Roe v Wade is on deck

[laughing dog]

Those safeguards do not exist absent law. I literally showed you a facility that will do abortions for any reason up to 35 weeks 6 days of gestation, in a state where there are literally no limitations in place at all. There are no safeguards.

You just quoted one.

There is no absolute certainty in determining how far along the gestation period is nor the risks in carrying to term or delivering, or anything else. It seems to this observer that you are trying to micromanage a complex situation that is essentially none of your immediate concern.

I don’t like the choices many people make, but when it comes to their health, I think it is reasonable to reduce/eliminate as many obstacles as practicable. Placing restrictions based on estimates of age on when a legal abortion seem to me to be such an obstacle.

I suspect that is the view of most of those with whom you disagree.

 

[Elixir]

You just quoted one.

^ Shows the level of rationality driving Ems’ “position”.

Those safeguards do not exist absent law

The idea that reproductive health decisions should be made by law enforcement, is the most destructive and inhumane possible course to pursue.

There is PLENTY of constraint that is operative at all levels of healthcare, and neither Ems or anyone else here has offered one shred of evidence that abortion restricting laws have ever benefited anyone.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

In what way do you think this is overriding the doctor's opinion?

By the introduction of a delay.

I have not introduced a delay - this is something I've clarified repeatedly, so you are once again INACCURATELY presenting my position, and at this point, I have to conclude that it's intentional mischaracterization.

Time is of the essence, and the anti-abortion lobby knows full well that if they can drag things out in court for long enough, the result will go their way by default.

Justice delayed is justice denied, and never more so than in the case of legal wrangling over whether or not to grant someone the right to an abortion.

Justice is best served by denying the courts and the legislature any input at all, prior to the act.

I gather this is why your country has no legal restrictions on abortion... oh wait...

This is a common misnomer, but bilby isn't in charge of Australia. He isn't even from there!

So it isn't technically "his country".

 

[Elixir]

I have not introduced a delay - this is something I've clarified repeatedly, so you are once again INACCURATELY presenting my position, and at this point, I have to conclude that it's intentional mischaracterization.

CLARIFIED?
"I don't have all the answers" isn't clarification, it's evasion.

The solution put forth by Emily is that law enforcement shall act instantaneously to intercede to save the fetus if "law enforcement" instantly deems it inappropriate. See? No time delay. YOU introduced the time delay!

 

[bilby]

This is a common misnomer, but bilby isn't in charge of Australia. He isn't even from there!

So it isn't technically "his country".

Sure it is. It's a local tradition that the country belongs to you, if you turn up from England and say "It's nice here, so it belongs to me now". The existing residents don't get to say "no".

 

[pood]

This is a common misnomer, but bilby isn't in charge of Australia. He isn't even from there!

So it isn't technically "his country".

Sure it is. It's a local tradition that the country belongs to you, if you turn up from England and say "It's nice here, so it belongs to me now". The existing residents don't get to say "no".

Trump says, “It’s nice up there, so the country belongs to me,” referring to Canada. And the residents don’t get to say “no.” Seriously, many observers believe the orange lunatic is starting a trade war to crater Canada’s economy to soften it up for annexation. These are unbelievable times.

 

[Emily Lake]

Of course there are safeguards in place. They just are not what you agree with or understand

What safeguards are in place?

 

[Emily Lake]

2) I can read, you can read, everyone can read, bilby. This is what you wrote, and what I objected to:

I understand your hatred of freedom commitment to rule of law, but as I don't share your authoritarian bent, I don't agree with it at all.

Are you trying to pretend that the stikethrough portion of that was NOT intended to insult and denigrate me? That it was NOT intended to portray me as evil?

No, I am not trying to pretend that at all.

The strikethrough portion carries the exact same meaning as the following five words, just with a different spin. I suspect you are oblivious to that, so I left it in for clarity.

If the cap fits...

No, it absolutely does NOT carry the exact same meaning. Commitment to rule of law is something that all well-functioning societies must have, or they devolve to anarchy ruled by predatory warlords. It is not even remotely synonymous to "hatred of freedom".

 

[bilby]

2) I can read, you can read, everyone can read, bilby. This is what you wrote, and what I objected to:

I understand your hatred of freedom commitment to rule of law, but as I don't share your authoritarian bent, I don't agree with it at all.

Are you trying to pretend that the stikethrough portion of that was NOT intended to insult and denigrate me? That it was NOT intended to portray me as evil?

No, I am not trying to pretend that at all.

The strikethrough portion carries the exact same meaning as the following five words, just with a different spin. I suspect you are oblivious to that, so I left it in for clarity.

If the cap fits...

No, it absolutely does NOT carry the exact same meaning. Commitment to rule of law is something that all well-functioning societies must have, or they devolve to anarchy ruled by predatory warlords. It is not even remotely synonymous to "hatred of freedom".

Anarchy is just freedom you don't like; Freedom is just anarchy you are in favour of.

 

[Emily Lake]

I just listed safeguards.

You didn't list any safeguards. You merely asserted that they must exist in some fashion.

You said that doctors have professional and personal ethics - which is true, but you haven't in any way demonstrated that any professional ethics pertaining to abortion are actually documented anywhere at all. Furthermore, this creates a position where if a doctor's personal ethics are such that they believe any woman should have a right to abortion at any time, regardless of how far along in the pregnancy they are, then they will be in accordance with their personal ethics to perform an abortion 3 days prior to delivery. In this case, those personal ethics boil down to whatever the doctor believes whether a reasonable person would agree with it or not.

You said that doctors are guided by their hospital and the AMA - which is marginally true but incomplete. First off, not all doctors are subject to hospitals, and there are several facilities that are substantially dedicated to providing abortion services and have no affiliation with any hospitals at all, Planned Parenthood for example. And many doctors aren't part of AMA, it's not a requirement - only around 15% to 20% of all practicing doctors in the US are members of AMA. But even if a doctor is affiliated with a hospital and a member of AMA... you haven't actually referenced what guidelines and safeguards any specific hospital has in place, nor what the guidelines for abortion are from the perspective of AMA.

Here - AMA's statement on abortion. This is the entirety of it. Can you tell me what part of this you see as constituting a safeguard?

Abortion | AMA-Code

The Principles of Medical Ethics of the AMA do not prohibit a physician from performing an abortion in accordance with good medical practice.

code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org

Planned Parenthood's only statements on abortion are that they comply with state laws on it. They have no stated or listed safeguards or guidelines for when an abortion would be considered inappropriate.

You chose to believe they are inadequate which is your right to chose.

I don't choose to believe they're inadequate; I observe that they are nonexistent. Right now, the only safeguards in place are those legally put in place by each state. Many of those "safeguards" are absurdly regressive, such as total bans or requirements for significant counseling, etc. And some of those "safeguards" are literally no-holds-barred, such as in Oregon where the "safeguard" is that there are no restrictions on abortion at all, regardless of gestational stage.

 

[Emily Lake]

The idea that reproductive health decisions should be made by law enforcement, is the most destructive and inhumane possible course to pursue.

Here's a reproductive health decision that I 100% support being made by law enforcement: It is illegal to remove the healthy reproductive organs of a minor.

 

[laughing dog]

I just listed safeguards.

You didn't list any safeguards. You merely asserted that they must exist in some fashion.

You said that doctors have professional and personal ethics - which is true, but you haven't in any way demonstrated that any professional ethics pertaining to abortion are actually documented anywhere at all. Furthermore, this creates a position where if a doctor's personal ethics are such that they believe any woman should have a right to abortion at any time, regardless of how far along in the pregnancy they are, then they will be in accordance with their personal ethics to perform an abortion 3 days prior to delivery. In this case, those personal ethics boil down to whatever the doctor believes whether a reasonable person would agree with it or not.

You said that doctors are guided by their hospital and the AMA - which is marginally true but incomplete. First off, not all doctors are subject to hospitals, and there are several facilities that are substantially dedicated to providing abortion services and have no affiliation with any hospitals at all, Planned Parenthood for example. And many doctors aren't part of AMA, it's not a requirement - only around 15% to 20% of all practicing doctors in the US are members of AMA. But even if a doctor is affiliated with a hospital and a member of AMA... you haven't actually referenced what guidelines and safeguards any specific hospital has in place, nor what the guidelines for abortion are from the perspective of AMA.

