Law could mean death penalty for doctors

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Aug 30, 2005.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    link

     
  2. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #2
    Little by little, our freedoms will be chipped away. Depressing.
     
  3. iindigo macrumors 6502a

    iindigo

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #3
    Oh yeah, the freedom to murder miniature human beings... ugh. I won't reply to this thread again, so don't waste your breath trying to convince me otherwise.
     
  4. eva01 macrumors 601

    eva01

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Location:
    Gah! Plymouth
    #4
    It is the persons choice if they want the child or not.

    Thankfully i live in MA where if a kid no matter what age if they have an HIV test or anything of the sort that their parents are not to be given results for it. The guarantor has to be changed from the Next of Kin to the Patient.

    I know i would want to decide wether a parasite can be in my body or not.
     
  5. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #5
    what's far more interesting, to me, than having yet another fruitless abortion debate is this idea that doctors can be punished for providing what is, technicalities aside, a legal procedure.

    similar in ways to how CA doctors could be arrested for prescribing pot, which for certain patients is supposed to legal.

    the loss of freedom of which leekohler speaks has to do w/ what is supposed to be privacy between a doctor and his/her patient. where will this lead? will the state force a doctor to refuse treatment for, say, cancer at some point, because the state has an interest in not seeing that person healthy?
     
  6. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #6
    Hopefully it will lead to a constitutional amendment that protects privacy. Depending on your viewpoint, it is already hinted at.

    I can't see why anyone would be against having a right to privacy, but then I can't how others can oppose abortion and support capital punishment either.
     
  7. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #7
    Ah yes, the 'so-called right to privacy'. We'll be hearing a lot of that phrase starting next week...
     
  8. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #8
    How do you mean?

    Wait, let me guess, we will have to respect John Roberts right to privacy before having to flip flop and accept that a SCJ (JR himself) has the right to invade ours?

    What's it going to take?!
     
  9. ham_man macrumors 68020

    ham_man

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    #9
    I thought that we all had the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? Or does that not apply when the person in question cannot defend themselves?
     
  10. ham_man macrumors 68020

    ham_man

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    #10
    Children didn't do anything wrong. Death row inmates either murdered someone or committed an act of treason...
     
  11. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #11
    are there any anti-abortion people here who think the unintended consequences of this law are good? i.e. that you'd feel justice has been done if an abortion doctor is put to death just for doing his job?
     
  12. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    You are correct, it does pertain to John Roberts.
     
  13. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #13
    They aren't children yet. In years where there are higher numbers of children born into poverty, it leads to higher rates of crime. Which, probably leads to higher rates of death row inmates. There has been a study or two that links the number of children born into absolute poverty to spikes in crime. Spikes in crime affect those around them (the criminals) and eventually the criminals themselves.

    You would be right to challenge me for a link, especially since it is one that I want to bookmark for myself.

    A compromise I can think of, pertains to all of those being against abortion, signing up to becoming foster parents of these unwanted children. If you are going to force a woman to have an unwanted child, you should think about the potential consequences (to the child) of forcing an unwanted child upon a mother. Obviously that child is not going to get the best treatment as they were not wanted in the first place and should probably not be put in that situation. If you really cared about the child, you would not stop at just making sure they are brought into this world, you would make sure that given the same opportunities that every wanted child is. But, that, would take some real sacrifice. More so than simply forcing an unwillingly mother to bear an unwanted child.
     
  14. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #14

    Politics have taken an interesting direction lately. I get the feeling both parties are worried about their collective asses. 'Cept the Prez of course, who doesn't seem to know enough to even be worried.
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    I think it was an Economist article I was reading not too long ago that posited that the drop in violent crime rates we've been seeing over the last decade or so dovetailed neatly with legal access to abortions + approximately 20 years. Interesting theory...
     
  16. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #16
    WOW That true and really depressing, first this then gay marriage, who knows were we will be in 20 years? our only hope A liberal!!
     
  17. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #17
    Sorry to everyone on this. But, I don't think that you have all of your freedom's until you are 18. yea, that sounds stupid, radical, etc. But really how many of you would not want to know if your 14 year old was having an abortion. How can they perform that proceedure with the side effects that are possible. When YOUR pocket would have to pay for it.

    You can't know if your kid is having a major medical proceedure, but if your kid gets drunk at 14 and kills someone in a car wreck, you get sued. Come on. Parents should have absolute knowledge over their children. No exceptions.
     
  18. eva01 macrumors 601

    eva01

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Location:
    Gah! Plymouth
    #18
    See ham_man I don't believe that it is alive so yes we do all have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but i don't believe it is a human nor is it alive.
     
  19. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #19

    Instead, I shall put my fingers in my ears and go 'la-la... la-la-la'.

    Minature human beings... utter nonsense :rolleyes:
     
  20. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #20
    I'm pretty sure that you're not supposed to refer to it as a child. That makes terminating its life a little more complicated.
     
  21. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #21
    Well first, you may not gain all your rights until you turn 18 (or 21 ;) ) but you certainly aren't right-less up to that point. You obviously have some rights, but what they are is surely debatable by reasonable people.

    Second, some parents are so horrible that a minor can emancipate themselves. Exceptions to absolute parental knowledge are both moral and necessary in extreme cases.
     
  22. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #22
    hm. maybe teen pregnancies would drop (thus negating the need for teen abortions) if the same people backing this legislation weren't also the ones backing abstinence-only education (dismissing condoms as viable pregnancy inhibitors) and blocking access to the plan-b pill.
     
  23. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #23
    I'm not intentionally trying to drag this off-topic, but I'm just curious: Are most teenage pregnancies the result of a lack of sex education? Seriously?
     
  24. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #24
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4584175.stm

    Holland is pretty serious about sex education for teenagers -- I used to live there. I'm fairly sure that the UK is pretty weak in this area although other UK residents here may be able to provide more detail.
     
  25. ohcrap macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    #25
    Why don't they take this **** to Russia and quit making such a big deal about it here? Seriously, I mean, if I want to have my dog put to sleep, BAM, snap my fingers and he's dead. Nothing is done to prevent this and the dog is already LIVING! If I were a girl who got pregnant and decided I did not want to keep the baby, that's my own damn decision. If it's morally wrong, let God decide who to punish. I'm not saying we should be able to do ANYTHING and let God decide, but when it comes to this oh-so-controversial matter, I don't think the country will ever fully agree, IMO it should be left to a higher power.

    BTW, the reference to Russia was based on this article. :rolleyes:
     

Share This Page