It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
We don’t even need religion to know what is wrong and right.... isn’t that what the secular humanists have been telling us?
originally posted by: trustmeimdoctor
who the hell is just pro-abortion? It's called pro-choice because we believe in the mothers right to choose rather than some #ty government telling us what to do. I personally think anything late term is disgusting. But maybe I should get educated enough to tell others what to do with their bodies. Or maybe just some religious indoctrination will do.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
I always thought the pro-abortionists were just uneducated and naïve, maybe a little stupid with no education towards the sciences.
Now this says they are deliberately evil.
How ridiculous .... people cannot read and write till
originally posted by: Archivalist
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
This place isn't a forum, it's an echo chamber.
Here's an idea though, forego the idea of a soul, in legislation.
Make these laws protect sentient self aware beings with the ability to express themselves, explicitly, or set a test with an easily determined IQ minimum.
If the fetus can read and write, I'm game for saving it.
originally posted by: Liquesence
Save Newborns Whom Survive Abortion.
So, are they newborns, or aborted fetuses? Because newborns aren't aborted, they are born, and fetuses who are aborted...aren't newborns.
But nice hyperbole.
...
Abstract
Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.
...
Infanticide Should Be Legalized
The United States should allow the use of infanticide in the case of infants with severe medical complications. This policy should be adopted because euthanizing infants in some scenarios can be a valid moral option since certain infants can be born with absolutely terrible life prospects. For example, there are a number of instances where infants can have terminal ailments that cause them to suffer immensely after birth before killing them shortly thereafter. In these situations, infanticide should be an option available to the parents of infants with these conditions. Additionally, there are strong grounds that can justify infanticide in a broader context since infants are not rational and self-conscious agents. Because infants cannot hold a conscious desire to continue living – and have never held a conscious desire to continue living - they can't be given the same rights as persons. Therefore, painlessly killing an infant cannot be wrong in the same way that killing a person is wrong. Of course, there would have to be parameters set around the practice of killing infants. And such technical matters are, indeed, important. But, for now, it is sufficient to recognize that there are certain situations in which intentionally killing infants can be justified.
...
Peter Albert David Singer, AC (born 6 July 1946) is an Australian moral philosopher. He is the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and a Laureate Professor at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne. He specialises in applied ethics and approaches ethical issues from a secular, utilitarian perspective. He is known in particular for his book Animal Liberation (1975), in which he argues in favour of veganism, and his essay "Famine, Affluence, and Morality", in which he argues in favour of donating to help the global poor. For most of his career, he was a preference utilitarian, but he stated in The Point of View of the Universe (2014), coauthored with Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek, that he had become a hedonistic utilitarian.
...
originally posted by: dawnstar
...
None of them died since there were others capable of caring for them.
When you talk about viability you are talking about at what stage a fetus can survive outside of the womb even with the best care providers providing the best care available
originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
I do believe that a viable fetus that is born early is a premature baby, isnt it? If it for some reason is born before It has developed to the point where it can' survive outside the womb even with medical intervention its not viable and it's considered a miscarriage?
originally posted by: dawnstar
That New York state law that you are griping about I do believe doesn't allow abortions after the point of viability unless certain conditions are met. Ya know, life and health of the mother, rape or incest, or a nonviable pregnancy (which isn't the same as a nonviable fetus).
originally posted by: dawnstar
And why are you going all the way to Cuba looking for babies that aren't getting the best medical care when you can probably find them in your own city?
originally posted by: dawnstar
You are griping that New York allows nurse practitioners to do abortions with no doctor present just in case the baby is born alive when midwives and nurse practitioners are delivering babies and providing pediatric care to them. I had one try to send me home with my son years ago. It turned out the kid had a collasped lung. I argued with her a good ten minutes before she relented and went to find a doctor to give me a second opinion. Are you saying that those "newborns " that somehow manage to survive abortion in the seventh or eighth month of pregnancy are more "human" than my six year old son was?
originally posted by: dawnstar
Like I told you one of the other times you were griping about this law new York has decided to give nurses the opportunity to obtain the extra training to take on responsibilities that used to be in the domain of doctors. They did this because there was a shortage of doctors in rural areas and doctors willing to serve the poorer communities.
But according to your rational, I guess they were trying to kill my five year old by not providing him with a standard of care you find acceptable.
originally posted by: Archivalist
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
This place isn't a forum, it's an echo chamber.
Here's an idea though, forego the idea of a soul, in legislation.
Make these laws protect sentient self aware beings with the ability to express themselves, explicitly, or set a test with an easily determined IQ minimum.
If the fetus can read and write, I'm game for saving it.
Any health care practitioner that is licensed or authorized under Title Eight of the Education Law (Section 6500, et seq.) may perform an abortion, if it is within the scope of their practice. In addition to M.D.s, this could also include nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and midwives.
statelaws.findlaw.com...
After the First 24 Weeks, With Exceptions
Abortions are illegal if they're performed after the first 24 weeks of pregnancy, unless the fetus isn't viable or the abortion is necessary to protect the mother's health. One of the justifications for this requirement is that it's a balance between the safety of the mother and giving her time to consider an abortion. Arguably, a mother could be able to make the decision to have an abortion within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy. After that amount of time, nearly the end of the second trimester, the risk of harm to the mother increases greatly. New York repealed all penal code statutes for aborting a fetus and thus there are no criminal penalties for abortion.
same source
...
New York repealed all penal code statutes for aborting a fetus and thus there are no criminal penalties for abortion.
...
originally posted by: dawnstar
as you can see, they ain't letting just anyone abortion a baby up till the time of birth like you claim...
after the 24th week they have the usual exceptions and only those who fit them are allowed to have an abortion
...
§ 3. Section 4164 of the public health law is REPEALED.
...
New York Consolidated Laws, Public Health Law - PBH § 4164. Induced viable births
1. When an abortion is to be performed after the twelfth week of pregnancy it shall be performed only in a hospital and only on an in-patient basis. When an abortion is to be performed after the twentieth week of pregnancy, a physician other than the physician performing the abortion shall be in attendance to take control of and to provide immediate medical care for any live birth that is the result of the abortion. The commissioner of health is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations to insure the health and safety of the mother and the viable child, in such instances.
2. Such child shall be accorded immediate legal protection under the laws of the state of New York, including but not limited to applicable provisions of the social services law, article five of the civil rights law and the penal law.
3. The medical records of all life-sustaining efforts put forth for such a live aborted birth, their failure or success, shall be kept by attending physician. All other vital statistics requirements in the public health law shall be complied with in regard to such aborted child.
4. In the event of the subsequent death of the aborted child, the disposal of the dead body shall be in accordance with the requirements of this chapter.