Good for Charlie Crist

[Quantum Windbag]

Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed a Republican-backed bill that would have required women seeking a first-trimester abortion to pay for an ultrasound exam and, with few exceptions, view the image or have it described to them by their doctor.

Crist vetoes Fla. abortion ultrasound measure - Decision 2010- msnbc.com

Whether you agree with abortion or not, it's impossible to deny that this procedure was nothing more than a cheap tactic to try and shame women out of getting an abortion.

There is absolutely no medical indication for it.

If this is what the Florida GOP is throwing up, it's easy to see why Crist left them.

Let us actually put the abortion issue aside here, and let me inform you that the only reason Charlie Crist left the Republican party is that he was going to lose the primary, and he is a petty scheming backstabber. He backed this bill when he ran for governor, and when he was running for the Senate as a Republican, and the only reason he vetoed it was the false hope that it would swing a few votes his way from Meek who is running against him and Rubio. They both intend to call him on his hypocrisy, and you want to praise him for it. The fact that you are espousing him as some type of hero for being a scoundrel shows just how uninformed you really are about what is happening in Florida.

That said, let me ask you a rather simple question, one a little closer to what you want the topic of this thread to be, what is the medical justification for abortion if the mother's life is not in danger? Doesn't it make sense to fight a procedure that is unjustified medically with another procedure that lacks medical justification? I fail to see anything about requiring women who are getting an abortion that is not medically justified to be fully informed about what they are doing, I thought that was the idea behind the concept of informed consent. It makes exceptions for women who are victims of crimes, and even exempts those who are getting abortions for a medical reason. It seems to me that you are being a bit disingenuous yourself.

 

[Immanuel]

If you agree that the procedure may not be medically necessary then why would you support requiring it in the first place? Should we also require women carrying pregnancies to term to view photos of women who have died or been disformed from giving birth? Or to view photos of deformed babies? Are women so ignorant that they can't be relied upon to make informed decisions on their own? If women who are considering abortion wish to have an ultra sound first before making a final decision, they certainly have that option. Why force it on them? I think it's quite obvious why some people would wish to force it on them . They have an misguided agenda to coerce women into bearing children they do not wish to bear.

I might add that should this ever become law I doubt it would achieve the effect anti abortionists desire. Women will still have abortions.

Actually it is the so-called pro-choice groups that have the mis-guided agendas.

Of course women will still have abortions, it is not intended to stop abortions. Nothing in it prevents the woman from having an abortion. It simply prevents the abortion provider from lying about what is actually inside the woman.

Immie

I doubt any abortion provider has lied to any woman and told her that abortion means removing any thing other than the fetus. If that has ever happened, it would be a rare incident indeed and hardly justifying women in FL from having to fork over even more cash to pay for ultrasounds which are medically unnecessary. What you are trying to claim, is that anyone who does not hold your personal view on the morality of abortion is a liar. It's not up to abortion providers to make moral judgemnet for their patients. That is up to the patient.

This law is clearly a loony attempt to force doctors to intimidate women out of having abortions, either by imposing a financial burden on them and/or by attempted intimidation.

I find your claims to want to educate women patronizing and insulting. You think anyone who does not have the same view as yourself uneducated? I think it is you who could do with some education.

I note you avoided my question of whether pregnant women should also be subjected to excessive warnings about of the dangers of pregnancy.

I avoided your stupid question, because it is nothing more than that. A stupid question of which the only goal is to spread more deceit and idiocy.

You are in fact the only one calling people liars in this discussion, so get your head out of your ass.

What you doubt is irrelevant. The fact is that abortion providers are in the business of selling abortions. That is exactly what they do. They sell abortions. Salesmen are only slightly higher on the honesty scale than politicians. Abortion providers sell abortions. They do not do so by telling women that the fetus within them is a living human being who may someday grow up to be a concert pianist, or the scientist that discovers the cure for Cancer. They do so, by telling the woman (in their most vulnerable moments) that the clump of cells within their womb is nothing more than waste material and a minor inconvenience that can be eliminated without any consequences in a matter of just a few minutes.

They cheapen life much as you have done in the post I quoted.

Abortion providers, the people who will be giving the ultrasounds, are not going to "intimidate women out of having abortions". Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought you were smarter than that. Guess I was wrong. What this law will do and the only thing this law will do is to make sure that the woman has a chance to see what lives within her and allow her to think a little bit longer as to whether or not she wants to take the life that lives within her.

