U.S Supreme Court overturns (Roe v Wade) legalised abortion - Page 9

Jaymoss · 14-09-2022, 09:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

In the UK "fetal abnormalities", ended up including the easily treatable condition of cleft palate. If the baby is already dead, how can it count as abortion? The pregnancy has already ended.

same with ectopic as it will never result is a child

BenMcr · 14-09-2022, 10:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

If the baby is already dead, how can it count as abortion? The pregnancy has already ended.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

same with ectopic as it will never result is a child

That doesn't mean that treatment wouldn't include an abortion, unless you're trying to split the definition

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abortion

Quote:

the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus:

Jaymoss · 14-09-2022, 10:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenMcr

That doesn't mean that treatment wouldn't include an abortion, unless you're trying to split the definition

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abortion

Yet the British Pregnancy Advisory Service states "Abortion is when a pregnancy is ended so that it doesn't result in the birth of a child." An ectopic pregnancy never will result in a baby as a lot of medical emergencies would not also

It is all semantics anyway I just worded my post badly

nomadking · 14-09-2022, 10:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenMcr

That doesn't mean that treatment wouldn't include an abortion, unless you're trying to split the definition

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abortion

So that would include where babies are born alive, but a doctor cuts their spinal cord with scissors, and the body placed in a freezer?

BenMcr · 14-09-2022, 10:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

So that would include where babies are born alive, but a doctor cuts their spinal cord with scissors, and the body placed in a freezer?

No, it would not. That's a very right-wing US talking point of 'after-birth abortion' and it's not helpful to what is already an emotive subject.

**Hugh** · 14-09-2022, 10:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

So that would include where babies are born alive, but a doctor cuts their spinal cord with scissors, and the body placed in a freezer?

For those who don’t understand the reference…

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dr...gosnell-trial/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell

What nomadking didn’t mention is the the Doctor was prosecuted for these actions, and found guilty…

Quote:

In May 2013, Gosnell was convicted of first-degree murder in the deaths of three of the infants and involuntary manslaughter in the death of Karnamaya Mongar, an adult patient at the clinic following an abortion procedure. Gosnell was also convicted of 21 felony counts of illegal late-term abortion, and 211 counts of violating Pennsylvania's 24-hour informed consent law.

nomadking · 14-09-2022, 11:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

For those who don’t understand the reference…

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dr...gosnell-trial/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell

What nomadking didn’t mention is the the Doctor was prosecuted for these actions, and found guilty…

Of just 3 murders.
Caught by accident, with prior evidence ignored for years by the authorities. So how many other similar cases are out there?
He wasn't the only one involved. Several others that were involved, and they considered that there was a Constitutional Right to do it. Why else did they think it ok?

Quote:

Pearl Mabel Gosnell, Kermit's wife, was charged with abortion at 24 or more weeks, conspiracy and participating in a corrupt organization. She pleaded guilty to these charges on December 13, 2011. Pearl Gosnell was sentenced to 7 to 23 months in prison.

Less than a week per killing.

Quote:

Practice staff routinely delivered living babies in the third trimester, subsequently killing them (or ensuring their death).[60] As part of this, fetuses and babies had their demise "ensured" post-operatively by severing of the spinal cord with scissors, known by staff as "snipping". Most of these were deemed infeasible to prosecute because files and other evidence were not held, although the report stipulates they numbered in the "hundreds".

**Hugh** · 14-09-2022, 11:15

But they were illegal acts, so I am not sure of your point…

1andrew1 · 14-09-2022, 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

Of just 3 murders.
Caught by accident, with prior evidence ignored for years by the authorities. So how many other similar cases are out there?
He wasn't the only one involved. Several others that were involved, and they considered that there was a Constitutional Right to do it. Why else did they think it ok?
Less than a week per killing.

Harold Shipman murdered 250 of his own patients but no one's suggesting we close down GP's surgeries because of this.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Harold-Shipman

nomadking · 14-09-2022, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Harold Shipman murdered 250 of his own patients but no one's suggesting we close down GP's surgeries because of this.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Harold-Shipman

Were others involved? No, so not relevant.

1andrew1 · 14-09-2022, 16:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

Were others involved? No, so not relevant.

Why is the number of murderers involved important?

nomadking · 14-09-2022, 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

But they were illegal acts, so I am not sure of your point…

That's just it, only 3 murder charges.

Quote:

and over 200 lesser counts including infanticide and racketeering

And the others who took part, did so at gunpoint, or did they agree with it? They ALSO felt they weren't doing anything wrong or illegal. Why is that?

**Chris** · 14-09-2022, 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

That's just it, only 3 murder charges.

And the others who took part, did so at gunpoint, or did they agree with it? They ALSO felt they weren't doing anything wrong or illegal. Why is that?

Not for the first time I find myself wishing you’d just make an actual point instead of trying to play Rumpole of the sudding Bailey.

nomadking · 14-09-2022, 16:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Why is the number of murderers involved important?

It's about whether it was the secret actions of one person, compared to the actions of several people, who all considered it ok.
The secret actions of one person, do not reflect wider than that. Having several people who took part, or were prepared to ignore things, DO reflect on the wider attitudes.
Shipman knew he was doing wrong. Gosnell and his staff DIDN'T think they were doing anything wrong. Doctors who had worked, might have gone and set up their own clinics, and operated in the same way.

BenMcr · 14-09-2022, 17:00

But what are you trying to argue?

If someone does illegal things, that's still illegal no matter if they thought what they were doing was legal.