A Trial in Philadelphia

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Conceding this point would be a great start for our conservative posters on the forum.

The conservatism that undergirds the legislation is a fact that I can certainly recognize. I can also certainly recognize that the Akins of the world are idiots; so can voters, who turned those loons out of office pretty quickly, and good for them.

As someone who, as I said earlier, considers himself privately pro-life but publicly realistic, I realize that abortion is an unfortunate and sometimes tragic medical necessity. As a result, I don't think it's constructive to label people on the left a baby-killer, the same way I don't think it's constructive to label people on the right woman-haters. Judging the motivation of legislators as a result, for me, holds about the same weight as the slippery-slope argument.
 
If you look at it carefully, the Texas bill is a job-killer. We know that Republicans hate over-regulation of private business and job-killing legislation (just look at the RNC website), so how they can sponsor a bill that would essentially close down 30+ employment sites due to intrusive government regulation is confusing.
 
Judging the motivation of legislators as a result, for me, holds about the same weight as the slippery-slope argument.

Except that legislative intent is one of the main things that is considered when legally evaluating a piece of legislation!

If motivations of legislators no longer matter, then that would be news to people like INDY who are strict constructionists.
 
privately pro-life

A lot of pro-choice people are this to, Nathan. Don't think this applies only to you.

As for being "publicly realistic", restricting access to legal abortion is killing women, plain and simple. Like I said, go look at some information about emergency care for women before Roe. I know you've stated before that what happened in the past doesn't concern you, but if you are really as concerned for the safety of women as you (and Rick Perry) insist, that information may be something you want to take a look at.
 
Don't have too much to add other than noting some of the deliberately selected words in regards to this medical procedure -- "business." Also, "record profits."

It seems to be increasingly important to portray reproductive health as really just a massive industry that seeks to push vulnerable women into having an abortion because its good for their bottom line.
 
Don't have too much to add other than noting some of the deliberately selected words in regards to this medical procedure -- "business." Also, "record profits."

It seems to be increasingly important to portray reproductive health as really just a massive industry that seeks to push vulnerable women into having an abortion because its good for their bottom line.

Again, you're choosing binary thinking. PP is a fairly profitable large business, with last-reported revenues of a billion-plus dollars and profits of $150M. Ordinarily such a business requires some significant government oversight, especially given the present and looming healthcare overhauls. I don't have a problem with PP getting a higher level of scrutiny, nor abortion-providers. I certainly don't consider myself anti-woman simply because I believe in strong regulation; I have three daughters, and if any one of them chose to have an abortion, I would want them to have the best possible medical care -- even if it involved driving two or three hours to a compliant clinic as opposed to a half-hour for a sub-standard one.

Again, binary, either/or thinking keeps us from actually being able to engage on this issue.
 
But in Texas, it could be 8-9 hours. Meaning one has to take 1-2 days off work, and pay for a hotel, and meals. And slid you don't work you don't get paid, or get fired.
 
The conservatism that undergirds the legislation is a fact that I can certainly recognize. I can also certainly recognize that the Akins of the world are idiots; so can voters, who turned those loons out of office pretty quickly, and good for them.

As someone who, as I said earlier, considers himself privately pro-life but publicly realistic, I realize that abortion is an unfortunate and sometimes tragic medical necessity. As a result, I don't think it's constructive to label people on the left a baby-killer, the same way I don't think it's constructive to label people on the right woman-haters.

:up:

Except that legislative intent is one of the main things that is considered when legally evaluating a piece of legislation!

:up:
 
I also think it is difficult to be in the middle about this issue. I was never gung-ho about abortion because I do agree that it is a human life, even at 3 months because the fetus is moving around by then. But it was the ignorant and fearful actions from the right that made me side strongly with the pro-choice supporters. Before, I was reluctant to say that I was uneasy with abortion because some on the pro-choice would get all nasty and say I wasn't a real woman and I was against my "sisters". Honestly, I think those kinds of feminists and pro-abortion supporters have deeper issues rather than insisting a woman deserves dominion over her body.

