Results 1 to 40 of 54

Thread: Christian Doctors Angry Over "Conscience Rule" Reversal

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    λεγιων ονομα μοι sycld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,570
    Credits
    2,517
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Atmosfear View Post
    These are elective procedures.

    ...

    Abortions are rarely more elective than boob jobs. The obvious exception here is rape/incest, in which case the law needs to protect victims first. Unfortunately, the majority of abortions aren't intended to protect a victim as much as they are intended to protect an irresponsible behavior.


    Since you seem to be unable to read regular size text, again:

    THIS IS YOUR OWN FUCKING OPINION THAT YOU ARE SUBSTITUTING FOR FACT,
    it is a matter of legal and medical debate, and you are coming out of left field now by adding that in the case of rape or incest abortion is suddenly less of an "elective procedure" than it would be otherwise.

    Yes, if someone was deformed in an auto accident or due to a birth defect such as cleft palette, then it is obvious that the plastic surgery neccesary to correct these deformities would not be merely elective since their features are grossly far from normal, and the plastic surgery would be an attempt to bring their features closer to normal so that they can function normally or not be ashamed of their appearance in public. There is a definite and obvious physiological distinction to be made between the condition of the person needing non-elective sugery and the condition of person with features clearly in the range of what's considered normal that just wants to look prettier.

    However, whether the child was concieved in a consensual sex act or by rape, there is no difference in the physiological condition of the pregnant woman. The act of abortion would still be just as elective (or non-elective) in either case because the initial physiological conditions are indistinguishable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syme View Post
    MrTroy, even though my sympathies are with your side of the argument... where is it written, anywhere at all, that a doctor must be willing to perform any and all medical procedures? Does it say so in any of the legislation that regulates the medical profession, or in any other laws for that matter? Does it say so in the Hippocratic Oath or anything like that? Does it say so on their license to practice medicine, or on their med school diploma? If not, your comparison to electricians refusing to follow code (for instance) is invalid.
    MrTroy is making the same error in his argument that I made earlier. Doctors don't have to make available every legal medical procedure. They must make available every non-elective , "neccesary" medical proedure. The argument is then one of whether abortion is a neccesary medical procedure or not.

    It is obvious that some medical procedures which merely but profoundly affect quality of life are considered non-elective, such as the correction of non-life-threatening but abnormal facial defects or the prevention or correction of conditions that threaten hearing and sight. So should abortion be considered non-elective? Plan B? Contraception? That is not so clear and is hardly a moot point.
    Last edited by sycld; 04-10-2009 at 02:40 PM.


    PANDAS
    If you don't like them, then get the fuck out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Think View Post
    Atheists are quite right

Similar Threads

  1. Can't Spell "Stink" Without "Ink"
    By Cruz_15 in forum Video Vault
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-05-2009, 04:48 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-24-2008, 09:44 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •