Quote:
Originally Posted by JHC
The court was split decidedly left right and not a single one of the judges is a gynecologist or obstetrician...and neither are you. The left/right split seems to indicate that the opinion about the particular brutality of a partial birth abortion is exactly that - opinion and apparently not related to law. There is no logical reason to ban partial birth abortions vs any other abortion method in my opinion. It seems obvious to me that this is a ploy to undermine Roe V Wade. Therefore, it is cloaked.
|
Clearly your opinion was not the one held by congress or by 5 of the 9 Justices. Just because people disagree with you does not mean that they have devious hidden agendas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHC
Fine. Your opinion is illogical because you specifically said it had nothing to do with the stage of pregnancy but with the "particularly brutal" tactics. Compared to WHAT?
|
But it DOESN'T have to do with the stage of pregnancy!!! You yourself said that this procedure can be done at different stages. The law clearly focuses on a specific procedure, not a specific stage of pregnancy.
That's neither an argument nor an opinion, it's merely an observation about the wording of the law.
And I think I have every right to consider this procedure particularly brutal. If only because the doctor must be looking directly at the fetus' head when he kills it. But that was
never presented as the reason why this procedure was special and should be banned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHC
If we are discussing the courts opinion, and I believe their opinion is illogical and a disguise, then I also believe that your agreement with it is illogical and a disguise. If you'd like to argue that partial birth abortion should be illegal because it is particularly brutal, you should go read up on the other methods. Without considering the stage of the pregnancy and viability of the fetus, your left comparing slicing and dicing and scraping to crushing or puncturing. GROSS!
|
Again, I object to the notion that just because I (and the majority of the court) disagree with your views we must therefore be utterly illogical and have come secret agenda. I'm not sure how we can discuss this if you assume any disagreement it completely illogical and merely the result of a disguised ploy.
And (once again), I never made the case that the brutality of this procedure alone justified its being banned. Please stop refuting an argument I haven't attempted to make.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHC
Not related to stage of pregnancy but on the particular methodology which you specifically call "particularly brutal". What can you tell me about other methods that would convince me this one is particularly brutal? Then I'd have to eat my hat.
|
Don't eat your hat; it isn't healthy.
I consider staring at the exposed head of a fetus (which, at the stage this is normally done, looks quite like the head of an infant) and stabbing it with a sharp instrament to be more brutal than almost any form of earlier termination. But again, this was NEVER presented as an argument, only as observation. I'm sure I would make the same observation about a variety of procedures.
If the word "particularly" in "praticularly brutal" so seriously offends you that you cannot move past it, then please consider it retracted for the sake of the discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHC
Otherwise, I get the distinct impression that what you really mean to say is that you disagree with abortion altogether unless, possibly, there is some line in the sand where the womans health or life are jeopardized. I can respect that as an opinion and the arguments that go with it.
After I made that assertion you made another post that seems to indicate that I was correct.
Look here:
|
Since this decision did not address all abortions, I purposefully chose to avoid that topic.
But lest my silence on that issue lead you to accuse me of conspiring, I will inform you as best I can of my broader opinions:
I don't support late-term abortions at all except when needed to save the life or health of the mothers; I find the idea that mere physical location (in or out of the womb) is the defining factor of personhood to be absurd.
I am more undecided about abortion at earlier stages.
I'd hoped the banning of this particular procedure provides something of a middle ground, as it is supported by some elements on both sides of the larger pro-choice/pro-life debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHC
Do you really think that the left/right split was based upon the overwhelming preponderance of gynecological/obstetrical testimony supporting your opinion?
I don't.
|
You are not required to. But I have yet to encounter evidence that makes me believe the overwhelming preponderance of testimony was against it.