Given how many abortion doctors are killed (not that many)...

[samoth]

There is a difference between a mother deciding she doesn't want to give birth to a child that will die within minute or suffer from traumatic birth defects after being born and sterilization/eugenics. Samoot...I'm surprised that I'm arguing this with you?

It seemed that the discussion was veering away from a mother's decision to terminate a pregancy (for personal or medical reasons) and moving into the treacherous realm of sterilization/eugenics.

 

[javaguru]

It seemed that the discussion was veering away from a mother's decision to terminate a pregancy (for personal or medical reasons) and moving into the treacherous realm of sterilization/eugenics.

Damn...I'm all about eugenics.

 

[mrplunkey]

Once everyone is a government employee everything will run smoothly in medicine, trust in hope and change...

This really isn't a government health care issue. There's a requirement to get an independent second opinion. This guy setup another doctor in his office and they basically signed each other's clipboards.

Physicians routinely trade referrals and/or swap procedures (i.e. "You give me all your long-bone trauma and I'll send you all my foot and ankle procedures"). But this wasn't that. This was one physician systematically rubber-stamping the actions of another.

 

[Bikini Mod]

And I'm sure that most taxpayers didnt want their tax-dollars paying for you and your (numerous) children when you were on food stamps.

Who decides which kid needs to be aborted or which potential mother needs to be sterilized? (This is what the lawyer-types call the slippery slope argument.)

Should your kids have been taken from you or euthanized as soon as you needed public assistance? Should the government have investigated your marriage and decided that your ex was a sociopath and then prevented the two of you from procreating?

By the time the family court system made is necessary for me to ask for assistance to feed my children I was:

1. working as many hours as I could to support us, that is until the family court took custody from me for working so many hours as a certified personal trainer.

2. not about to have anymore children.

3. only accepting the assistance for 1 year.

Your arguement does not hold water. Good devil's advocate though.

 

[javaguru]

This really isn't a government health care issue. There's a requirement to get an independent second opinion. This guy setup another doctor in his office and they basically signed each other's clipboards.

Physicians routinely trade referrals and/or swap procedures (i.e. "You give me all your long-bone trauma and I'll send you all my foot and ankle procedures"). But this wasn't that. This was one physician systematically rubber-stamping the actions of another.

You just described about every business relationship I've been involved with in the past seventeen years, businesses thrive on building networks. As long as it was a peer and not an intern....The state has the chance to investigate and bring charges. He was never convicted of a crime even when the full resources of the state were brought against him...just sayin.

Do you want a government bureaucrat making medical decisions and overruling MD's?

 

[mrplunkey]

You just described about every business relationship I've been involved with in the past seventeen years, businesses thrive on building networks. As long as it was a peer and not an intern....The state has the chance to investigate and bring charges. He was never convicted of a crime even when the full resources of the state were brought against him...just sayin.

Do you want a government bureaucrat making medical decisions and overruling MD's?

Outlawing or restricting a procedure isn't a bureaucrat making medical decisions. Are you saying the restrictions placed on frontal lobotomies by Congress in 1977 is a mistake too?

 

[javaguru]

Outlawing or restricting a procedure isn't a bureaucrat making medical decisions. Are you saying the restrictions placed on frontal lobotomies by Congress in 1977 is a mistake too?

Second guessing trained and experienced professionals on a procedure requested by the patient in deference to a bureaucrat is a bad thing.

If someone wants a frontal lobotomy it's their business.

 

[Mr.Blonde]

Well, i guess he died for something he believed in. Isn't that what it's all about? How very noble.

 

[Bikini Mod]

Well, i guess he died for something he believed in. Isn't that what it's all about? How very noble.

Did he?

So by your statement it would be safe to assume that you think it would be "equally ok" for me to do a drive-by the next time I see a bunch of holy-rollers with nothing better to do thant to picket an abortion clinic imposing their morality on others who obviously do not share their religious point of view. I mean, wouldn't they be guaranteed 17 virgins in heaven because they died for their religious beliefs?

 

[cindylou]

As I understand it Kansas requires a second opinion and specific criteria. It's not a woman can suddenly decide to terminate the pregnancy because she doesn't like back pains or looking fat anymore.

Not only that but late term abortions were a tiny part of his practice.

He was not giving late term abortions to women who just decided they didnt want their babies..these babies had their brains coming out of their skulls - missing organs, extreme cases of spina bifida etc etc but the baby has not yet died but would surely die.