The Official Republican Debates Thread

[Care4all]

No1,
I went to WEB md and it confirmed answers.com's description? There is no "injection" in to the fetus to numb it's pain.... There are some groups out there that are fighting for this though.... at least from what I have read?

I will gladly accept the fetus being anestetized via injection before the procedure takes place.... I just don't think that this is the case Damo.

Care

http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/Dilation-and-evacuation-DE-for-abortion

Dilation and evacuation (D&E) for abortion
Dilation and evacuation (D&E) is done in the second 12 weeks (second trimester) of pregnancy. It usually includes a combination of vacuum aspiration, dilation and curettage (D&C), and the use of surgical instruments (such as forceps).

An ultrasound is done before a D&E to determine the size of the uterus and the number of weeks of the pregnancy.

A device called a cervical (osmotic) dilator is often inserted in the cervix 24 hours before the procedure to help slowly open (dilate) the cervix. Dilating the cervix reduces the risk of any injury to the cervix during the procedure.

D&E usually takes 30 minutes. It is usually done in a hospital but does not require an overnight stay. It can also be done at a clinic where health professionals are specially trained to perform abortion. During a D&E procedure, your health professional will:

Give you a first dose of antibiotic to prevent infection.
Position you on the exam table in the same position used for a pelvic exam, with your feet on stirrups while lying on your back.
Insert a speculum into the vagina.
Clean the vagina and cervix with an antiseptic solution.
Give you a pain medication injection in the cervical area (paracervical block) along with a sedative. If the procedure is done in an operating room, you could receive a spinal anesthesia injection into the fluid around the spinal cord, which numbs the area between your legs, or general anesthesia, which makes you unconscious.
Grasp the cervix with an instrument to hold the uterus in place.
Dilate the cervical canal with probes of increasing size. An abortion in the second 12 weeks will need the cervix to be dilated more than required for a vacuum aspiration or D&C.
Pass a hollow tube (cannula) into the uterus. The cannula is attached by tubing to a bottle and a pump that provides a gentle vacuum to remove tissue in the uterus. Some cramping is felt during the rest of the procedure.
Use a curved instrument (curette) to gently scrape the lining of the uterus and remove tissue in the uterus.
Pass a grasping instrument (forceps) into the uterus to grasp larger pieces of tissue. This is more likely in pregnancies of 16 weeks or more and is done before the uterine lining is scraped with a curette.
Use suction, which may be done as a final step to make sure the uterine contents are completely removed.
Give you a medication to reduce the amount of bleeding with the procedure.
The uterine tissue removed during the D&E is examined to make sure that all of the tissue was removed and the abortion is complete.

Health professionals may use ultrasound during the D&E procedure to confirm that all of the tissue has been removed and the pregnancy has ended.

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

Spoken like a true "compassionate conservative".

 

[red states rule]

Spoken like a true "compassionate conservative".

Eh, a liberal radio talk show host (there are a few of them) was glad the mother of a conservative died - and wished his conservatove counterpart had died with her

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

believing that 2 wrongs can make a right. AND the end always justifes the means, correct?

 

[red states rule]

Libs are the hate filled ones on talk radio

Rush and Sean do not express any hate at all

Unless you a liberal and consider the truth to be hate radio

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

They don't hate "liberals"? Why do they blame them for all of Bush's failures? And everything else, for that matter.

 

[red states rule]

They don't hate "liberals"? Why do they blame them for all of Bush's failures? And everything else, for that matter.

They have never expressed hate toward liberals

Liberals however, express their hate toward conservatives on a dialy basis

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

you live in the Bizarro World. Take a break and snap out if it.

 

[red states rule]

you live in the Bizarro World. Take a break and snap out if it.

I have posted many instances of liberal hate radio - you are the one in La La land

Beter known as Liberalville

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

to all the conservative hate radio that has been around for many years. It's about time "liberals" fought back.

 

[red states rule]

to all the conservative hate radio that has been around for many years. It's about time "liberals" fought back.

Fight back?

Everytime they do - the show is cancelled

Libs cannot compete with Rush and Sean

Dead Air America is a great example of liberal hate radio falling on its ass

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

their hatred and demagoguery is unsurpassable.

 

[red states rule]

their hatred and demagoguery is unsurpassable.

That sums up liberal talk radio

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

as if you spend any time out of your busy day listening to it, anyway. Nice try.

 

[red states rule]

as if you spend any time out of your busy day listening to it, anyway. Nice try.

I do not have to

There are so FEW stations that carried Dead Air America,but there rants were reported on other sites

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

Get over it.

 

[no1tovote4]

Oh, I agree on the 20-21 weeks old baby surviving and actually going home with her mother, after about a year in the hospital, I believe.....? A whole story was done on one of the 24/7's about it.... This was about a year or so ago I think?

And as far as your tsk, tsk....

Can you provide a link that says the baby is injected with a pain killer before they dismember it with foreceps during a D & E? I don't see that in the medical description of a D & E?

Care

It was in the ruling. Medical descriptions notwithstanding. The ruling based its opinion on the pain and suffering of the forming human. To say that they replaced it with an even more painful substitute is limited in its reading of the ruling. They did not.

It also ignores this part of the law ruled on, "Among other things, the Act prohibits "knowingly perform[ing] a partial-birth abortion ... that is [not] necessary to save the life of a mother, (18 U. S. C. §1531(a)" then goes on to define what Partial Birth Abortion is...

Also ignored is the far more often perfored intact D&E on fetuses already dead or where vaginal delivery is not present. Quoting from the ruling: "the Act does not restrict abortions involving delivery of an expired fetus or those not involving vaginal delivery, e.g., hysterotomy or hysterectomy." (Most of the Intact D&Es are performed on fetuses already dead, therefore the vast majority of these would be in fact still allowed).

Anyway read up on the suppsed "ban" where the "life of the mother is ignored" in the actual ruling which I have quoted portions of above:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=05-380

So, in the cases where the fetus is not living (far more often than not in such abortions, and giving a viable reason to perform an injection before proceeding with such a procedure) it is allowed, and when it is clear that it is necessary to save the life of the mother actually WAS included in the law.

Notice the bolded portion of the quote above from the link of the ruling.

Selective reading of the ruling, without thought on the subject, would make it seem that they provided no alternative but the standard D&E, except when the fetus was already dead, disallowing only the termination at a certain point. This allows for the same procedure to be done if the doctor gives an injection to the fetus ending its life before the procedure begins.

I'll take my bows now...

But before I leave I'll leave you another quote from the actual ruling:

No as-applied challenge need be brought if the Act's prohibition threatens a woman's life, because the Act already contains a life exception.

 

[TeddyRoosevelt]

1. Fabricate intelligence to scare the people into pre-emptive war with an enemy who had no connections to 9/11 terrorists, and denounce the pacifists as unpatriotic.

2. Spend more than half of the country's discretionary budget on defense (not including pre-emptive wars).

3. Make sure that special interest contractors get plenty of the war dollars.

4. Decrease funding for veteran benefits and make sure to extend tours of duty on a whim.

5. Advocate for huge tax cuts while increasing defense and military spending.

6. Ignore the American people and veto war-spending bills sent you by Congress.

7. When facts about the bad policies surface, claim they are all politically motivated.

8. Threaten that anything less than continued war will "embolden the enemy."

9. Continually change the rationale for the war, making sure to keep troops there as long as possible.

10. Ignore the wishes of the majority of the now "democratic" Iraqi citizens.



-with thanks to Rob Ross

 

[red states rule]

Dealing with Leftists who "Support the Troops"
By John Robinson


One of the biggest problems we conservatives have always faced is language. Conservatives all too often allow liberals to bamboozle us into arguing issues on liberal terms.


For example: why are we even discussing the "war in Iraq"? What is going on now is not war, but reconstruction. Or more precisely, providing military security for Iraq's social, political and economic reconstruction. The war was clearly over at "Mission Accomplished", and we quickly pulled our major hardware presence from the arena.


So why aren't conservatives pounding liberals for wanting to "walk out on the security necessary for Iraqi reconstruction"? Because too many of us have accepted liberal control of the language.


So when a liberal says to me that (altogether now) "I support the troops, just not the mission", I don't lie to them anymore.


And one particular conversation I recently had with a liberal went like this:


"I support the troops, just not the mission"


"Nice patriotism."


"That's mean!"


"It's the truth."


"You can't question my patriotism!"


"Then stop saying unpatriotic things!"


"Just because I question the President doesn't make me unpatriotic!"


"No... but trying to subvert his constitutional authority and foreign policy just because you disagree, does."


"You make it sound like I'm a traitor."


"How would your behavior be different if you were?"
That usually stops them right there, at least for a moment.


But last Martin Luther King Day, I received a gift of inspiration. I finally found a way to make a liberal understand. I'm not sure if I changed his mind, but he hasn't mentioned it since. This liberal persisted.


"You can support the troops without supporting the mission; I don't want them to die!"


"You can't separate the troops and the mission for your political convenience."


"Of course I can..." he countered.


That's when the little incandescent lightbulb lighted up in my mind.


"Today is Martin Luther King Day" I said, "so lets' take a trip back in time...."
Then I adopted a Southern drawl that sounded like an uneasy mix of Deliverance and Hee Haw... (I've found that liberals always appreciate a little drama, it makes the truth easier for them to swallow. A little Fosse and they'll believe almost anything.)


"You know, buddy," I began, "I like Martin Luther King, I do. I think he's a stand up guy. But this whole Civil Rights for blacks thing, that's gotta go. But I still support Martin. Like I said, he's a great guy. I just don't support his mission at all. In fact, I'm going to go down to the Selma City Council and petition to have his marching permits revoked. Because there's been a lot of violence at these marches he's been doing. Dogs and firehoses, you know. People are dying, can't you see! For what? Equality? Freedom? Who cares about that -- I just don't want Martin or anyone else to get hurt. I support Martin. And because I support Martin, we have to cancel these marches."
He was shocked.


"I can't believe you're such a racist," he said.


"Who's a racist?" I countered. "I support Martin. I just don't support his mission. Can't I do that? I care about Martin, that's why I want him to come home."
As I said, I haven't heard a word about it from him since.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/04/dealing_with_leftists_who_supp.html

 

[maineman]

another op-ed cut and paste....how droll.