Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Obama Supports Infanticide


cmotherofpirl

Recommended Posts

We can't trust people with a 'political agenda', but it's fine to trust doctors who are worried about getting sued?
That fails in two separate logical examinations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]I have prepared a document, legalising mass abortion
We will turn a blind eye to infanticide

We are not your friends
We don't give a beaver dam for what you're saying
We're here to live our lives

[/quote]"We are hungry men" David Bowie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='18 November 2009 - 03:29 PM' timestamp='1258572589' post='2004960']
We can't trust people with a 'political agenda', but it's fine to trust doctors who are worried about getting sued?
That fails in two separate logical examinations.
[/quote]


Its not only a matter of getting sued, but losing their licences to practice medicine.

What will happen and in fact has already started to happen, medical students are avoiding
obstetrics, because of laws like this.

What will we end up with, if we don't have enough physicians to serve in this field?

More people will die, mothers and babies included.

Just as we look to theologians for their expertise on theology and lawyers for their expertise on law, we should look to physicians for their expertise in medicine, not those pushing political agendas.

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='18 November 2009 - 01:46 PM' timestamp='1258573597' post='2004974']
Its not only a matter of getting sued, but losing their licences to practice medicine.

What will happen and in fact has already started to happen, medical students are avoiding
obstetrics, because of laws like this.

What will we end up with, if we don't have enough physicians to serve in this field?

More people will die, mothers and babies included.

Just as we look to theologians for their expertise on theology and lawyers for their expertise on law, we should look to physicians for their expertise in medicine, not those pushing political agendas.

Jim
[/quote]
If going into obstetrics means that one has to provide abortions, then one should not go into obstetrics.

Luckily this is not the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Winchester' date='18 November 2009 - 04:04 PM' timestamp='1258574690' post='2004986']
OBAMA GOOD! REPUBLICANS BAD!
[/quote]


Walking on all fours good, walking upright, bahd, bahd.


Jim

Edited by JimR-OCDS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='18 November 2009 - 03:28 PM' timestamp='1258576108' post='2004994']
Walking on all fours good, walking upright, bahd, bahd.


Jim
[/quote]
Yes, it's evolution to support Overman. I know Nietzsche, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='18 November 2009 - 02:46 PM' timestamp='1258573597' post='2004974']
Its not only a matter of getting sued, but losing their licences to practice medicine.

What will happen and in fact has already started to happen, medical students are avoiding
obstetrics, because of laws like this.

What will we end up with, if we don't have enough physicians to serve in this field?

More people will die, mothers and babies included.

Just as we look to theologians for their expertise on theology and lawyers for their expertise on law, we should look to physicians for their expertise in medicine, not those pushing political agendas.

Jim
[/quote]

There are other ways to take care of lawsuits than denying rights to the unborn (actually born in this case).

Texas tort reform pretty much killed all medical malpractice cases here.

The right to life is non-negotiable regardless of someone's potential liability.

I can imagine if slave owners had said "No we can't free the slaves! We'll be put out of business... no one will want to be a plantation owner/farmer we just couldn't afford it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='rkwright' date='18 November 2009 - 05:05 PM' timestamp='1258578320' post='2005027']
There are other ways to take care of lawsuits than denying rights to the unborn (actually born in this case).

Texas tort reform pretty much killed all medical malpractice cases here.

The right to life is non-negotiable regardless of someone's potential liability.

I can imagine if slave owners had said "No we can't free the slaves! We'll be put out of business... no one will want to be a plantation owner/farmer we just couldn't afford it!"
[/quote]


The pediatricians are concerned over previable fetuses born dead, or presumed to be dead at the time of extraction, which may move due to nerve activity or merely because the mother thought she saw it move, and then reports to a government board, that the doctor didn't try to save the baby's life. Some government bureaucrat could have the physicians licence to practice suspended, pending and investigation, or even revoked.

Would you work under such conditions?

Many doctors will chose to go into other areas of medicine, rather than risk their careers and well-being to government bureaucrats and lay people who have no clue about medicine.


Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dominicansoul

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='18 November 2009 - 04:15 PM' timestamp='1258578920' post='2005032']
The pediatricians are concerned over previable fetuses born dead, or presumed to be dead at the time of extraction, which may move due to nerve activity or merely because the mother thought she saw it move, and then reports to a government board, that the doctor didn't try to save the baby's life. Some government bureaucrat could have the physicians licence to practice suspended, pending and investigation, or even revoked.

Would you work under such conditions?

Many doctors will chose to go into other areas of medicine, rather than risk their careers and well-being to government bureaucrats and lay people who have no clue about medicine.


Jim
[/quote]


is it really that difficult these days to determine "Life?" I read your posts, and I'm thinking...the culture of death has made it all so ridiculously complicated...

back in the good ol' days, if you had a heart beat...you were alive...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know, this can be looked at another way. it seems that fairly regularily both parties, while intentional or not, introduce bills/laws etc, that when reduced to a headline seem completely obvious, but are completely flawed in other aspects. Thus, when a person/party votes against it, on the grounds that the flawed details leave too much open, etc they can be slammed by the other party for voting against such an "obviously" smart or moral thing.

both parties do this, Democrats introduce a "healthcare for the Poor" that has some serious flaws. Republicans(some of which might have been inclined to vote for it) vote against because of far reaching flaws. Republicans all look like they hate the poor.
Likewise, every year GOP introduces a Bill that "Saves Babies", some Democrats that might otherwise say "yeah ok, that sounds good" take a look at the details and say "uhhh, whats up with these? try again." and Democrats all look like they hate babies.

i wouldnt go so far as to say this is endemic, but its something ive been thinking about, and it may play a role. Smaller, more focused laws would probably have a better effect.

politicians get Re-elected either by making themselves look really good, or by making their opponent look really bad. i suspect the latter is easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='18 November 2009 - 04:21 PM' timestamp='1258579305' post='2005036']
you know, this can be looked at another way. it seems that fairly regularily both parties, while intentional or not, introduce bills/laws etc, that when reduced to a headline seem completely obvious, but are completely flawed in other aspects. Thus, when a person/party votes against it, on the grounds that the flawed details leave too much open, etc they can be slammed by the other party for voting against such an "obviously" smart or moral thing.

both parties do this, Democrats introduce a "healthcare for the Poor" that has some serious flaws. Republicans(some of which might have been inclined to vote for it) vote against because of far reaching flaws. Republicans all look like they hate the poor.
Likewise, every year GOP introduces a Bill that "Saves Babies", some Democrats that might otherwise say "yeah ok, that sounds good" take a look at the details and say "uhhh, whats up with these? try again." and Democrats all look like they hate babies.

i wouldnt go so far as to say this is endemic, but its something ive been thinking about, and it may play a role. Smaller, more focused laws would probably have a better effect.

politicians get Re-elected either by making themselves look really good, or by making their opponent look really bad. i suspect the latter is easier.
[/quote]
+1. Good insight.

Obama, though, did indeed vote against the Infant Born Alive Act. Take from that what you will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus_lol

[quote]politicians get Re-elected either by making themselves look really good, or by making their opponent look really bad. i suspect the latter is easier.[/quote]

This happens all the time. The campaign rhetoric that comes out is something like, Senator A voted against a bill to fund abortions while senator B voted for it.

As you look deeper, the bill was merely to increase funding for a health-clinic, which provides a vast array of services to women, including abortion. Senator A voted against increasing the funding, but if you look back, he voted for the funding in the first bill that made it possible. Senator B merely voted for the increase and wasn't even around when the original funding bill was voted and enacted.


Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USairways

thanks. yeah im not really going to draw an specific conclusions, my thoughts were more about a general trend, but i wager more people would vote pro life if the pro life bills were more comprehensively sound.

If attempting to pass a lame bill one year, gives a lot of democrats anti pro life voting records, that is a lot more votes for the republicans from people who might otherwise vote against them next year. you would think after decades of introducing Pro-Life bills and laws, some of these offending factors might have been fixed. introducing the same bill that keeps failing year after year does nothing but pander to their target voter base.



^jim, exactly.

Edited by Jesus_lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 09:33 PM' timestamp='1257561220' post='1997460']
Yea, even most pro aborts aren't that disgusting. Although I guess it's the logical extension of allowing abortion.
[/quote]

Bingo. Nail on the head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...