I think probably the majority of people in this country feel the way you do, maybe shading to the left or right to a degree but more less on the same page.

Perhaps the problem is that the public debate is controlled by extremists on both sides and somehow they've bamboozled us all in to believing that we have to be either in one camp or the other.

Honestly, I think deeper than a win/lose stance lies the unwillingness for each side to face its own hypocrisy about the sanctity of life.

No one is comfortable with the taking of human life and agrees it is wrong. Yet the notion that it is acceptable in circumstances of self-defense is just about universal.

Excellent point. Even the hard-core Catholic doctrine which is anti-death penalty, anti-contraception, anti-abortion, pro-help-the poor, still doesn't take it as far as being strictly pacifist.
 
But in Texas, it could be 8-9 hours. Meaning one has to take 1-2 days off work, and pay for a hotel, and meals. And slid you don't work you don't get paid, or get fired.

That's a really wrenching position to be in. To me, doesn't it then behoove the clinics who want to provide this service to make sure that they're corresponding with all standards?

Again, the TX law would require the 38 non-compliant clinics to become as compliant as the 6 that would remain open.

How many clinics permanently shut down in PA when they raised their standards?
 
How can one be a pro-choice extremist?

I was reluctant to say that I was uneasy with abortion because some on the pro-choice would get all nasty and say I wasn't a real woman and I was against my "sisters".

When I was talking extremists I wasn't even talking about the people that go the extremes like Martha mentioned. I was talking about the people who brook no compromise of any sort and view the other side as "baby killers" or "woman haters."
 
I can also certainly recognize that the Akins of the world are idiots; so can voters, who turned those loons out of office pretty quickly, and good for them.

The thing is, disassociating yourself from Akins is one thing, but many anti-choice people like to think they make an exception in rape cases. The problem is that none of them can spell out exactly how that would work.
 
I think many pro-choice people understand the awfulness of abortion because we know people who've gone though it and how agonizing it was for them. I think that if many "pro-life" people knew how many of their acquaintances had gone through it, they'd be a little more understanding.
 
I think many pro-choice people understand the awfulness of abortion because we know people who've gone though it and how agonizing it was for them. I think that if many "pro-life" people knew how many of their acquaintances had gone through it, they'd be a little more understanding.

I agree that the power of relationships and experiences can change hearts and minds. This goes both ways, too -- Norma McCorvey being a prominent example.
 
When I was talking extremists I wasn't even talking about the people that go the extremes like Martha mentioned. I was talking about the people who brook no compromise of any sort and view the other side as "baby killers" or "woman haters."


Ok, that's fair.
 

Maybe.

But then maybe not. The way it's framed, sure that sounds like crazy talk. But if you read carefully, it's clear to me that Snow is not just saying," look just kill it. That's what they were trying to do, so go ahead and finish the job."

In a situation like that there may be many extenuating circumstances that might complicate the issue, including the viability of the baby (is the child going to last longer than a few minutes/hours/days anyway). What is the health of the child? Has it properly developed and will it continue to develop if placed under intensive preemie care? There are a lot of possibilities so maybe it's not so evil and heartless to suggest that the doctor and mother in question need to have the flexibility to make that decision. Doctors and parents already have that flexibility when dealing children that are born early that aren't the product of an unsuccessful abortion.

Personally, I would want a baby that survives an abortion to be given the chance to live. It could always be adopted (by a gay family even!) But I don't know that I'd want that enshrined into inflexible law.

I guess that makes me the opposite of Nathan. Privately pro-life, but publicly pro-choice?
 
I agree that the power of relationships and experiences can change hearts and minds. This goes both ways, too -- Norma McCorvey being a prominent example.

True. Though I doubt her story will warm many hearts in here. :wink:

But, hey the point is that people can change their minds. I'm getting ready to do a blog on the topic of how we come to the point of changing our minds on major issues. I'll post a link when I get it done.
 