Immie

 

[L.K.Eder]

so an ultrasound would of been harassing and intrusive for a woman.

I wonder if being aborted is harassing and intrusive for a baby?

people are sick sick sick, especially lefty-liberals

do you ever get tired of posting dumb shit?

 

[Immanuel]

To everyone else:

I have been trying to justify my stance on this position since I read this posted earlier in the thread:

"Individuals hold strong personal views on the issue of life, as do I," Crist wrote. "However, personal views should not result in laws that unwisely expand the role of government and coerce people to obtain medical tests or procedures that are not medically necessary."

It has been hard for me to do so, because when I read Gov. Crist's stated reason (stated because he has never been "Pro-life" by the way he does hold strong personal views on the issues of life, he has always been pro-choice, strongly pro-choice") I thought, yes, I agree with that the government is too big as it is and should not have anymore control than it already has. It has been difficult for me to reconcile my point of view on life with the thought that there is just too damned much governmental interference as it is.

Well, it comes down to this for me. In my humble opinion there is one thing that I believe the government should be responsible for and that is to protect and defend life. There may be other things the government needs to do, but as I see it, the major responsibility of the government is to protect and defend life. That means the life of the fetus in the womb and the life of the old woman that is sick and dying in a hospital bed and will never again be a benefit to society.

Protect and defend life. That is the role of government as I see it. Gov. Crist has failed to do so again. Life isn't perfect and in a perfect world we would not have to deal with this question at all, but unfortunately, we do have to deal with it. We will continue to have to deal with it until we find an alternative to the daily destruction of unborn human lives.

Immie

 

[SmarterThanHick]

You and I will just have to disagree on that. It is a human being and will never be anything else.

no no. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a clump of cells. That is its actual composition. You can try to justify or twist that clump of cells in your head, but literally that is what it is. Not opinion. Fact.

There are patients who demand the word "obese" be removed from their charts despite a BMI of 36. It doesn't matter what the patient wants the chart to say to make their feelings less hurt: that's literally what it is.

That said, let me ask you a rather simple question, one a little closer to what you want the topic of this thread to be, what is the medical justification for abortion if the mother's life is not in danger? Doesn't it make sense to fight a procedure that is unjustified medically with another procedure that lacks medical justification?

Women are informed. Completely. They don't need their noses rubbed in it. Your assertion of abortion being unjustified holds no support, so all your reasoning after that point doesn't work.

What you doubt is irrelevant. The fact is that abortion providers are in the business of selling abortions. That is exactly what they do. They sell abortions.

Like oncologists sell cancer? Or cancer surgeries? That's ridiculous.

They provide a service that historically has been performed in just as high a rate. the only difference is, when it's illegal, more women die in the home-attempt.

It's clear to me you have no clue how abortion works, or what goes on in an abortion clinic. So why are you speaking on the subject?

 

[Immanuel]

You and I will just have to disagree on that. It is a human being and will never be anything else.

no no. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a clump of cells. That is its actual composition. You can try to justify or twist that clump of cells in your head, but literally that is what it is. Not opinion. Fact.

There are patients who demand the word "obese" be removed from their charts despite a BMI of 36. It doesn't matter what the patient wants the chart to say to make their feelings less hurt: that's literally what it is.

That said, let me ask you a rather simple question, one a little closer to what you want the topic of this thread to be, what is the medical justification for abortion if the mother's life is not in danger? Doesn't it make sense to fight a procedure that is unjustified medically with another procedure that lacks medical justification?

Women are informed. Completely. They don't need their noses rubbed in it. Your assertion of abortion being unjustified holds no support, so all your reasoning after that point doesn't work.

What you doubt is irrelevant. The fact is that abortion providers are in the business of selling abortions. That is exactly what they do. They sell abortions.

Like oncologists sell cancer? Or cancer surgeries? That's ridiculous.

They provide a service that historically has been performed in just as high a rate. the only difference is, when it's illegal, more women die in the home-attempt.

It's clear to me you have no clue how abortion works, or what goes on in an abortion clinic. So why are you speaking on the subject?

Sorry, it is the other way around, you don't have a clue what goes on in an abortion clinic, unless maybe you are and abortionist who is simply attempting to defend your lies? So, since I doubt you are an abortionist, why are you speaking on the subject?

