Author Topic: Killing babies at 9 months  (Read 26184 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #250 on: February 03, 2019, 04:18:52 PM »
Nah that was a SD straw man.  You could base it off diagnostic codes if you wanted the certainty he was seeking, but I don't think that's the best route. 

I've already expressed my preference ITT: (1) non-viable fetuses get no protection; (2) if a doctor determines that carrying a viable fetus to term would likely cause death or permanent disability to the mother BUT live birth via induction and/or c-section would mitigate that risk as well as abortion would, no abortion; (3) same as #2, except abortion is the only way to avoid the risk, abortion is allowed.

I personally would be pretty comfortable that "likely" causing "permanent disability" gives doctors sufficient wiggle room to use their judgment without providing carte blanche authority to perform late term abortions.

Obviously if you're in the "stay out of people's business" camp, no standard will be palatable.  But if we are already ok with laws against child abuse (don't tell me how to discipline my own kids in my own house blah, blah, blah) I don't feel like it's much of a stretch to talk about treatment of babies who are capable of survival outside of the womb.

As long as you give doctors that discretion, I don't see the end result being much different than the status quo. Will the state actually intrude into these private medical decisions and prosecute doctors when the state disagrees with their medical judgment? Seems dicey.

"Dlew, I'm ready to serve."


Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15103
    • View Profile
Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #251 on: February 03, 2019, 04:35:53 PM »
Doctors are used to having their professional judgment questioned in court. I’m not all that worried about it.

Huge difference between a patient bringing a civil claim for malpractice (as I understand you to mean) and the state bringing a criminal charge. How would the state even find out? And what of privilege/confidentiality, if applicable?

I mean how does the state find out about stuff like child abuse? And if you’re prosecuting a case for infanticide I don’t think anything related to the procedure is gonna be privileged. Again, the idea is to treat the viable, unborn child as a patient in the eyes of the law and applicable standards of professional responsibility.

Offline treysolid

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3483
  • complacent and self-involved
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #252 on: February 03, 2019, 09:11:18 PM »
What you're saying is that the health of the mother isn't as important as the health of the fetus. That's just wrong (and probably originates with some religious stuff on your side). Medically, if the pregnancy is significantly imperiling the health or life of the mother, it is no longer viewed as a child, but as a diseased organ.

Offline DQ12

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 22226
  • #TeamChestHair
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #253 on: February 03, 2019, 09:54:05 PM »
Nah that was a SD straw man.  You could base it off diagnostic codes if you wanted the certainty he was seeking, but I don't think that's the best route. 

I've already expressed my preference ITT: (1) non-viable fetuses get no protection; (2) if a doctor determines that carrying a viable fetus to term would likely cause death or permanent disability to the mother BUT live birth via induction and/or c-section would mitigate that risk as well as abortion would, no abortion; (3) same as #2, except abortion is the only way to avoid the risk, abortion is allowed.

I personally would be pretty comfortable that "likely" causing "permanent disability" gives doctors sufficient wiggle room to use their judgment without providing carte blanche authority to perform late term abortions.

Obviously if you're in the "stay out of people's business" camp, no standard will be palatable.  But if we are already ok with laws against child abuse (don't tell me how to discipline my own kids in my own house blah, blah, blah) I don't feel like it's much of a stretch to talk about treatment of babies who are capable of survival outside of the womb.

As long as you give doctors that discretion, I don't see the end result being much different than the status quo. Will the state actually intrude into these private medical decisions and prosecute doctors when the state disagrees with their medical judgment? Seems dicey.
That's exactly my point.  If the state can't (or shouldn't) find that a doctor is abusing his discretion to the degree that he'd be in violation of the law, then what's the point of the "threat to health" requirement in the first place?  Purely aspirational?  We should just legislate what we're actually doing and let abortions be performed whenever for any reason.

FWIW, I don't think the doctors are required to have any certification or expertise in mental health -- correct me if i'm wrong.  Do you find that troubling at all?   
« Last Edit: February 03, 2019, 11:19:06 PM by Dlew12 »


"You want to stand next to someone and not be able to hear them, walk your ass into Manhattan, Kansas." - [REDACTED]

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15103
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #254 on: February 03, 2019, 10:27:03 PM »
What you're saying is that the health of the mother isn't as important as the health of the fetus. That's just wrong (and probably originates with some religious stuff on your side).

You’re making that up. I’m saying the life of the child should be considered period. I’ve already said if abortion is the only way to prevent permanent disability to the mother it can be acceptable. That means long term health of mother trumps life of child even in my suggestion.

Medically, if the pregnancy is significantly imperiling the health or life of the mother, it is no longer viewed as a child, but as a diseased organ.

Yeah and I have a problem with that.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #255 on: February 03, 2019, 10:41:53 PM »
Purely aspirational?

governments make a lot of laws that have no, or almost no, practical enforcement mechanism, but serve to communicate expected behavior.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline treysolid

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3483
  • complacent and self-involved
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #256 on: February 03, 2019, 10:46:05 PM »
What you're saying is that the health of the mother isn't as important as the health of the fetus. That's just wrong (and probably originates with some religious stuff on your side).

You’re making that up. I’m saying the life of the child should be considered period. I’ve already said if abortion is the only way to prevent permanent disability to the mother it can be acceptable. That means long term health of mother trumps life of child even in my suggestion.

