Another medical procedure that's been politicized. A young woman, strongly considering an abortion, appears at a medical office to find out what her options are. The intake technician ushers her into an exam room.
The technician, affected by how distressed the procedure made the patient, later asks the doctor: "Why is the legislature allowed to dictate how we practice medicine?”

:(

Question... as a republican are you not an advocate for minimal government and minimal government intrusion on citizens' freedoms???

Don't you think that the Theocratic Fascist government which republicans are currently literally fighting for, is the exact opposite of the above goal???

Or is it only the minimal governance and intrusions upon the Theocrats' freedoms to wreak havoc on the rest of the serfs and rubes that republicans are fighting for???

With apologies to Thomas Jefferson for ever so slightly altering his profound insightful words to make them address our day and age....

More like the Triple Crown of Sophistry.

To poke at what Warp12's likely trying to refer to, badly, I think he's trying to poke at the "criticisms" in these forums along the lines of "If you're claiming that all fertilized ova are sacred and it's murder to abort them, why are you in favor of allowing exceptions for ova fertilized via rape?" Naturally, that's a fair question to ask anyone who is espousing those positions and quite deserves a real answer, not least because it's extremely likely that they *don't* actually believe that all fertilized ova are sacred and are just virtue signalling in a manifestly harmful way. Warp12, of course, is trying to warp a couple people poking in that direction into "all you liberals oppose exceptions, you arrogant pricks!" and of course, then following up with "So just suffer, you <bleeeeeeeep>!"

Of course, pretty much everyone, including Warp12, should easily have been able to understand that the "criticisms" weren't of the exceptions.

Exactly. I've said the same thing regarding the "all life is sacred and you're killing babies!" argument when they make exceptions for rape and incest victims. Are these babies not sacred and are they not worthy of life? It's not criticism of the exceptions; it's criticism of the hypocrisy, illogic, and irrationality of their argument in the first place. Not only should Warp have known that, I'd bet he did and does.

Well, you get what you wish. Rape babies forced to be carried to term.

:rolleyes:

It seems to me that whether it's the right to immigrate, control one's own body or any of the other rights you are so quick to trample you are the one denying people their rights.

Do you not see how you present yourself as having pretty much exactly the traits that you are complaining about? But hey, keep telling skeptics interacting on a skeptics forum that they're not allowed to poke at flawed logic in particularly obvious ways and keep trying to employ a litany of fallacies to do so! Such a brilliant way to try to convince people!

Of course. The other day I was watching someone spread jam on toast, and remarked "there's a fly in one corner." The other person naturally assumed I meant that I wanted flies on all of it.

I wish that rather than forcing rape victims to bring their fetus to term, we could simply induce labor and put baby up for adoption. But that would force the woman to go through Labor which is a pretty big deal. Seems like there are no good answers.

I presume the critical question having to do with abortion, a woman's right to seek one versus society's right to restrict them, is 'When does Life Begin?' I just read a very interesting 'Letter to the Editor,' on this topic, published in the Baltimore Sun in August 2018.
I don't like the idea of abortion. But I completely understand why women -- at least most women -- want the legal right to control their pregnancy up to and including being able to end it. Women had this right for close to fifty years. The decision to take this right away was political. Like many people, I feel that was wrong. I agree: whether or not to have an abortion should be left to the woman and her doctor. But taking away that right is an issue that a sizable minority are ultra focused on.

Some legal experts argue the right should have been left to the states to determine. SCOTUS should never have gotten involved.

And here we are.

Fixed your selective editing job there for ya, Warp.

Have you got those quotes from us showing that liberals "as clearly demonstrated in this thread) are critical of measures that allow for exceptions. They are haughty with their condemnation of such" ?

The Wont of Zombies
 

Yup... and they are the same ones who also argued that slavery and segregation and voting rights should have been left up to the states....



In a pre-syphilitic virus called christianity pandemic blighted world, they have had it since time immemorial.... they did not have a great technology to do it safely... but they did it.

All these Zombies infected with the christian syphilitic virus are doing is deny the safe technology.... i.e. REGESSING this country and infecting the rest of us with their syphilitic virus.... the wont of Zombies.... ironic since their god is one too.

What would Biden do if the 2023 congress passed a law banning abortion past 15 weeks? Would he sign it? If he signed it, it becomes a non-issue for the 2024 election. It would then be up to Democrats later to pass a law to take it back to 20 weeks.

If it just a fifteen weeks ban he would veto. That is the garbage that Lindsey Graham was pushing. Nationwide ban after fifteen weeks, but allowing states to ban it earlier. Such a bargain.

And abortion will not be a non-issue for the foreseeable future. There is no compromise position that a politically significant fraction of Americans will not object to.

There is one, let the woman make an informed choice and if she wants an abortion make sure there's a safe clinic nearby staffed with properly trained professionals and a good exclusion zone around it for wingnut protestors.

And PS should the woman decide to carry the foetus to term, then every reasonable aid should be provided to her to successfully birth and bring up the child.