And in regards to your opinion that it is only a clump of cells, that is in fact, nothing but your unsubstantiated opinion. One that you did in fact, simply pull out of your ass and is absolutely of no consequence to the discussion or the real world.

Oncologist do not sell cancer. Oncologists sell what they hope is a remedy for their patient's disease. Big difference there my friend.

And I have not called for abortion to be made illegal. Making it illegal would not work. In fact, I believe I stated that very fact earlier in this thread. In fact, as you say, many women would die. Education is the only thing that will reduce the number of abortions, hence the need for something like the bill that Crist vetoed.

Immie

 

[skookerasbil]

obviously.............a thread to make the feminist bulldogs giddy!!! Its people like this that I keep thosuands of miles away from my children!!! Because...........holy fcukking YIKES!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Women are informed. Completely. They don't need their noses rubbed in it. Your assertion of abortion being unjustified holds no support, so all your reasoning after that point doesn't work.

Except they are not.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIXHrusvMDw]YouTube - Investigation of medical lies and manipulation at Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin[/ame]

One side of the issue, yours, clearly lies about the development of the fetus. Requiring them to actually show an ultrasound, and tell the truth is just a method of stopping the lies, and fully informing them of the reality.

 

[HUGGY]

Actually it is the so-called pro-choice groups that have the mis-guided agendas.

Of course women will still have abortions, it is not intended to stop abortions. Nothing in it prevents the woman from having an abortion. It simply prevents the abortion provider from lying about what is actually inside the woman.

Immie

I doubt any abortion provider has lied to any woman and told her that abortion means removing any thing other than the fetus. If that has ever happened, it would be a rare incident indeed and hardly justifying women in FL from having to fork over even more cash to pay for ultrasounds which are medically unnecessary. What you are trying to claim, is that anyone who does not hold your personal view on the morality of abortion is a liar. It's not up to abortion providers to make moral judgemnet for their patients. That is up to the patient.

This law is clearly a loony attempt to force doctors to intimidate women out of having abortions, either by imposing a financial burden on them and/or by attempted intimidation.

I find your claims to want to educate women patronizing and insulting. You think anyone who does not have the same view as yourself uneducated? I think it is you who could do with some education.

I note you avoided my question of whether pregnant women should also be subjected to excessive warnings about of the dangers of pregnancy.

I avoided your stupid question, because it is nothing more than that. A stupid question of which the only goal is to spread more deceit and idiocy.

You are in fact the only one calling people liars in this discussion, so get your head out of your ass.

What you doubt is irrelevant. The fact is that abortion providers are in the business of selling abortions. That is exactly what they do. They sell abortions. Salesmen are only slightly higher on the honesty scale than politicians. Abortion providers sell abortions. They do not do so by telling women that the fetus within them is a living human being who may someday grow up to be a concert pianist, or the scientist that discovers the cure for Cancer. They do so, by telling the woman (in their most vulnerable moments) that the clump of cells within their womb is nothing more than waste material and a minor inconvenience that can be eliminated without any consequences in a matter of just a few minutes.

They cheapen life much as you have done in the post I quoted.

Abortion providers, the people who will be giving the ultrasounds, are not going to "intimidate women out of having abortions". Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought you were smarter than that. Guess I was wrong. What this law will do and the only thing this law will do is to make sure that the woman has a chance to see what lives within her and allow her to think a little bit longer as to whether or not she wants to take the life that lives within her.

Immie

The fact is that abortion providers are in the business of selling abortions.

That is an outrageous comment. Please provide an example of a doctor advertising same.

 

[Immanuel]

I doubt any abortion provider has lied to any woman and told her that abortion means removing any thing other than the fetus. If that has ever happened, it would be a rare incident indeed and hardly justifying women in FL from having to fork over even more cash to pay for ultrasounds which are medically unnecessary. What you are trying to claim, is that anyone who does not hold your personal view on the morality of abortion is a liar. It's not up to abortion providers to make moral judgemnet for their patients. That is up to the patient.

This law is clearly a loony attempt to force doctors to intimidate women out of having abortions, either by imposing a financial burden on them and/or by attempted intimidation.

I find your claims to want to educate women patronizing and insulting. You think anyone who does not have the same view as yourself uneducated? I think it is you who could do with some education.

I note you avoided my question of whether pregnant women should also be subjected to excessive warnings about of the dangers of pregnancy.