Medically, if the pregnancy is significantly imperiling the health or life of the mother, it is no longer viewed as a child, but as a diseased organ.

Yeah and I have a problem with that.

Part 1. I'm not making it up. By suggesting that the outcome of a viable fetus be considered at all, you're opening a debate into whose life is more important. Passing legislation that mandates that the well-being of the unborn child must be accounted for in every scenario would make every single decision that a doctor makes during a difficult pregnancy open to a malpractice suit. What a crap-mess that would be.

Part 2. How can you have a problem with that when you just stated above that you think the long-term health of the mother trumps the life of the child?

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53675
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #257 on: February 04, 2019, 12:10:08 AM »
How is this thread still going

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15103
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #258 on: February 04, 2019, 06:30:23 AM »

Part 1. I'm not making it up. By suggesting that the outcome of a viable fetus be considered at all, you're opening a debate into whose life is more important. Passing legislation that mandates that the well-being of the unborn child must be accounted for in every scenario would make every single decision that a doctor makes during a difficult pregnancy open to a malpractice suit. What a crap-mess that would be.

Yeah sure acknowledging the life of the child makes things more difficult for the doctor and potentially mother. I don’t really see anything wrong with that consequence.

I’m sure slave owners really endured some hardships after emancipation too but that’s just gonna happen when you change the system to acknowledge basic rights for a new class of people.

Part 2. How can you have a problem with that when you just stated above that you think the long-term health of the mother trumps the life of the child?

That’s not my personal belief, it’s the system that I think can be most effectively implemented.

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15255
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #259 on: February 04, 2019, 07:52:32 AM »
I see why pro life people are often wall people. They build up these fantastical stories in their mind an fresh themselves out
Yes.  The two issues are perfectly analogous.   :rolleyes:

Coathangers and caravans of brown people scary stories
If you keep making things up in your head, they must be true.

You literally posted about coathangers ITT and Fox news is filled daily with brown people caravan horror stories.  Both are made up fearmongering ideas that people actually believe to formulate their opinions on issues like abortions and walls. What exactly am I making up here? Rubes are rubes.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #260 on: February 04, 2019, 08:22:23 AM »
Phil, do you also find it crazy that the party that loves killing babies, also wants open borders and acts like they give af about families being separated when trying to illegally get in the US? Bizarre crap, right?

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15255
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #261 on: February 04, 2019, 08:30:54 AM »
Phil, do you also find it crazy that the party that loves killing babies, also wants open borders and acts like they give af about families being separated when trying to illegally get in the US? Bizarre crap, right?

I would if any of this were true.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #262 on: February 04, 2019, 08:32:53 AM »
It doesn't seem crazy to me that some people actually care about other people.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63770
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #263 on: February 04, 2019, 08:33:37 AM »
We are witnessing full radicalization
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #264 on: February 04, 2019, 08:47:31 AM »
Phil, do you also find it crazy that the party that loves killing babies, also wants open borders and acts like they give af about families being separated when trying to illegally get in the US? Bizarre crap, right?

I would if any of this were true.
:lol: You're high!

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #265 on: February 04, 2019, 08:54:04 AM »
It doesn't seem crazy to me that some people actually care about other people.
If that were true, they wouldn't be in love with abortion.

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15255
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #266 on: February 04, 2019, 08:59:25 AM »
Imagine framing this argument in your mind that people love abortions. Like oh man let's go.get preggers so we can go get ourselves one of them abortion procedures.


Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #267 on: February 04, 2019, 09:02:48 AM »
Phil, relax, it's Monday. I'm sorry you support a party that loves killing babies. That's on you, not me.

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15255
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #268 on: February 04, 2019, 09:13:57 AM »
Phil, relax, it's Monday. I'm sorry you support a party that loves killing babies. That's on you, not me.

Blood thirsty libs survive off fetus blood I've heard

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #269 on: February 04, 2019, 09:16:43 AM »
I'd be embarrassed to support a party like that.  :frown:

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #270 on: February 04, 2019, 09:19:12 AM »
I really doubt liberal people get abortions at a higher rate than conservatives. Is there any data out there that links party affiliation to abortion?

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #271 on: February 04, 2019, 09:42:17 AM »
Something tells me Phil has a punch card for all of his abortions.

Online Phil Titola

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15255
  • He took it out!
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #272 on: February 04, 2019, 09:57:09 AM »
Something tells me Phil has a punch card for all of his abortions.

You are trying to hard here wacks. Only one person is getting out of their minds ITT.  It's the one talking about dumpster babies.

Offline 420seriouscat69

  • Don't get zapped! #zap
  • Wackycat
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63922
  • #1 rated - gE NFL Scout
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #273 on: February 04, 2019, 09:59:39 AM »
 :lol: You legit said there was no way ppl would take advantage of late term abortions and all I did was provide some examples that sent you into a fit of rage. T's and P's, friend.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2019, 10:06:57 AM by WackyCat08 »

Offline ChiComCat

  • Chawbacon
  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 17542
    • View Profile
Re: Killing babies at 9 months
« Reply #274 on: February 04, 2019, 10:06:13 AM »
How is this thread still going

Shhh.  They've almost solved this in a way that pleases everyone.