![]() |
#81 |
Refugee
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 04:26 PM
|
^ I still think there is collective interest in minimizing the need and defining parameters.
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#82 |
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 04:26 PM
|
And what role should the government play in defining how abortions are to be regulated and performed? The case in TX is about this. It has nothing to do with a woman's right to choose, but instead making sure that women are safe and protected when they go through an invasive surgical procedure that carries a degree of risk, as well as making sure that butchers who want to make a quick buck are kept out of the ORs of the world.
__________________ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#83 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,866
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
Quote:
The US has the highest rate of c-sections in the world, far exceeding rates that are seen as acceptable by your own medical associations. Do we see bills regulating these? You are not so naive to believe that it has "nothing to do with a woman's right to choose." |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#84 |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,239
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#85 |
ONE
love, blood, life Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,452
Local Time: 11:26 AM
|
Exactly. When I was pro-life (way back when) this is exactly the realization that changed my position. No one is "pro-abortion," only pro-choice.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#86 | ||
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,866
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
Also forgotten, or conveniently not mentioned is this statement:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#87 |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,239
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
when it comes to what's happening in TX, it's really not the rightness v wrongness of abortion that's at issue, it's how access to abortion is being reduced in the name of health and safety using Gosnell as a pretext.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#88 | |
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 04:26 PM
|
Quote:
Hospital Maternity-Related Procedures and Practices Statistics The website was around even before a case like this, a year ago. Botched C-Section Procedure Poses More Questions | NBC New York It's great that women can look up hospitals with documented issues, and that NY State promotes such freedom of information. Should women who want to get an abortion be offered any less? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#89 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,866
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#90 |
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 04:26 PM
|
You realize that the attitude your posts demonstrate are only highlighting the problem, right? Let's figure out how to constructively engage on the issues at hand. Unless you think that women's health isn't one of them? But since you posted to statistics published by the CDC, you surely must recognize that government has at least some role to play in the regulations and policies that govern the health of its citizens. And, being the realist that you are, you must recognize that at least part of the problem that creates a monster like Gosnell is the lack of regulation and follow-through that allowed him to operate with impunity for decades....and that kept politicians from saving the lives of the women and babies he murdered.
If abortion is legal, it should be safe. If an abortion doctor is unsafe, s/he should not be legal. Do you disagree? Your posts make me wonder: is it not possible to be reasonable on this issue? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#91 |
Galeonbroad
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,778
Local Time: 06:26 PM
|
Of course it is the government's task to make sure medical procedures are taken care of properly. But shutting down clinic after clinic after years of not properly adressing issues isn't the way to do it! They should have regular checks on clinics to make sure they're conform the safety standards, or, dare I say, just do it as most other countries do. Abortion is a relatively standard medical procedure, so why have a specialised clinic rather than having it done in the hospital? That takes care of the clinic issue, so everyone happy right?
Oh wait... that would raise even more outrage of those opposing abortion. To those, I have the same thing to say as the ones who oppose gay marriage. If you're against abortion, Don't get one! But stop trying to tell ME what to do with my life and my body. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#92 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,866
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
Quote:
I agree with you in principle. But until you recognize that there are, generally conservative forces, all around your country who are trying to pass bills, like the one in Texas, stuffed with unnecessary provisions which are aimed to at least indirectly curtail access to abortion, there can be no discussion. So long as you're continuing to maintain, over and over again that this has NOTHING to do with a woman's right to choose, no, you know what, we can't have a reasonable discussion. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#93 | ||
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 04:26 PM
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#94 | |
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 04:26 PM
|
Quote:
Abortion should be safe. Abortion should be legal. Abortion should be rare. It is the role of government to make sure that abortions are safe. Where they are not safe, the government has a role to play to ensure that they are. How is this unreasonable? Do you believe the government doesn't? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#95 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,866
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
Yes. In your statement that this has "nothing to do with a woman's right to choose."
I will put it to you plainly. As a lawyer, I read and consider this law in terms of the implications, both in implementation and legislative intent, as I would any other piece of legislation. And in my professional legal opinion this piece of legislation does not pass the smell test. Not necessarily every word of it, but the intent behind a number of the provisions is not as it seems. You can go on and continue to label me unreasonable if it makes you feel better. I don't care. It is still my opinion that what the drafters of this legislation are trying to accomplish, as an indirect benefit is not what you think it is. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#96 | |
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 04:26 PM
|
Quote:
In my mind, a very simple solution is as follows. Planned Parenthood made a record $150M profit last year. Why not magnanimously offer to use some of that funding to bring these clinics up to code? TX can have public safety, PP can step in as a crusader for women's health, everybody wins. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#97 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,866
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
I don't think that there is a point as I don't get the sense that you'll budge.
I said before, it is tantamount to constructive dismissal. The fact that you would shut down the vast majority (all but 5 or 6) clinics and most of these do not have the money to bring themselves to a standard of an ambulatory centre, which by the way neither the Texas Hospital Association nor the Texas District of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists think that it is necessary, tells you all you need to know. Do you think that medical associations (both providers and services), which bear the brunt of the costs associated with medical malpractice are lying here or pushing a political agenda? Have you at all considered their view and why they hold it? It is my opinion that a case like Gosnell is being take an extrapolated to every clinic out there that does not meet the standards of an ambulatory centre, regardless of whether those standards are medically necessary. The side benefit of this is an effective near-ban on abortion altogether in the state of Texas. I don't really care to spend more time on this, you can have your opinion and I can have my "unreasonable" one, that's fine, we can agree to disagree. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#98 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,866
Local Time: 12:26 PM
|
I noticed I didn't address Planned Parenthood - I don't know if that is their national "profit", but I assume so. Not sure why you think they need to drain it in Texas. Furthermore I am not sure why an organization, which performs abortions as a small minority of their services should be told to direct all their funding into that area. Not maternal health or pre-natal health or contraception or STD testing, etc. Seems a little bizarre.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#99 | |
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,443
Local Time: 04:26 PM
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#100 | |
Galeonbroad
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Schoo Fishtank
Posts: 70,778
Local Time: 06:26 PM
|
Quote:
We have a saying here in Dutch, that says After the cown has drowned, people will close the well. Meaning that first something has to happen before people take action, while if they took action in the first place the accident could've been prevented. I believe that is the case here, if there had been regular checks and tight regulation on the clinics, there would've been WAY less chance that so many clinics operate below health code standards. And if that had happened, they wouldn't have been closed now and the women in need of such a clinic wouldn't have had trouble getting to one. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|