Here - AMA's statement on abortion. This is the entirety of it. Can you tell me what part of this you see as constituting a safeguard?

Abortion | AMA-Code

The Principles of Medical Ethics of the AMA do not prohibit a physician from performing an abortion in accordance with good medical practice.

code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org

Why did you omit the text above that which referred to the physician’s best judgment?

 

[Elixir]

Why did you omit the text above that which referred to the physician’s best judgment?

That wouldn’t fit with law enforcement having the final say over reproductive health decisions now, would it?
I’m sure the omission was not intentional, or part of a bad faith argument, right?

There’s also a bit about snitching on colleagues who are doing stuff that Emily fears. It’s required. The best interest of the patient is also in there, but the best interest of a 24+ week fetus is not. That has to rankle Ems something fierce.

 

[Toni]

Of course there are safeguards in place. They just are not what you agree with or understand

What safeguards are in place?

I’ve discussed them upthread.

You seem to believe that only laws will do.

I disagree and in fact such laws have caused women to lose their lives.

 

[Jarhyn]

Why did you omit the text above that which referred to the physician’s best judgment?

That wouldn’t fit with law enforcement having the final say over reproductive health decisions now, would it?
I’m sure the omission was not intentional, or part of a bad faith argument, right?

There’s also a bit about snitching on colleagues who are doing stuff that Emily fears. It’s required. The best interest of the patient is also in there, but the best interest of a 24+ week fetus is not. That has to rankle Ems something fierce.

What is it with women seeking such power over women? It is distinctly toxic.

 

[Emily Lake]

Why did you omit the text above that which referred to the physician’s best judgment?

In what way is "physician's best judgement" either materially different or more safeguarded than "physician's personal ethics"?

 

[Emily Lake]

Why did you omit the text above that which referred to the physician’s best judgment?

That wouldn’t fit with law enforcement having the final say over reproductive health decisions now, would it?
I’m sure the omission was not intentional, or part of a bad faith argument, right?

There’s also a bit about snitching on colleagues who are doing stuff that Emily fears. It’s required. The best interest of the patient is also in there, but the best interest of a 24+ week fetus is not. That has to rankle Ems something fierce.

Why do you feel the need to incessantly and repeatedly make shit up?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why did you omit the text above that which referred to the physician’s best judgment?

In what way is "physician's best judgement" either materially different or more safeguarded than "physician's personal ethics"?

Because their license depends on it.

 

[Emily Lake]

Of course there are safeguards in place. They just are not what you agree with or understand

What safeguards are in place?

I’ve discussed them upthread.

Link, please?

You seem to believe that only laws will do.

I think regulations or laws are the only concrete safeguards we really have. Everything else ends up being someone's preference of personal beliefs - and personal beliefs are only safeguards if those personal beliefs completely align with yours.

Actual Safeguard: All firearm purchasers must undergo a background check
Meaningless 'Safeguard': Sellers will use their best judgment to decide whether or not to sell a firearm to someone who wishes to buy them

Actual Safeguard: Teachers and Caregivers working with children under age 13 without parental presence will be subjected to a background check and preliminary investigation which can include social media posts and shared video content
Meaningless 'Safeguard': Employers will use their personal beliefs and ethics to decide whether or not to hire someone who will be working with little kids.

The law doesn't have to be a step-by-step recipe, it doesn't have to be onerous. But without some regulatory or legal basis, it's not a safeguard at all, it's "trust me bro" and nothing more.

I disagree and in fact such laws have caused women to lose their lives.

Some laws have caused women to lose their lives. But not all laws are created equal. The fact that a bad and overly restrictive law has caused problems is NOT an effective argument for no laws at all.

 

[Emily Lake]

Why did you omit the text above that which referred to the physician’s best judgment?

In what way is "physician's best judgement" either materially different or more safeguarded than "physician's personal ethics"?

Because their license depends on it.

No, it doesn't.

How about you go find me the language that specifies that a physician's license depends on them employing safeguards to prevent the termination of health fetuses in healthy mothers in the later stage of gestation? Show me that language and I'll change my mind. Go on, I'll wait.