I avoided your stupid question, because it is nothing more than that. A stupid question of which the only goal is to spread more deceit and idiocy.

You are in fact the only one calling people liars in this discussion, so get your head out of your ass.

What you doubt is irrelevant. The fact is that abortion providers are in the business of selling abortions. That is exactly what they do. They sell abortions. Salesmen are only slightly higher on the honesty scale than politicians. Abortion providers sell abortions. They do not do so by telling women that the fetus within them is a living human being who may someday grow up to be a concert pianist, or the scientist that discovers the cure for Cancer. They do so, by telling the woman (in their most vulnerable moments) that the clump of cells within their womb is nothing more than waste material and a minor inconvenience that can be eliminated without any consequences in a matter of just a few minutes.

They cheapen life much as you have done in the post I quoted.

Abortion providers, the people who will be giving the ultrasounds, are not going to "intimidate women out of having abortions". Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought you were smarter than that. Guess I was wrong. What this law will do and the only thing this law will do is to make sure that the woman has a chance to see what lives within her and allow her to think a little bit longer as to whether or not she wants to take the life that lives within her.

Immie

The fact is that abortion providers are in the business of selling abortions.

That is an outrageous comment. Please provide an example of a doctor advertising same.

No sweat!

Abortion Clinic, Orlando, Florida. Second/Late Term Abortion Clinic.

Our Florida Abortion Clinics offer surgical and medication abortion services as well as emergency contraception (abortion by pill). Our mission will always be to provide all women and their families with the highest quality abortion care available at the lowest possible cost.

We remain steadfast in our commitment to ensure that every woman who receives medical care in any one of our Florida Abortion Clinics be treated with the utmost respect and consideration.

At the Orlando Abortion Clinics we vow to provide services for our patients in an atmosphere of warmth and compassion, free of judgment or prejudice, and where their safety and well being will always be our first priority.

The decision to have an abortion is extremely personal and very difficult. Our mission is to treat every patient with compassion, competence and in complete confidence, ensuring that abortion procedures are performed under the safest conditions with our patients’ health as our first priority. This procedure should not interfere with the decision to have children in the future.

We will constantly strive to treat our patients as the special and individual beings they have become, each with their own unique mind, body, heart and soul.

If you are faced with an unplanned or complicated pregnancy and wish to have an abortion, we are here to help in every way possible. Our goal is to improve the quality of our patients' lives...Every single one.

To find the nearest abortion clinic location in Florida, please visit our premiere abortion clinic website to learn more about our Florida abortion clinic facilities.

What do you think they are selling? Vacuum cleaners?

Immie

 

[hortysir]

And they're very deliberate in not saying fetus/embryo/baby

 

[Misty]

Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed a Republican-backed bill that would have required women seeking a first-trimester abortion to pay for an ultrasound exam and, with few exceptions, view the image or have it described to them by their doctor.

Crist vetoes Fla. abortion ultrasound measure - Decision 2010- msnbc.com

Whether you agree with abortion or not, it's impossible to deny that this procedure was nothing more than a cheap tactic to try and shame women out of getting an abortion.

There is absolutely no medical indication for it.

If this is what the Florida GOP is throwing up, it's easy to see why Crist left them.

I disagree with you 100%.

Abortion should not be looked at as the fetus not being a life because that is an outright lie.
It is a life and a woman has the right to see that before she makes her choice.

 

[geauxtohell]

Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed a Republican-backed bill that would have required women seeking a first-trimester abortion to pay for an ultrasound exam and, with few exceptions, view the image or have it described to them by their doctor.

Crist vetoes Fla. abortion ultrasound measure - Decision 2010- msnbc.com

Whether you agree with abortion or not, it's impossible to deny that this procedure was nothing more than a cheap tactic to try and shame women out of getting an abortion.

There is absolutely no medical indication for it.

If this is what the Florida GOP is throwing up, it's easy to see why Crist left them.

I disagree with you 100%.

Abortion should not be looked at as the fetus not being a life because that is an outright lie.
It is a life and a woman has the right to see that before she makes her choice.

Nothing is preventing a woman from obtaining an ultrasound prior to getting an abortion. That's quite different than forcing them to get one.

As for the semantics of fetus. v. baby. v. life:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2403003-post33.html

 

[jillian]

I disagree with you 100%.

Abortion should not be looked at as the fetus not being a life because that is an outright lie.
It is a life and a woman has the right to see that before she makes her choice.

so don't have an abortion. no one is forcing you to. women aren't imbeciles who can't make a decision without being tortured.

i say we make men watch bodies being blown up before they start wars.

or is that life not supposed to be protected?

stay out of other people's uteruses.

i've rarely seen anyone from the religious right whose judgement i thought was good enough to make their OWN choices much less choices for other people.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Sorry, it is the other way around, you don't have a clue what goes on in an abortion clinic, unless maybe you are and abortionist who is simply attempting to defend your lies?

I see. So the only options are that I have absolutely no knowledge, or that I am an abortionist myself trying to defend lies. Those are the only options one has to speak on this topic? OK, which group do you fall in? There are two people in this thread who are in medicine. You appear to not have taken high school biology, and creating ridiculous coerced categorizations for reasons why someone would have knowledge on the topic.

So you tell me: why is it you think you know anything about what happens in an abortion clinic?

And in regards to your opinion that it is only a clump of cells, that is in fact, nothing but your unsubstantiated opinion. One that you did in fact, simply pull out of your ass and is absolutely of no consequence to the discussion or the real world.

Once again you demonstrate a complete lack of basic biological knowledge. An embryo is literally a clump of cells. 8 cells, 16 cells, etc. about 200 micrometers in size. At a month it's a ball few millimeters wide. This pretty solidly defines a clump of cells. Do you think fetuses are not comprised of cells? Or that the cells are not clumped together in undifferentiated masses? Which part of "clump of cells" do you find incorrect?

Let's face it, you're just presenting an immature defense mechanism because you don't like the factual evidence being presenting instead of supporting anything you say.

And I have not called for abortion to be made illegal. Making it illegal would not work. In fact, I believe I stated that very fact earlier in this thread. In fact, as you say, many women would die. Education is the only thing that will reduce the number of abortions, hence the need for something like the bill that Crist vetoed.

The bill did not seek to educate women. It sought to force them to do something they didn't want to do. Once again you appear to exhibit a lack of knowledge on the topic. Medical ethics are founded on the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy. What part of those four do you think grants doctors, you, or anyone else the ability to force someone to watch a medical procedure? Can you name ANY other aspect of medicine where such a thing occurs?

 

[Immanuel]

Sorry, it is the other way around, you don't have a clue what goes on in an abortion clinic, unless maybe you are and abortionist who is simply attempting to defend your lies?

I see. So the only options are that I have absolutely no knowledge, or that I am an abortionist myself trying to defend lies. Those are the only options one has to speak on this topic? OK, which group do you fall in? There are two people in this thread who are in medicine. You appear to not have taken high school biology, and creating ridiculous coerced categorizations for reasons why someone would have knowledge on the topic.

So you tell me: why is it you think you know anything about what happens in an abortion clinic?

And in regards to your opinion that it is only a clump of cells, that is in fact, nothing but your unsubstantiated opinion. One that you did in fact, simply pull out of your ass and is absolutely of no consequence to the discussion or the real world.

Once again you demonstrate a complete lack of basic biological knowledge. An embryo is literally a clump of cells. 8 cells, 16 cells, etc. about 200 micrometers in size. At a month it's a ball few millimeters wide. This pretty solidly defines a clump of cells. Do you think fetuses are not comprised of cells? Or that the cells are not clumped together in undifferentiated masses? Which part of "clump of cells" do you find incorrect?

Let's face it, you're just presenting an immature defense mechanism because you don't like the factual evidence being presenting instead of supporting anything you say.

And I have not called for abortion to be made illegal. Making it illegal would not work. In fact, I believe I stated that very fact earlier in this thread. In fact, as you say, many women would die. Education is the only thing that will reduce the number of abortions, hence the need for something like the bill that Crist vetoed.

The bill did not seek to educate women. It sought to force them to do something they didn't want to do. Once again you appear to exhibit a lack of knowledge on the topic. Medical ethics are founded on the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy. What part of those four do you think grants doctors, you, or anyone else the ability to force someone to watch a medical procedure? Can you name ANY other aspect of medicine where such a thing occurs?

Hey, you are the jerk that attempted to evict me from the conversation. I was more than willing to discuss this in a friendly manner until you started your arrogant bull shit.

You have presented no "factual" evidence. You present your beliefs. So far you have not proven to me that you know the difference between your rectum and a knothole in a fence.

