Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I support abortion with strict limitations... early as possible in the first trimester, and only in cases of rape/forced sex. Seems to me if someone forced you to have sex, and you got pregnant as a result, you would take care of the issue as quickly as possible, not wait until the third trimester, when you are about to have the baby, to decide to kill it. That is entirely messed up and irresponsible.
I agree that during the interview he used a poor choice of words, but even then he as not advocating the killing of a just-born alive child. No one is.
True. From your link:
Northam's office said in a statement on Wednesday that his comments were taken out of context and that Republicans "are trying to play politics with women's health."
"No woman seeks a third trimester abortion except in the case of tragic or difficult circumstances, such as a nonviable pregnancy or in the event of severe fetal abnormalities, and the governor's comments were limited to the actions physicians would take in the event that a woman in those circumstances went into labor," Ofirah Yheskel, Northam's spokesperson, wrote in the statement.
"Attempts to extrapolate these comments otherwise is in bad faith and underscores exactly why the governor believes physicians and women, not legislators, should make these difficult and deeply personal medical decisions"....
I heard exactly what Northam said. If he doesn't understand the laws he's discussing, then he should explain himself. He hasn't.
What is it that you think you heard?
Every report I've read clearly stated that he was talking about an infant with severe deformities and the horror of parents and doctors having to make the heart-breaking decision to not prolong its suffering.
Absolutely no different than what is done when someone has a DNR order and is not resuscitated after suffering a heart attack or stroke.
Please do show the governor's full statement when defending your interpretation.
It's far more complicated then you portray it. Delivering a healthy baby and then killing it is not an option. If the baby is on life support, with major health problems, deformities, quality of life issues is when this comes into play.
This is why I hate the anti-choice right.
Always distortions and lies.
The governor's comments where in exactly this context.
A late term baby is delivered during an intended abortion that has so many deformities or problems that the life expectancy is very short and the cost of care for it in the remaining days/weeks it has to live very high.
This is where the "conversation" he referenced between the doctor and and woman is had during delivery. The conversation is similar to what happens at the end of life when the family agrees that moving a dying elderly patient to hospice and stopping expensive procedures is the best option. This scenario in the context of a baby that is born alive is also exceedingly rare.
The anti-choice right would have you believe the conversation was over whether or not to terminate the life of a healthy baby who would otherwise live just fine simply because the mother does not want it.
Every report I've read clearly stated that he was talking about an infant with severe deformities and the horror of parents and doctors having to make the heart-breaking decision to not prolong its suffering.
Absolutely no different than what is done when someone has a DNR order and is not resuscitated after suffering a heart attack or stroke.
Please do show the governor's full statement when defending your interpretation.
I guess I don't view a baby with disabilities as any less human than what the pro-abortion people would call a healthy baby.
I guess I don't view a baby with disabilities as any less human than what the pro-abortion people would call a healthy baby.
Someday you should research the horrors that a developing fetus can develop. I once (in 1975, while attending college in Denton, Texas) went to the state school to apply for a job. The woman that interviewed me warned me that I would be exposed to severely deformed children. After walking about some, I saw what she meant. These poor children had no life; they barely existed. Their parents of course were unable to provide care, and so to this state school the children would go.
Some people seem to have the idea that a 'deformed' baby means the cuddly and cognizant Down Syndrome children that are often featured on television like for the special olympics. However, there are other chromosome disorders that will make you question the existence of God.
Often such afflicted fetuses spontaneously abort, but some are viable to birth, and off to the state home they go.
Huh. Spontaneous abortion. Natural and, I would assume, ordered by God. If God did not like abortions, perhaps He should not have created natural abortions.
Here's a poll question for the OP. Do you support the Conservatives' position of slashing the social safety net so all these children who are not aborted but who are born into poor households are denied food, shelter and medical care?
No need to respond. We all know the answer would be a resounding YES! from the forced-birther crowd.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
