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.
The day that men are able to give birth from their nether regions, they can start telling women what we can do with our bodies. I guess women are safe for awhile.
Can you imagine if we DARED to make a law that said no man could get a vasectomy? None, not even if the wife wanted him to? Or, if we made a law requiring all men to get neutered? LOL, can't you just hear the outrage "but but but, you can't tell me what to do!" That's right boys, you are not us, you will not make laws telling us what we can & cannot do.
What is wrong, Great Day? I thought you were pro life. Yet it is ok to let women die? !
Excuse me but, when noting that it is not the Doctors place to decide, I'm not expressing my opinion. I'm tell you what the LAW is. Your husband could sue all day long - and would lose - because that is the LAW.
My "opinion" is meaningless on what I stated above (and before).
Can't you understand the difference between your personal opinion (which btw I can understand) and what the law says? That they can be, and often are, different?
Excuse me but, when noting that it is not the Doctors place to decide, I'm not expressing my opinion. I'm tell you what the LAW is. Your husband could sue all day long - and would lose - because that is the LAW.
My "opinion" is meaningless on what I stated above (and before).
Can't you understand the difference between your personal opinion (which btw I can understand) and what the law says? That they can be, and often are, different?
I understand. I do not believe what you say is correct though. I do not believe the Law says to just let people die. And I noticed you did not answer to anything else I said. Just want to keep on saying "it is not the doctors place".
I doubt husbands would lose if they sued for this. Very much so.
it is ok to treat illegals even if that is against the law but not women, huh? With this whole healthcare reform, conservatives were saying "Anyone can go to a doctor and still be treated." But I guess not. I don't know. No offense, but you guys are making less sense everyday.
If you do not have anything else to say other than "not the doctors place", then please don't bother responding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by karfar
Can you imagine if we DARED to make a law that said no man could get a vasectomy? None, not even if the wife wanted him to? Or, if we made a law requiring all men to get neutered? LOL, can't you just hear the outrage "but but but, you can't tell me what to do!" That's right boys, you are not us, you will not make laws telling us what we can & cannot do.
Can you imagine the outrage? WE ARE MEN! Blah blah blah! They cannot tell us what to do. But but!
Of course not. Women's rights all the way.
I am with you, Karfer. 100 percent. We are in 2009 in America. Land of the free.
I understand. I do not believe what you say is correct though. I do not believe the Law says to just let people die. And I noticed you did not answer to anything else I said. Just want to keep on saying "it is not the doctors place".
I doubt husbands would lose if they sued for this. Very much so.
it is ok to treat illegals even if that is against the law but not women, huh? With this whole healthcare reform, conservatives were saying "Anyone can go to a doctor and still be treated." But I guess not. I don't know. No offense, but you guys are making less sense everyday.
If you do not have anything else to say other than "not the doctors place", then please don't bother responding.
Can you imagine the outrage? WE ARE MEN! Blah blah blah! They cannot tell us what to do. But but!
Of course not. Women's rights all the way.
I am with you, Karfer. 100 percent. We are in 2009 in America. Land of the free.
You are mixing your metaphors -
If a woman is CONSCIOUS - she can tell the doctor what SHE WANTS. If the woman (patient) is UNCONSCIOUS, it is the next of kin who makes the decision to abort and save the woman or vice versa.
As for the husband losing that I mentioned: I represented a man in such a case - and lost
As for illegals - a totally different subject - TOTALLY DIFFERENT. I'm really surprised you cannot see nor understand the difference.
Yes, Illegals have babies here. So what? Most pregnant females ARE CONSCIOUS when they come in.
So - do you understand now that if the woman (patient) is CONSCIOUS - she makes the choice? Unconscious - it is next of kin?
In my situation, my wife was UNCONSCIOUS - in a coma. Hence why it fell to me to make the decision - not the doctor.
[quote=Theliberalvoice;10974822]I understand. I do not believe what you say is correct though. I do not believe the Law says to just let people die. And I noticed you did not answer to anything else I said. Just want to keep on saying "it is not the doctors place".
/quote]
Yes, I too have a hard time understanding this but don't want to belabor such a touchy subject. But if I understand things correctly, If I don't carry an emergency card that asks for my life to be saved, that means my spouse has the legal right to choose the fetus over mine merely because abortion is wrong?
It's hard for me to come to grips with that, because yes, I'm a mother, and to lose my beloved girl would tear me up, and yes I'd give my life for her; however, if I did not make that arrangement with my husband prior I'd like to think that my life has as much value as the unborn child's. Like I've said before, putting a fetus's life front and center over the mother's is WRONG. I MATTER TOO.
Yes, I too have a hard time understanding this but don't want to belabor such a touchy subject. But if I understand things correctly, If I don't carry an emergency card that asks for my life to be saved, that means my spouse has the legal right to choose the fetus over mine merely because abortion is wrong?
It's hard for me to come to grips with that, because yes, I'm a mother, and to lose my beloved girl would tear me up, and yes I'd give my life for her; however, if I did not make that arrangement with my husband prior I'd like to think that my life has as much value as the unborn child's. Like I've said before, putting a fetus's life front and center over the mother's is WRONG. I MATTER TOO.
I do not believe believe such a law exists either. Maybe Great day had a misunderstanding? I am sure that if there was a pregnant women who came in from an accident, all would be done to save her before the fetus. That is the way it should be unless otherwise told. If her husband has proof or if the woman is able to speak still, then yes. Otherwise, save the woman.
I do not understand how some people are so against saving the woman versus the unborn. It is quite stupid really. The woman matters more in my opinion. She is the living person. She is entitled to her life before the fetus is.
No,I do not think if you do not carry a legal emergency card, it does not mean your spouse gets to choose.
Yes, I too have a hard time understanding this but don't want to belabor such a touchy subject. But if I understand things correctly, If I don't carry an emergency card that asks for my life to be saved, that means my spouse has the legal right to choose the fetus over mine merely because abortion is wrong?
No, if you are not conscious, and you have no directive available stating that in case of accident, you want your life saved and not the unborn child, then yes, it falls to the Next of Kin (NOTE: I did not say "spouse") because not every pregnant female has a "spouse" to decide to save the mother by aborting the unborn (realizing that this is not always necessary) or saving the unborn.
It is NOT the Doctors choice.
More often than not, Doctors try to save BOTH the Mother and Baby.
No, if you are not conscious, and you have no directive available stating that in case of accident, you want your life saved and not the unborn child, then yes, it falls to the Next of Kin (NOTE: I did not say "spouse") because not every pregnant female has a "spouse" to decide to save the mother by aborting the unborn (realizing that this is not always necessary) or saving the unborn.
It is NOT the Doctors choice.
More often than not, Doctors try to save BOTH the Mother and Baby.
Ok, fine that's the law and all....you're saying to me that the choice between the mother and the baby, the baby wins?? Again, I only HOPE that you were acting on HER desire. I'm actually shuddering here...
Ok, fine that's the law and all....you're saying to me that the choice between the mother and the baby, the baby wins?? Again, I only HOPE that you were acting on HER desire.
If you are UNCONSICIOUS , and no directive from YOU is available, it then falls to the NEXT OF KIN to decide who to save.
I cannot make it any clearer than that.
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.
I am sure that if there was a pregnant women who came in from an accident, all would be done to save her before the fetus. That is the way it should be unless otherwise told. If her husband has proof or if the woman is able to speak still, then yes. Otherwise, save the woman. 