Just curious... Does anything in this article cause anyone here to be outraged?

[MichaeltheGreat]

I don't have to, since I've objected for the record.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Seeker
For the umpteenth time, the fetus is NOT a 'baby'. It's not a sentient human being at this time of pregnancy.

It's a mass of organic tissue.

This procedure can in theory be performed right up to the time the fetus would deliver normally, and under Roe v. Wade, the fetus can be considered a human being for purposes of the state's protective interest from the onset of the third trimester, or earlier if and as medical science advances and allows for fetal viability at an earlier stage.

[DinoDoc]

It's not a sentient human being at this time of pregnancy.

I doubt it's sentient at birth either. What's your point?

[monkspider]

It's birth? [/dinodoc]

[DinoDoc]

I don't understand the question. Please rephrase.

[Whoha]

Babies that have pain receptors would of course feel pain.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
I don't have to, since I've objected for the record.

We only have Kangaroo courts here at Apolyton. You have to answer the question or be shoved out of a helicopter.

[ixnay]

ABORTION KILLS CHILDREN







BUT ONLY THE ONES THAT DESERVE IT

[Urban Ranger]

Re: Just curious... Does anything in this article cause anyone here to be outraged?

Originally posted by Lincoln
"Does the fetus feel pain?" Judge Richard C. Casey asked Johnson, saying he had been told that studies of a type of abortion usually performed in the second trimester had concluded they do.

Oh boohoohoo, so a foetus can feel pain. So what? I have got news for you -- most if not all animals can feel pain, or sensations akin to it. Even amoebae. If you poke an amoeba with a sharp object, it moves away from it.

Next.

[Lincoln]

Maybe we should rip the arms and legs from your body and see if you make a reference to amoeba's to justify your pain.

[RGBVideo]

Just curious... Does anything in this article cause anyone here to be outraged?

Yes:

"I don't think we would use those terms," Johnson said. "I think we would probably use a term like 'decompression of the skull' or 'reducing the contents of the skull.'"

What an incredible ***hole that guy is.

[Spiffor]

I don't support this procedure, and I think the doctor should take steps to avoid foetal pain during the abortion. I also oppose abortion at will after the thrid month, when the fetus begins to develop a nervous system.

However, I'm much more outraged with the judge's treatment of the affait than by the doctor's behaviour. The judge simply doesn't do his job properly by mistaking a judge's job and his political agenda He should be removed from the case, to let someone working with the law do the job.

[Pax]

I'm pro choice at the same time I believe the parents should make the choice life. Being pro choice does not actually mean that people are running screwing and constantly having abortions.

From the article the judge sounds biased. I would feel more comfortable if our judges were unbiased as much as possible. That's what they are paid for after all.

[Az]

The fact that it's guys deciding the fate of abortion. Why don't we turn this over to the women judges and decide? Sandra Day O'Connor would shoot this thing down in a second.

That makes no sense. (using a hyperbole here): Should only psychopaths judge psycopaths?

[loinburger]

I think that the line of questioning in the last few paragraphs was misleading. I have yet to witness a doctor or nurse use terms analogous to "brain sucking" or "skull cracking" when describing any other medical procedure, and I don't know why they'd deviate from normal practice for an abortion. Would fewer women have partial-birth abortions if they were told that it would involve "sucking the brain from a fetus"? Probably. Would fewer people have spinal taps if they were told that it would involve "shoving a huge needle into their spinal cord and sucking out some spinal fluid"? Probably. Would fewer people have surgeries to repair a torn ACL if they were told that it would involve "slicing open your knee, butchering a nearby tendon, gouging out a path through the cartilege lining, and mangling the remnants of your ligament"? Probably. BFD. Given the order of questioning, the judge was probably just trying to put Johnson on the spot, so no harm, no foul.