It is a human being. It will never be anything else. Period! If you can't understand that, then you, my friend, must not have completed fifth grade sex ed. let alone high school biology. Once again, fool, IT WILL NEVER BE ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR A HUMAN BEING.

By the way, you are a clump of cells, but you are not "nothing more than a clump of cells" and neither is an embryo. You are human and so is a human embryo. Size makes no difference at all. It is still a human being. The contention of abortionist is that it is "nothing more than a clump of cells" and that is a lie.

As for the "Medical Ethics" BS, you would have to convince me of the ethical standards of abortion. What kind of "ethics" snuffs out the life of a human being for convenience sake?

Principals of benevolence? Really? Is it benevolent to snuff out a life because you feel inconvenienced by that life? Hell it is not even benevolent to snuff out the life of a dog for such reasons.

Non-maleficence? Really? You don't think it is evil to snuff out the life of a living being for convenience sake?

Justice? Really? You think justice plays a role in snuffing out a live for convenience sake? You certainly have a screwed up sense of justice.

Autonomy? I suppose this is about the only point that I can agree with you here, it sure does produce independence to be free of that pesky varmint in the womb sooner than later.

And by the way, this is a free country and I will comment on the evils of abortion when ever I damn well please.

Immie

 

[hortysir]

Sorry, it is the other way around, you don't have a clue what goes on in an abortion clinic, unless maybe you are and abortionist who is simply attempting to defend your lies?

I see. So the only options are that I have absolutely no knowledge, or that I am an abortionist myself trying to defend lies. Those are the only options one has to speak on this topic? OK, which group do you fall in? There are two people in this thread who are in medicine. You appear to not have taken high school biology, and creating ridiculous coerced categorizations for reasons why someone would have knowledge on the topic.

So you tell me: why is it you think you know anything about what happens in an abortion clinic?

And in regards to your opinion that it is only a clump of cells, that is in fact, nothing but your unsubstantiated opinion. One that you did in fact, simply pull out of your ass and is absolutely of no consequence to the discussion or the real world.

Once again you demonstrate a complete lack of basic biological knowledge. An embryo is literally a clump of cells. 8 cells, 16 cells, etc. about 200 micrometers in size. At a month it's a ball few millimeters wide. This pretty solidly defines a clump of cells. Do you think fetuses are not comprised of cells? Or that the cells are not clumped together in undifferentiated masses? Which part of "clump of cells" do you find incorrect?

Let's face it, you're just presenting an immature defense mechanism because you don't like the factual evidence being presenting instead of supporting anything you say.

And I have not called for abortion to be made illegal. Making it illegal would not work. In fact, I believe I stated that very fact earlier in this thread. In fact, as you say, many women would die. Education is the only thing that will reduce the number of abortions, hence the need for something like the bill that Crist vetoed.

The bill did not seek to educate women. It sought to force them to do something they didn't want to do. Once again you appear to exhibit a lack of knowledge on the topic. Medical ethics are founded on the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy. What part of those four do you think grants doctors, you, or anyone else the ability to force someone to watch a medical procedure? Can you name ANY other aspect of medicine where such a thing occurs?

Too ******* many quote tags to trim that damned post down, so I just highlighted my area of interest.



Smartthanhick, but not by much,
You are leaving out one crucial word in your definition of a "clump of cells".
CREATED
They are a clump of "created" cells that are growing, evolving, and developing in to a life of it's own.

 

[Misty]

If the fetus is not a life, why is there a problem with showing it in a sonogram. There would be nothing to see right?

Except that no one will perform an abortion before 8 weeks. At 8 weeks the fetus is a fully formed baby only really tiny. It is a life.

They can't abort an embryo. It is too embedded in the uterine lining. They have to wait until the baby forms and separates from the uterus via the umbilical cord.

 

[Immanuel]

If the fetus is not a life, why is there a problem with showing it in a sonogram. There would be nothing to see right?

Except that no one will perform an abortion before 8 weeks. At 8 weeks the fetus is a fully formed baby only really tiny. It is a life.

They can't abort an embryo. It is too embedded in the uterine lining. They have to wait until the baby forms and separates from the uterus via the umbilical cord.

Not true anymore:

Early Surgical Abortion Procedures, Menstrual Extraction.

