- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 5th Circuit in NOLA tosses injunction. Texas abortion clinics to close.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 9:29 am to The Spleen
Posted on 10/3/14 at 9:29 am to The Spleen
Dr. / patient confidentiality doesn't seem like a reasonable argument. We still have laws against physician-assisted suicide, which is a private decision. I guess what I'm getting is the inconsistency of laws and how they are applied. For example, California law states -
Murder is the "unlawful killing"...fetus. Unless it's carried out "lawfully" such is the case with abortion. The law still recognizes that it is in fact killing of the fetus and that, that killing could be considered murder under the appropriate circumstances. If a fetus is not yet human, does it have a right to life? If no, how can it be murder?
quote:
187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
Murder is the "unlawful killing"...fetus. Unless it's carried out "lawfully" such is the case with abortion. The law still recognizes that it is in fact killing of the fetus and that, that killing could be considered murder under the appropriate circumstances. If a fetus is not yet human, does it have a right to life? If no, how can it be murder?
0
Posted on 10/3/14 at 9:36 am to Vegas Bengal
quote:
Something like that. Can't perform abortions unless they have local privileges.
So it's a law designed to protect women from back-alley abortions?
Posted on 10/3/14 at 9:44 am to Meauxjeaux
Nah. It's a law to restrict the right of doctor's to perform an elective, and legal, procedure.
I'm all for less government intrusion.
I'm all for less government intrusion.
This post was edited on 10/3/14 at 9:45 am
Posted on 10/3/14 at 9:53 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:
So it's a law designed to protect women from back-alley abortions?
It'll actually cause more back-alley abortions.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 10:22 am to FalseProphet
quote:I'm all for consistency.
I'm all for less government intrusion.
If the admission privilege requirement was in place across the board, it would be justified. It isn't. It's a BS requirement contrived to serve a different purpose.
It is the same kind of inconsistency that, on the other side of the equation, allowed Kermit Gosnell to perform "medical" procedures on underage girls in his filthy shithole of an office without parental consent. Whereas in a state of the art medical center, MDs cannot lay a procedural finger on an underage patient without a parent's permission.
This post was edited on 10/3/14 at 11:18 am
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:03 am to Elephino
Quick question: Can a doctor, who is an employee at a hospital, be forced to do a NON-Lifesaving abortion that he/she may be against doing on moral/religious grounds?
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:08 am to SundayFunday
quote:No.
Quick question: Can a doctor, who is an employee at a hospital, be forced to do a NON-Lifesaving abortion that he/she may be against doing on moral/religious grounds?
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:12 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:
Posted by Meauxjeaux
quote:
So it's a law designed to protect women from back-alley abortions?
It's a law designed to make it impossible to get an abortion in Texas. Protection for women is a laughable front, considering how abortions will be under the table and much more dangerous now that the clinics are forced to close.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:17 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Just like how dentists who use laughing gas are required to have admitting privileges at a hospital with an ER within 30 miles, to protect the safety of dental patients.
Dentists aren't medical doctors and don't have admitting privileges - that requires a medical doctor's signature. If a procedure is deemed risky enough, most either consult with an oral surgeon (a medical doctor) or refer the patient out to an oral surgeon. If the procedure is both risky and the patient, himself, is high risk, then they have the option to perform the procedure in the hospital.
Next, you'll be telling me that personal trainers need admitting privileges at a hospital...
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:18 am to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:
Posted by Old Hellen Yeller quote: Posted by Meauxjeaux quote: So it's a law designed to protect women from back-alley abortions? It's a law designed to make it impossible to get an abortion in Texas. Protection for women is a laughable front, considering how abortions will be under the table and much more dangerous now that the clinics are forced to close.
This is literally straight out of the response handbook. More people will die. Scare tactic scare tactic scare tactic.
The abortion industry brought this on itself with their totally disregard of clinics maintaining min standards.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:22 am to STEVED00
quote:Then legislate that those clinics must meet the same requirements as do similar OPT facilities. Don't contrive some backdoor BS.
The abortion industry brought this on itself with their totally disregard of clinics maintaining min standards.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:25 am to Old Hellen Yeller
I've seen laws and rules and regulations that are designed with a different end outcome in mind than what it was sold as originally.
Things like "necessarily bankrupt" coal plants and the like.
Are all sides being consistent in their support for or against these types of laws/rules/regs?
Things like "necessarily bankrupt" coal plants and the like.
Are all sides being consistent in their support for or against these types of laws/rules/regs?
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:29 am to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:
much more dangerous now
quote:
Following her abortion on February 6th, Carhart left Maryland and could not be reached by Morbelli’s family when her condition deteriorated later that evening. The next day, Morbelli was taken to Shady Grove Hospital where she eventually died from massive internal bleeding. The hospital staff were also unable to reach Carhart, which complicated and delayed both diagnosis of her condition and appropriate treatment.
Erm. I mean there is precedent for a doctor needing to be involved in the patient's care after a complication arising from abortion. Having abortionists fly into Birmingham from Nigeria does seem to present some issues in the continuation of care for a patient.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:42 am to NC_Tigah
There are standards in place. Who is going to monitor them?? Current responsible parties just casts a blind eye.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 11:58 am to SundayFunday
Actually, based on personal experience, a physician at a religious-affiliated hospital can tell you that your unborn child has a lethal condition, will not survive outside the womb, continuing the pregnancy is a risk to your wife due to complications, and should be terminated...now please go to another hospital because we cannot help you with that here.
This post was edited on 10/3/14 at 11:59 am
Posted on 10/3/14 at 12:18 pm to Elephino
So funny.
Libtards finally find government regulations they don't like.
Libtards finally find government regulations they don't like.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 12:20 pm to TrueTiger
So funny.
Conservatives finally find government regulation that they love.
Conservatives finally find government regulation that they love.
Posted on 10/3/14 at 12:27 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
Conservatives finally find government regulation that they love.
Oh I agree.
It's just that it is much rarer when libs feel the sting of the lash that they love to wield.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News