Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus1124
Ever heard of the terms slang or euphemism? There IS such a thing as "PBA", it is a term used specifically in reference to the procedure in question. That statment is about as stupid as saying their is no such a thing as "reefer", that we are talking about "marijuana" in a discussion of drug legalization.
|
The term is vague, inflammatory, and purely political in nature. It has no scientific or medical meaning and is purposely vague.
Quote:
|
Actually there is NO law declaring "abortion" legal, each and every method of proceedure is subject to its own forms of regulation and restriction. In the case of THIS method of abortion, it is now ILLEGAL (in case you hadn't been paying attention). Going back to my earlier analogy of a drug discussion, that is about as stupid as defending pot smoking because "smoking is legal".
|
Unless you are trying to say that my claim of abortion being legal is false then I see no point here.
Quote:
The AMA has ruled that PBA/ID&E is NEVER medically neccesary for the life or health of the mother. In EVER instance the delivery could be completed WITHOUT resulting in the death of the baby with NO adverse consequences to the mother.
The life/health needs of the mother are what requiring termination of the PREGNANCY, and in case you hadn't figured out by now based on the billions of people walking the Earth, it is NOT always neccesary to terminate the baby in order to end a pregnancy (in fact most births in this country are now induced--JUST as is the case in ID&E--the only difference being that in the ID&E the doctor, after inducing labor, then artificially forestalls delivery in order to kill the baby before it has fully emerged from the uterous.
Your problem is that you are utterly fixated on the notion that the medical purpose of the proceedure is to terminate the CHILD rather than the PREGNANCY. When the ACOG says it is sometimes the preferable method, it is comparing it ONLY to other options which result in the death of the baby, and specifically excluding all options for terminating the PREGNANCY, which (as is factored into the AMAs findings) includes live-birth.
That's because like most people, you are ignorant. The fact of the matter is, despite the contemporary tendency to use the word abortion as specifically referring to a termination of a pregnancy, which as you say purposefully kills the baby, is NOT supported by the ACTUAL definition of the word:
Notice the emphasis on termination/ending of the pregnancy rather than the baby. In practical terms, prior to "viability" they are one and the same, but not by definition.
|
I can only repeat that according to the medical experts most familiar with abortion, this procedure is sometimes the best and safest choice.
I volunteer for an organization (
HOPE project) which works to prevent unwanted pregnancy in teens. I also donate money to Mom's house and birthright. I suspect my work and my donations (modest thought they are) have prevented more abortions than this legislation. So maybe it's the congress and the court who is fixated on killing babies.
Abortion is (IMO) an evil thing. It needs to be reduced and, if possible, prevented. But it needs to be done by social, cultural, and religious activities which address the causes of unwanted pregnancy and the mindset which regards abortion as an acceptable birth control method. Not by legal tricks which interfere with a woman's legal rights and deny her the safest method of obtaining a legal medical procedure.