Historically, surgical abortion procedures were performed at 6 weeks gestation or further. With new medical equipment and surgical instruments, along with advanced technical training, the surgical procedure can now be performed as early as 3 to 4 weeks into a pregnancy. This means the surgical procedure can be performed before the first menstrual period is missed. Patients will have an ultrasound exam performed prior to the procedure and usually the surgery is performed under sonographic guidance. This confirms that the pregnancy is completely removed during surgery. Another name for early abortion procedure is “Menstrual Extraction”. In countries around the world, lay women have performed this procedure on each other. It has been safely practiced for over 50 years internationally. This early abortion was introduced in the United States in the mid 1970’s and the surgical technique has advanced in its effectiveness and safety throughout the 80’s and 90’s.

Immie

 

[SmarterThanHick]

I'm still waiting to hear the experiences that have granted you the insight into the inner workings of an abortion clinic. Clearly by your logic you must be an abortionist yourself. Perhaps we should start with a simpler question: have you ever stepped inside a clinic, or personally spoke with a doctor who has performed an abortion?

You also ignored my claim that the rejected policy has nothing to do with patient education. Instead of addressing the actual issues, I get this:

Hey, you are the jerk that attempted to evict me from the conversation. I was more than willing to discuss this in a friendly manner until you started your arrogant bull shit.

No factual or supporting evidence.

You have presented no "factual" evidence. You present your beliefs. So far you have not proven to me that you know the difference between your rectum and a knothole in a fence.

No factual or supporting evidence here either.

It is a human being. It will never be anything else. Period! If you can't understand that, then you, my friend, must not have completed fifth grade sex ed. let alone high school biology. Once again, fool, IT WILL NEVER BE ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR A HUMAN BEING.

By the way, you are a clump of cells, but you are not "nothing more than a clump of cells" and neither is an embryo. You are human and so is a human embryo. Size makes no difference at all. It is still a human being. The contention of abortionist is that it is "nothing more than a clump of cells" and that is a lie.

Conjecture, opinion, straw man argument putting words in a doctor's mouth without citation. This also makes it appear that you do agree an embryo is a clump of cells. This is still fact, as I have argued from the start and provided numbers to support the claim, and this is also something you have contested based solely on opinion and extraneous emotional responses.

As for the "Medical Ethics" BS, you would have to convince me of the ethical standards of abortion. What kind of "ethics" snuffs out the life of a human being for convenience sake?

Principals of benevolence? Really? Is it benevolent to snuff out a life because you feel inconvenienced by that life? Hell it is not even benevolent to snuff out the life of a dog for such reasons.

Non-maleficence? Really? You don't think it is evil to snuff out the life of a living being for convenience sake?

Justice? Really? You think justice plays a role in snuffing out a live for convenience sake? You certainly have a screwed up sense of justice.

Autonomy? I suppose this is about the only point that I can agree with you here, it sure does produce independence to be free of that pesky varmint in the womb sooner than later.

Recurrent exhibition that you do not understand the topic we are discussing. Medical ethics refers to the ethical obligations of the doctor, not the patient. Based on the ethical principle of autonomy, the patient has the free will to make their own decisions, and doctors do not have the right to force the patient to do otherwise, with the exception of psychiatric commitment.

Given the choice between a woman attempting to perform an abortion by herself, which comes with a significant mortality rate, and performing it in a controlled medical environment with little risk, the beneficent act is to help the woman not kill herself. No one is pro-abortion. The purpose of abortion clinics is to reduce otherwise unavoidable harm. This is yet another reason your "selling abortions" claim is just pure garbage. If a doctor was in it for the money, they wouldn't be in that field.

You can continue getting all huffy about the woman's decision, but we're talking public law and policy here regarding a doctor's role in the process, so your personal "morals" about the patients hold no weight.

And by the way, this is a free country and I will comment on the evils of abortion when ever I damn well please.

You mean it's only a free country for you. Because clearly for other people who you feel should be forced to do things they don't want to do, it's not a free country. Your well timed hypocrisy is hilarious. Once again you provide no rational argument as to why any competent patient should be forced to do ANYTHING they don't want to do, let alone any other field of medicine which allows for such things, and at the same time claim your stake in personal internet freedoms. What a small silly mind.

You are leaving out one crucial word in your definition of a "clump of cells".
CREATED
They are a clump of "created" cells that are growing, evolving, and developing in to a life of it's own.

So you also agree that is is a clump of cells, and similarly provide some modifier to it in a poor effort to reduce that fact?