Explain the logic: anti abortion, birth control and welfare

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by Annie53

After both of us graduate medical school with an OB/GYN specialty then we can have that debate, until then, neither one of us is qualified to make those medical decisions.

It's not a moral decision. It's ICD-10 codes. Post them. We'll see if they match known and accepted risk percentages.

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Only to stabilize them if their life is in danger. They do NOT get complete medical treatment. Are you unaware of how EMTALA works?

Yes I am......and in the example I provided they would get surgery, they would get broken bones set.


Would they get physical therapy for those broken bones? Probably not.


So, who pays for the surgery? Everyone who does have health insurance.


The hospital raises its rates to cover unpaid services rendered. The cost of healthcare goes up, YOUR health insurance premiums go up.


So, YOU get to pay for someone else's careless behavior.

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof

Historically - and generally speaking - anytime someone wants to impose their personal feelings and beliefs on others and limit their choices, their most effective strategy is to assert their personal feelings and beliefs in terms of Divine commandments and/or absolute universal laws. [Which were not raised in the aforementioned 5 points]


Some classic examples of this have been the imposition of slavery (e.g., "the curse of Ham"), the control of women via religion (e.g., God wants women to be monogamous; God sanctions the burning of witches, etc.), the imposition of Western cultural practices on other cultures (e.g., God wants missionaries to spread the word to heathens; "God is on our side" in the Christian crusades, etc.). The basic idea is to claim that some sort of universal law justifies the imposition of my beliefs over yours, and if you don't agree with me, then I can feel justified in using force to make you conform to my wishes. [Which were not raised in the aforementioned 5 points]

Obviously we are social creatures and, as such, we need individuals to conform to some basic social rules - hence the general justification for the concept of government. Those who want to make abortion illegal see their view - "abortion is murder" - as a universal law, thus allowing the anti-abortionist to feel justified in imposing their beliefs on women who want to chose abortion. But applying the concept of "murder" depends on the concept of person in the context of "right to life." The anti-abortionist believes that personhood begins at conception - or sometime shortly thereafter - but this is not a universal belief. When all is said and done, the assertion that a fetus in a person in the legal sense is a matter of faith, not universal law.
[All aborted fetuses who wish they were not aborted, please raise your hand....]

On a related note: Should "uncivilized" necessarily mean illegal? Should a woman go to prison for having an abortion?
[Which was not raised in the aforementioned 5 points]

On the question of public funding, I think this is a reasonable area for compromise. General tax dollars should not fund abortions. (I think that restriction might already be in place.)
[Indirectly, they do fund agencies that advise, facilitate or perform said acts. Thus compelling taxpayers to fund that which they abhor.]

"Compulsory charity" is another deep issue that is not nearly as clear-cut as you might like. I was a libertarian for many years, so I understand your perspective on this. But I'm not going to get into this at the moment.
[If you do not comprehend that 'taking' from one to 'give' to another, under threat, duress and / or coercion is NOT SLAVERY, you might enjoy being a negro slave in 1840 Virginia.]

Thank you for your support.

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

It's not a moral decision. It's ICD-10 codes. Post them. We'll see if they match known and accepted risk percentages.

Exactly. It is not a moral decision, it is a MEDICAL decision. A MEDICAL decision made by DOCTORS.


If you want the codes posted so bad, YOU look them up. I will not, as I have explained, the point is moot as neither one of us is qualified to make medical decisions.


And.....I will ask you again.....


If a doctor doesn't make those decisions, WHO SHOULD? YOU?


Should doctors making these decisions have your number on speed dial? Ya know, so they can ask you what you think before they make a decision?

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by jetgraphics

#1 - killing unborn children is uncivilized.
#2 - using public funds to do so is abominable.
#3 - compulsory charity (socialism) is slavery.
#4 - shifting the blame is a tactic of irresponsible people.
#5 - actions have consequences.

So, what should happen to the children of the irresponsible?