In a situation like that there may be many extenuating circumstances that might complicate the issue

I think that this is so important. Personal circumstances are just that, personal. They can never be fully understood by outsiders - not the facts, not the emotions involved or anything.

I had a host of medical procedures this past year, including two surgeries, one of which was minor (day) and one which was major and removed 15 benign tumors from my abdomen. Without boring people with details, I had to attend at one of North America's premier fertility centres to undergo scans and exams on several occasions. For me, this was not related to trying to get pregnant or anything like that - it's that they had specialized equipment and expertise which they could extend to me outside of the context of assisting me with pregnancy (or termination thereof). It was a bit of a strange experience because everyone else there whom I encountered in the various waiting rooms, recovery rooms, changing areas, etc was there either because they were desperate to have a baby and were spending tens of thousands of dollars to that end or because they were terminating. Keep in mind, the ones terminating were particularly tragic cases of women who had subjected themselves to months or maybe years of painful, intrusive and expensive fertility treatments only to experience heartbreaking loss down the line. You'd see their face and it's all you needed to know. And some of them were over 20 weeks (or so I'm assuming based on their size).

I am so glad they had a choice in the matter. That's really the essence of my pro-choice views. People should behave in accordance with their own situations, not with what the rest of us think is ideal.
 
That's a really wrenching position to be in. To me, doesn't it then behoove the clinics who want to provide this service to make sure that they're corresponding with all standards?

Again, the TX law would require the 38 non-compliant clinics to become as compliant as the 6 that would remain open.

But one of the issues here is that the aim of the TX legislation is not to make sure that clinics are compliant to some arbitrary standard (after investing maybe millions), but to make sure that all clinics will have to close as to make abortion impossible in TX. As the sponsors of the legislation have stated, it's not about providing a safe enough environment, but about changing goalposts in such a way until there's no official abortion.
Yes, 5 or 6 clinics may stay open for now. Until they find some other rule to have them closed for not meeting standards.
 
That's a really wrenching position to be in. To me, doesn't it then behoove the clinics who want to provide this service to make sure that they're corresponding with all standards?

Wait a minute - these clinics, as far as I'm aware, already are complying with all the current standards. It strikes me as disingenuous to imply there is a lack of compliance when the proposed new standards don't even pass muster with the relevant professional organizations in the medical community. It strikes me as even more disingenuous to vocalize compassion for those put in a tough spot by this legislation (that again, is viewed as unnecessary and ill advised by the majority of experts in the medical community), and then suggest the solution is for everyone to, essentially, comply and just deal with it. It gets right back to the argument of eliminating access.
 
Last edited:
I think that this is so important. Personal circumstances are just that, personal. They can never be fully understood by outsiders - not the facts, not the emotions involved or anything.

I had a host of medical procedures this past year, including two surgeries, one of which was minor (day) and one which was major and removed 15 benign tumors from my abdomen. Without boring people with details, I had to attend at one of North America's premier fertility centres to undergo scans and exams on several occasions. For me, this was not related to trying to get pregnant or anything like that - it's that they had specialized equipment and expertise which they could extend to me outside of the context of assisting me with pregnancy (or termination thereof). It was a bit of a strange experience because everyone else there whom I encountered in the various waiting rooms, recovery rooms, changing areas, etc was there either because they were desperate to have a baby and were spending tens of thousands of dollars to that end or because they were terminating. Keep in mind, the ones terminating were particularly tragic cases of women who had subjected themselves to months or maybe years of painful, intrusive and expensive fertility treatments only to experience heartbreaking loss down the line. You'd see their face and it's all you needed to know. And some of them were over 20 weeks (or so I'm assuming based on their size).

I am so glad they had a choice in the matter. That's really the essence of my pro-choice views. People should behave in accordance with their own situations, not with what the rest of us think is ideal.

I really appreciate you sharing your experiences -- and for what it's worth, I'm sorry to hear about some of the procedures you've had to deal with and hope things are going better.
 
Thanks nathan. I'm a super fast healer and was back to running 3-4 miles within 4 weeks. Surgeon says I'm good as new. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom