Posted on 02/06/2009 11:38:26 PM PST by malkee
Doctors from Haiti? God forbid.
Foreshadowing the future of Obamacare.
Actually, a large portion of our physicians come from overseas, by design. This is a long standing public policy. We have plenty of people waiting to get into medicals schools who have successfully met the requirements for entry, but we don't allow them to attend. We simply don't accept enough people to our medical schools to fill anywhere near the number of residency spots available. The result is that a lot of physicians in rural and under-served areas went to medical schools overseas.
Personally, I think it's a bad policy that limits the physician supply, and the case of this incompetent physician who claims he can't earn a living without killing American babies is a case in point.
The abortion activists have won. People think in words and pictures, and they have managed to remove the negative vocabulary and pictures regards abortion that shape perception. From main stream media, Hollywood, and general education you see no real substantive counter argument, although they exist. What you end up with is talk of “a woman's rights,” in a vacuum of any real counter argument since they are seen as vulgar.
Liberalese: “Botched abortion”
Translation to English: “Vicious, cruel murder.”
Those cold,heartless people have no souls.
You remind me: In a world of stiff competition, "if you can't trust me with a choice, how can you trust me with a child?" has got to be one of the most morally vacuous slogans ever placed on a bumper sticker.
Choose what? "Should I have an abortion?" isn't at all like "should we invite your friends for dinner?" or "should I buy these shoes in blue or green?"
"If you can't trust me with a choice..." is especially ironic to consider here, in light of what happened in this case--an especially poor set of Choices. But as that "especially" should tell you, it's sobering to realize what would've happened if he'd done a routine textbook "non-botched" abortion: someone would've still wound up as a lump of decomposing "tissue," and he'd still be at work.
(Someday I may twist "if you can't trust me with a choice..." to support gun rights and pose the resulting question to a leftist, just to see what happens when a head explodes. You can make interesting Second Amendment twists on pro-abortion platitudes, but by and in themselves, gun rights and abortion "rights" really aren't parallel. A better parallel is between a woman's choice to get a "safe"-and-legal abortion and a woman's choice to fire a gun at a child's head--the big differences between these situations are in their status under the law and in the minds of people who support "a woman's right to choose.")
You can bet the media in Florida will ignore this story as much as possible...after all, their hero, Hussein, supports and voted for the killing of children who were “supposed” to be aborted.
What we have here are two premeditated attempts to kill the same defenseless baby.
To me, an adult taking a child's life in or out of the womb is “Vicious, cruel murder.”
God help us!
So was this guy fired for not being good at killing babies or being poor at it??
If we are given the responsibility to write the abortion legislation tomorrow, I believe we, too, should offer amnesty to all "mothers" who committed one for a variety of reasons: they were told it's a right, some of them have extenuating circumstances, and it is not expedient to prosecute. I also think that we should be careful not to create a climate when people's pregnancies are inspected by some kind of abortion prevention gestapo, as on some level the privacy concern does become valid.
However, the pro-life agenda should not have the overwhelming focus on abortion providers. The fundamental crime is committed by "mothers". Clemency is fine, placing them among the victims muddles the message.
The war crime analogy has its limits. Germany was in a war, so to draw distinctions between legitimate yet lethal work of a soldier, and a war crime is difficult, especially for the victorious side. Those guilty of an abortion today are not under orders; each such act is ipso facto a crime.
I meant to say was he not good enough at killing babies to meet their criteria or was he too efficient at infancticide?
I understand. There’s simply no sense anywhere to be found in this matter.
Reminds me of the boyfriend who was arrested and charged (a few years ago) for jumping up and down on his pregnant girlfriend’s belly to kill the child inside her... Charged?? With what, practicing medicine without a license??
This seems like murder to me.
Focusing on the mothers is an excellent point. If homicide by abortion were made illegal today, we would still continue to have abortions, just as we still have other types of murders despite laws against them. Recognizing abortion as homicide would not stop all abortions, but it would end abortion on a massive scale, would prevent many of the atrocities that occur in abortion clinics, and would likely end the cultural assumptions and practices that rely upon abortion.
With regards to the war crime trials after WWII, I didn't have in mind war crimes, but rather crimes against humanity, such as the murder of Jewish civilians, dissidents and Catholic priests, torture, and barbaric human experimentation. It's not simply an analogy, since I believe that those who routinely enable or commit abortion are guilty of crimes against humanity. A mother going to get abortion may or may not be guilty of intentional homicide, because ignorance and coercion may play a major role. However, she is not guilty of a crime against humanity. She's in the position of Andrea Yates or Diane Downs, not Adolf Eichman or Dr. Mengele.
Also, the fathers have a role as well, since they may in fact be the ones supplying the coercion.
Well put. Nobody wants to hear about what goes on in the abortion industry. It's like bringing up the Nazi gas chambers at dinner, the actions of the abortionists make people sick. We can't, however, simply wish abortion away. It does occur, and it occurs daily on a massive scale. We have a duty to act against it.
“The abortion activists have won.”
In the sense that Hitler won, and slavery won, yes, for awhile. But these practices cannot continue in a civilized society. Abortion will ultimately be recognized as homicide, and those who practiced it will be held accountable for what they have done.
“People think in words and pictures, and they (the abortion activists) have managed to remove the negative vocabulary and pictures regards abortion that shape perception.”
You're absolutely right, and that's why insisting on the accurate usage of words is one part of the battle. We have to insist that this is framed concretely, as killing of the embryo, fetus, or newborn baby, and not as an abstract and euphemistic exercise of “choice.” We have to take away their euphemisms. The abortion movement is intellectually bankrupt. There is no intellectual justification for what abortionists do. Abortion is homicide. The human embryo, fetus, or newborn baby is killed. They are hiding behind a house of cards. People could naively have gone along with abortion when it was thought that it would be rare and only practiced in extreme cases, but that's not how things turned out. 50 million children have been killed, and the abortionists not only refuse to engage in legitimate debate or discussion, they attempt to censor and preempt it. The abortionists don't have a leg to stand on, and we have to confront them personally for their actions.
Yes. Dead baby in a plastic baby, and it was put there by someone who deliberately killed it. Sounds like murder and it sounds like....abortion. Hmmmm.
Excuse me, I meant to say, dead baby in a garbage bag.
Signed the little contract in blood with Satan to get you BMW early. Well, enjoy unemployment, you belong in prison, and enjoy Hell for eternity.
moral absolutes/pro-life ping
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.