FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
STOP BY A BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD
Posted on 06/15/2002 12:53:45 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:54:43 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
After three decades dominated by the rabid rhetoric of reproductive choice, the number of doctors choosing to perform abortions keeps shrinking.
This is a significant cultural phenomenon, but don't look for the National Organization for Women or National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) to explore it truthfully anytime soon. The last thing feminists want to contemplate is how their crusading efforts to diversify medical schools might have actually backfired by resulting in more women doctors
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
You have essentially said, 'if someone I know is going to hire a hit on an innocent infant, I would want his hit man to be an excellent marksman, maybe a sniper.'
Pretty incredible thinking, dude.
There's no way this is a true statement.
I understand your personal statement. As a collective segment of our culture, to abide training to terminate life, is beyond me to agree with you. Soon perhaps it will be mandatory study in medicine, to perform euthanasia, of course just for those that desire it.
If a woman trusts you enough to confide her desire to terminate her pregnancy, and you feel an obligation to support her in this, you may want to advise her that current research shows abortions cause eating disorders, chronic depression, substance abuse, confused maternal image and relationship difficulties.
From this article: "I had an abortion, and I hate myself. Now what?"
In other words ... "we shall ostracize them".
I do believe it when President Bush (I and II) and their pro-abort wives state they wish to "reduce" abortions. The only critical thing is to keep abortion legal.
After that, it's just a matter of convincing the right folks to do the "right thing" ... primarily the poor and anyone whose kid is somehow imperfect and posing the potential to be a special burden to his parents.
After all, abortion underlies not only the right to have a child when and how a person pleases but also the right to have a perfect child.
The pregnant woman always seems to just vanish into thin air in these discussions.
The entire reason women have a legal right to abortion is that their very bodies are put at risk by pregnancy and childbirth.
I know how strongly people feel that a woman should bear the risk and the child, no matter what, but even in that perfect land where women do just that, there is a need for Ostetrician/gynecologists and GP's and surgeons trained well...
Women need doctors skilled in suction D&C; most misscarriages before 12 weeks are incomplete and require mechanical evacuation. The procedure is identical and there is no excuse for a physician who aims to treat women to avoid learning it.
Exactly. Can't you see that the training is already being given, as it must be, for D&C for other reasons, e.g., dysfunctional uterine bleeding?
What is going on is that they are trying to lead the horses to water AND make them drink, and the horses are balking, which is something I would expect to happen to well educated physicians who don't want to be murderers.
Face it, the physicians just don't want to do abortion, the feminazis don't know how to deal with such a thing as a free will, so they try to legislate training (read: brainwashing) in abortion techniques.
Sorry, doctors rightly find abortion repulsive. They don't want to do it. And no amount of arm-twisting by the state of New York is going to make them do it.
And I'm laughing because now every med school class is about fifty percent female, many of them are liberals, and, even then, the procedure is so repulsive and evil that they can't get enough people to do it.
As it should be.
As for the pregnant woman, she has a hard row to hoe, no doubt about it.
She shouldn't make matters worse by having an abortion, something that will plague her with guilt for the rest of her life.
She should have the baby, keep it, or give it to someone who will be able to care for it.
That is the fitting thing to do for an innocent infant caught in the circumstances of another person's life.
There are three persons involved: the mother, the child, and the father.
Denying that the child exists doesn't solve anything.
Pretty incredible thinking, dude.
No, your analogy fails. A better analogy might be 'I want to his man (wouldn't you mean her hit man, btw) to not also hit another person.' You would, by implication, not care if a second person gets in the line of fire. That's incredible thinking, dudette.
I don't like much that is mandatory. If I, or someone about whom I cared, were to seek a painless release from an otherwise painful death, I would like it assisted by someone who would make it painless.
I entirely agree with that.
I agree....If one looks at the totality of human inflicted death, the babies have no say because they cannot, therefore how long before those at the other extreme of life have the decision made for them because they cannot.
Somehow mankind survived before abortion was legalized and I somehow think man would continue to survive without it.
Abortion has become a convenience to do away with unwanted life, a decision made by others, that road leads to other convenience.
There is a decided difference between a pregnant and non-pregnant uterus. Learning to do a sharp curettage on for DUB is not going to prepare a physician to do a suction curettage on an inevitable,incomplete or missed abortion.
There are not three people involved in the actual pregnancy. The father bears no risk to his physical person from the pregnancy or delivery.
While financial or other life circumstances might be factors weighing on a woman's mind, these are not the reasons she can legally end her pregnancy; it's because pregnancy affects her physical person; it can disable, injure, and kill, and there is no way to know ahead of time that a pregnancy will proceed safely and end with a good result.
(Even in the best of circumstances, the physical changes of pregnancy can have substantialimpact on a woman's body, some temporary and some permanent, but I am not addressing those)
I think the fetus is a living human being killed by abortion, and you do not.
So it is a waste of time trying to convince you otherwise.
You should question the premise you have that the fetus is not a living human.
BTW, your argument that pregnancy is life-threatening and so the law allows abortion, is totally specious and bogus.
Pregnancy is safer than driving.
When pro-choice people start selling their cars and walking everywhere they go, for risk-management reasons, then, I will respect that particular argument.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.