of the neck. That implies that most of the head would already have to be out. If that is the case, how can issues relating to the deliverability of the head be pertinent?



The c-section is a very common procedure performed thousands of times a year. It very rarely results in serious complications for the mother. I fail to see why killing the baby is a better solution than the mother just having to undergo some discomfort with that.

Unless, of course, they're using a long thin instrument that can be pushed up inside. Kind of like they do with things like coronary bypass nowadays. Instead of cutting open your chest for open heart, they put a small incision somewhere I don't recall, and feed the instrument in.

BG

[undotwa]

The problem is with the health exception issue is that technically, it is illegal to have an abortion in New South Wales (a state of Australia) however many women who would have no complications in pregnancy have abortions because most abortionists would agree to do an abortion whether a complication is there or not. Thus the law becomes pointless.

[Dr.HermanG.]

The health exception is also widely abused here as well. Woman use all kinds of excuses to justify that carrying the baby to term would endanger their health when really it doesn't (as defined in Doe v. Bolton) - ( the definition of health being widely abused to include financial or 'mental' health instead of purely being a life or death situation requiring immediate surgery to avoid fatal consequences due to the pregnancy).

[Nicko]

Anyone who thinks they have the right to tell a pregnant woman to have their baby when they don't want it is an idiot.

[Spliffdaddy]

Better than being a murderer, I reckon.

Call me an idiot, then.

[Dr.HermanG.]

Me too.

[coolmacdude]

Originally posted by Nicko:
Anyone who thinks they have the right to tell a pregnant woman to have their baby when they don't want it is an idiot.

Anyone who tells me that this country really values life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is an idiot.