Skip to main content

View Diary: Open thread for night owls: Roe v. Wade at 38 (376 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Because sometimes (5+ / 0-)

    the doctors are unable to see fetal development until the late stages of the pregnancy, or women don't develop complications until the second trimester. Sometimes doctors delay making a decision as to whether the fetus is actually compromised, or send the woman to specialist after specialist, until they finally decide that abortion is the only answer and the woman is in her third trimester.

    How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

    by skohayes on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 04:28:54 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I think those are "good cause", which is (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rainmanjr

      entirely different than the rationale that a woman gets to do whatever she pleases because it is her body.   Most women do not have abortions frivolously, but some dilly dally around for stupid reasons (theirs or someone else's) and then have them too late to be comfortable.  And the disabled community will object to wanting to abort a baby because it has birth defects, and here we go again.  Perhaps you are right.  Regulation often develops a life of its own making none better than any.  I see zero tolerance criminalizing our kids for frivolous reasons, which is why I am also opposed to any anti-bullying "laws".  

      What we need is a Democrat in the White House.

      by dkmich on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 05:05:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  So you think (0+ / 0-)

        that women who want to have abortions, yet are prevented from doing so by other people's stupid decisions, should be stopped after some random point in their gestation? Because it becomes uncomfortable for you?
        And why does the disabled community need to be informed about a woman's very private decision?
        Some people can't afford to bring babies into the world with severe bith defects. It's a simple fact.

        How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

        by skohayes on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 05:32:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Then the child could be adopted out. (0+ / 0-)

          I'll grant you adoption becomes less likely for such a child but many do survive and overcome disabilities.  In fact, if you believe in such things, it may be why they are being put on Earth.  It is not our right to make a value-of-life decision upon someone else--even one waiting to arrive.  They can make such a decision for themselves later on.  Hopefully it will be when they can make a rational one (and I support suicide as sometimes rational).

          "Put on your high-heeled sneakers/it's Party time" - Steely Dan.

          by rainmanjr on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 05:56:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What are the odds of someone adopting them? (0+ / 0-)

            If they are born to the wrong parents, the damage goes beyond what they are born with.  Quality of life is everything. I support suicide as rational under the right circumstance - end of life.

            What we need is a Democrat in the White House.

            by dkmich on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 06:03:32 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's not for us to say. (0+ / 0-)

              It's a personal decision based on experience, outlook and future possibilities.  None of which can be made by a fetus.  If it's in the 3rd-Tri then the child has a right to be born and given a chance to make that decision itself.  I would support it's right to say no...I'm history, I'm a ghost.  ha ha.  I'm a guy who holds that life has very little to recommend it, as well, so don't put me in a wrong camp.  

              "Put on your high-heeled sneakers/it's Party time" - Steely Dan.

              by rainmanjr on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 06:11:22 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  So you want to force a woman (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            schnecke21, tardis10

            to carry what could be a severely disabled infant to full term on the chance that it might be adopted?
            Nevermind that, what right does the public have to invade a woman's private medical records, which is the only way they would find out why she had an abortion?
            I certainly hope you're not advocating that we start making information like that public.

            How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

            by skohayes on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 06:11:42 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  No, not a severely disabled one. (0+ / 0-)

              A fetus that has a disability (in late term that was known of earlier) should, in my view, be born and be open to adoption or made a ward of the state.  When that child is old enough they may commit suicide if they like for whatever reason they like.  Life is their decision, then.  We protect those who are not able to make such a decision and that's why living wills are important.  We can't bring this issue to a conclusion just throwing the same demands around on either side.  Got another solution (besides arresting people just for hanging around a clinic and looking mad)?  As for privacy, it doesn't exist anymore, anyway, and I'm resigned to it.  I don't like it but I am resigned to it.  I don't tell my Dr of anything I'd rather the insurance company not know.

              "Put on your high-heeled sneakers/it's Party time" - Steely Dan.

              by rainmanjr on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:36:05 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Why, rainmanjr, is it your right to make that (0+ / 0-)

            decision for anyone other than yourself? That's a lot of the issue here, why those not themselves in the situation, insist on making a decision, many decisions, for other people whom they have never met and probably will never meet. Virtually the only situation in our modern society where the rights of a human being involved are deliberately subordinated in this way by anonymous others.

            •  ??? (0+ / 0-)

              My view gives a mother every possible opportunity to abort the child, for whatever reason, anytime before the 3rd trimester or after under certain conditions.  If for birth control or economic hardship then I don't believe taxpayers should pay for it.  These women are making decisions for someone else but I can't?  There's no way to deal with any social question without making a decision for someone else.  Simply repeating a point that I've already argued against many times is not going to change my mind.  I think my view goes a long way to solving the problem, stopping the violence and electing more Dem's.

              "Put on your high-heeled sneakers/it's Party time" - Steely Dan.

              by rainmanjr on Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 09:29:49 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Did you read the whole comment? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dsb, skohayes

          You brought me full circle, and I concluded by saying

          Perhaps you are right.  Regulation often develops a life of its own making none better than any.

          Laws are often made of good intentions, but often become as abusive and bad in practice as that which they were passed to prevent.

          When it comes to some things, one has to trust the good will and intentions of their fellow man, despite those that misuse their place on the planet and convince you that the human race is a lost cause.

          What we need is a Democrat in the White House.

          by dkmich on Sat Jan 22, 2011 at 06:01:36 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  You assume the presence of doctors. (0+ / 0-)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site