That's crazy socialist talk.

Hang on a moment - the kid is only my business until it's born, after that **** it. That skank and her brat ain't getting anything from me!!



Hopefully I don't have to explain that is a joke.

It would have to be worded such that abortion is allowed for 15 weeks. It would cancel Texas and Missouri laws.

He would hopefully veto it, as 15 weeks is an arbitrary number with no meaning.

Yep, they force women to give birth but disparage those same mothers for being on welfare and 'sponging' off society when they can't afford to care for them.

I'm pretty sure I don't want medical services from anyone who doesn't understand sources of authority in a democracy, or why community oversight of medical practice and ethics is desirable to the alternative.

Medical practice and ethics should be left to health care experts, not to lay people in the "community" and people who base it on their personal religious beliefs which is what we see happening now by a particular party.

I don't try to hide it.

FTFY. It's a quibble, perhaps, given that for the people you speak of political positions and religious positions have been mixed in a rather... unholy manner, but it's still worth pointing out. It's not actually a belief that's generally rooted in or been spread for religious reasons, after all, but rather is generally rooted in a cynical political ploy and has been pointedly emphasized and spread for political reasons.

Agreed. Their political and religious...or purported... religious beliefs are so intertwined they can't separate them. That's why they have difficulty understanding the concept of separation of Church and State.

Oh yes, please, let's negotiate with the Republicans, I'm sure they'll meet us halfway!

In all seriousness, the goal for them is complete control of pregnant women's bodies. I have ZERO faith that they would take such a bill as anything but a show of weakness and then redouble their efforts at a total ban.

The "community" has no business overseeing anyone's body, thanks. I thought Republicans wanted the government out of their personal lives?

Demanding oversight of doctors, nurses, and medical institutions is not the same as dictating what health care I or anyone should or should not seek, which is exactly what we are talking about. I'm having a hard time believing you're "accidentally" conflating the two rather than being willfully obtuse as part of an agenda.

:thumbsup:

I have a feeling ThePrestige would object to "the community" telling him what he can do with his own body. When was the last time MEN were told what they could and couldn't do to control their own reproduction? What if men were told they couldn't get a vasectomy?

Maybe not the best example. I've been evangelizing vasectomies to some of my male friends for years and there is still some ignorance and masculine stigma around the procedure.
Now take away their access to Viagra/Cialis or other ED treatments and there may be men marching in the streets. lol

Back when there was the initial conflict over health insurance covering birth control pills for women, someone on the discussion boards for the local newspaper suggested telling men that Viagra wouldn't be covered by insurance and see how they would react. The response that followed was enlightening.

"The problem with your argument is that nobody is asking for insurance to cover Viagra."
"They don't have to. It's already covered."

Keep your community out of my medical decisions.

Absolutely. A person's medical decisions should be between a patient and his/her doctor.

I think it is not such a bad example for those who argue against birth control, either barrier or IUD. A vasectomy is, after all, basically an internal barrier birth control method. What's the difference to a sperm cell where it is stopped? If a woman cannot manipulate her fertility, why can a man? Like the implantation of an IUD it is a procedure done entirely to one person, who is not engaged in any sexual act, in anticipation of future acts that are entirely conjectural.

It's more than just controlling sex, it's controlling the actual physical body of a person on the presumption that decisions on how that body might someday be used must be pre-empted in order to prevent sin.

Three strikes is a home run in MAGA world.

An Abortion Pill Network is Growing!
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...gn=wp_politics

A covert abortion network rises after Roe. Amid legal and medical risks, a growing army of activists is funneling pills from Mexico into states that have banned abortion.

The emerging network — fueled by the widespread availability of medication abortion — has made the illegal abortions of today simpler and safer than those of the pre-Roe era, remembered for its back alleys and coat hangers. Distinct from services that sell pills to patients on the internet, a growing army of community-based distributors is reaching pregnant women through word of mouth or social media to supply pills for free — though typically without the safeguards of medical oversight.

Many who spoke to The Post did so on the condition of anonymity to discuss activity that potentially breaks multiple laws, such as practicing medicine without a license and providing abortions in states where the procedure is banned. The Post was permitted to observe distributors handling pills in antiabortion states on the added condition that their locations not be identified.

The most delicious part? Merton's Law applies beautifully...

The system could upend Republican plans for a post-Roe America. Despite the strict abortion bans that have taken effect in over a dozen states, some anti-abortion leaders fear that the flow of abortion pills could help make abortion more accessible than it was before Roe fell.

As in pre-Roe America, this is further proof that when abortion is made unavailable to women, they will get them anyway. It just forces them to break the law. Women will not go back to allowing others to control their bodies and telling them they must give birth.

Yes... this is just going to start yet another illicit marketing... and then they will start a whole new enforcement body to fight a war on it.... the net result is a whole new cadre of millionaire thugs and brigands and their associated minions and cronies in politics and policing bodies... e.g. Prohibition and War On Drugs etc. etc.... ironically also instigated and created by christian ZEALOTS.