Religious group attacks religion in healthcare
A coalition of religious leaders took on the Catholic Church, the U.S. Supreme Court and the Bush administration on Tuesday with a plea to take religion out of health care in the United States.
They said last week’s Supreme Court decision outlawing a certain type of abortion demonstrated that religious belief was interfering with personal rights and the U.S. health care system in general.
The group, calling itself the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, said it planned to submit its proposals to other church groups and lobby Congress and state legislators.
With the April 18 Supreme Court decision banning specific abortion procedures, concerns are being raised in religious communities about the ethics of denying these services,” the group said in a statement.
#32 – Frank IBC,
Actually, you are incorrect. Here is the text of the final paragraph and a link to the complete text.
For these reasons, Congress finds that partial-birth abortion is never medically indicated to preserve the health of the mother; is in fact unrecognized as a valid abortion procedure by the mainstream medical community; poses additional health risks to the mother; blurs the line between abortion and infanticide in the killing of a partially-born child just inches from birth; and confuses the role of the physician in childbirth and should, therefore, be banned.
http://tinyurl.com/2ycghs
So, in conclusion, this bill is MOST DEFINITELY NOT a pro-life bill.
Rather it is a religious bill passed by theocrats in an effort to take a step closer to banning a medical procedure they find abhorrent based solely on religious reasoning.
Oh, and one more point, if you think this is based on any real medical information, just remember the wording “Congress finds …” not doctors have found, congress finds.
an abortion in which a physician delivers an unborn child’s body until only the head remains inside the womb, punctures the back of the child’s skull with a sharp instrument, and sucks the child’s brains out before completing delivery of the dead infant…blurs the line between abortion and infanticide in the killing of a partially-born child just inches from birth
With what part of that statement do you disagree, Misanthrope?
This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.
OhForTheLoveOf
Xians trashed your car?
Jesus once stole my car stereo (but that was a Jesus from Mexico not Jerusalem.)
I’m a Christian but you and I could probably come up with some compromise that we both could live with since. Is there any hope that most Americans could come up some similar compromise?
I am getting VERY TIRED of this debate and there seems to be no end in sight.
#35 – Frank IBC,
I’m no lawyer. The section you quote is not in the section I quoted. I honestly hope it applies to the prior section as well. I find it unclear.
As for what part of the procedure I disagree with, based on my limited reading of the subject, it seems that in most cases, the doctor kills the fetus prior to IDX being performed. In the cases where this is not done, my reading of it is not clear. It appears unpredictable how wide the birth canal will be opened. It may be that in some cases, they are trying to save the baby but the head will simply not fit and so, to save the mother’s life, the fetus must be killed.
In short though, my real problem with this is making a blanket ruling that ties a doctor’s hands and forces him/her to use a riskier procedure or allow a woman to die. I just think this is not a subject for legislation at all.
Also, for those who, like raddad, are interested in defining the point at which life begins, consider the following:
1) A mosquito is alive; a single case of west nile virus and we kill millions of them.
2) An adult pig clearly has far higher brain functioning than a newborn human infant. Would you outlaw pig slaughter?
I think this type of definition will do more harm than good. I’d strongly recommend that we keep the law where it was prior to 2003. Live birth is a good dividing line to me. Infanticide is wrong and stays illegal. Abortion needs to be considered carefully by the mother, and usually, her doctor and family. It should not be a matter for some senator sitting in DC that never met the family to decide.
#36 – Once trashed because of a Darwin Fish.
Another time I was physically assaulted in a Wal-Mart parking lot by a foul-tempered Pro-Lifer who thought I was an animal because I wasn’t inclined to listen to her screed on her pet issue.
I grew up around Unitarians, Quakers, and mild-mannered Methodists, and of course, the always delightful Catholics. I never thought of Christians as anything other than normal folks who just happened to believe something different from me. But they were good folks, good friends, and made killer BBQ.
Since moving to Indiana, I have learned that there really is a hateful, spiteful, and violent side of Christianity, and that temperment is the norm for the right wing fundie. These are stupid, primitive, violent people who do not deserve a seat at the table of public debate.
I have to assume these Xians did unto others as they would have others do unto them, so being a good neighbor, I am doing unto them in accordance with their wishes.
Your car had a Darwin fish.
Your car was trashed.
Correlation does not imply causation, Misanthrope.
#40 – The note left behind sort of cleared up the mystery…
Conservative Xians suck.
#40 – Frank IBC,
To what comment is your comment directed. I was not aware I had said anything that would indicate that correlation proved causation.
But, since you commented again, can I at least assume that you finally read The Real Price of Gasoline? (I won’t even begin to guess your opinion of it. I’d just like to think that when you ask something, you read the answer.)
#41 – OhForTheLoveOf ,
Mammals suck. It’s in the definition.
Seriously though … they left a note??!!? Were you able to find a cop that would at least consider looking into it? If it was demonstrably discriminatory, it should be classed as a hate crime.
#42 – They smashed the back panel of the van door where the fish was located, and a tail light. Then placed the shattered fish parts on the windshield with a note that read “exept Jesus or burn” written on notebook paper in pencil.
If the poor spelling wasn’t a give away to their poor education, the fact that Darwin wasn’t an atheist is…
What’s a cop gonna do about it? I fixed the tail light and the new Darwin Fish is located next to the dent, along with a another fish that has legs and is holding a wrench which says “evolve”
On a related note, I don’t believe in the notion of hate crimes. Oh, I believe crimes are committed out of hate, but I also believe we should punish people for the actions they take, not for the thoughts in their heads.
Besides, it’s Indiana… they probably don’t believe a hate crime could be committed against an atheist. I went a lifetime being positively sunny about my Christian neighbors, then inside of a one year after moving to Indiana, I have two acts of malice taken against me by angry Xians (the other being the woman who attacked me in a parking lot over abortion).
Fundies are a hateful people and an angry people, and Indiana is just full of them.
#43, Fundies are a hateful people and an angry people, and Indiana is just full of them.
Amen to that brother. And ya just gotta love the new license plates that proudly proclaim “In GOD We TRUST”. No charge for one, but if you want, say, a “Support Our Troops”, that’ll set you back $20. One saying you’re a “Hoosier Veteran” will only set you back $15”.
Sorry to hear about your van.
Frank,
There are extremely few third term abortions. Most are performed in the seventh month as most physicians will consider the fetus viable in the eighth month. I am unaware of ANY abortions having been performed in the ninth month as a healthy fetus will be very viable.
… asking if it’s ethical to suck out the brains of a live 8-month baby …
That would be a criminal act. Although I think you meant FETUS, the correct and more descriptive term. Again, very rare and usually only done with non-viable (sick) fetuses. I wouldn’t say never done with healthy fetuses, but there would be no reason to endanger the life of the mother when she could be induced and deliver vaginally. Of course an exception would be if the mother has become ill and the delivery would harm her health to the point of killing her and possibly the fetus.
But since it hasn’t passed through the birth canal, it doesn’t count as human.
No, it doesn’t count as a person. The fetus would be a human fetus, as compared to a pig or cat fetus.