Abortion and medical ethics

[preacherman76]

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.http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.abstract

I will wage a personal war, and sacrifice my life the day this actualy happens. Medical ethics??? My God.

[conspiracybeliever]

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.http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.abstract

I will wage a personal war, and sacrifice my life the day this actualy happens. Medical ethics??? My God.

I wouldn't worry about it. You won't have to sacrifice your life. It's your children they are after. And they don't want to kill them, rape...probably. Children are big business in this country.

[preacherman76]

I wouldn't worry about it. You won't have to sacrifice your life. It's your children they are after. And they don't want to kill them, rape...probably. Children are big business in this country.

Honestly Im not worried about it. The public backlash from this article alone will send these murders back to thier caves. I just want my possition to be made clear in the event it ever does actualy happen.

Edited February 28, 2012 by preacherman76

[Daughter of the Nine Moons]

Hi Preacherman, do you have a copy of the full JME article as all that is available in your link (without purchase) is the abstract that you quoted?

Edit to add: This is written by Australian authors in a British medical journal and has nothing do with the Americas or US. Moving to a more appropriate forum

Edited February 28, 2012 by Daughter of the Nine Moons

[Mr Right Wing]

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.http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.abstract

I will wage a personal war, and sacrifice my life the day this actualy happens. Medical ethics??? My God.

I agree

If they dont want it put it up for adoption. You dont murder another human being because its inconveniant.

[randym23]

Corporations/ churches are about eugenics,

abortion & contraceptives are about holding back the horrible inertia of misogyny throughout history that uses an umbilical cord as a leash.

Please...

are we really going to start the whole Hitler association lie thing again?

how about that Hitler was a Catholic?

how about the Vatican used concentration camp detainees as slaves?

how about how the Vatican helped Nazi's escape prosecution?

(sigh)

[Wyvernkeeper]

I agree

If they dont want it put it up for adoption. You dont murder another human being because its inconveniant.

Yeah funny how the people who oppose abortion on the grounds that it is murder don't seem to have as many qualms about murdering fully-grown adults.

Arson, bombing, and property crime

According to NAF, since 1977 in the United States and Canada, property crimes committed against abortion providers have included 41 bombings, 173 arsons, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats, 1630 incidents of trespassing, 1264 incidents of vandalism, and 100 attacks with butyric acid ("stink bombs").[12] The New York Times also cites over one hundred clinic bombings and incidents of arson, over three hundred invasions, and over four hundred incidents of vandalism between 1978 and 1993.[16] The first clinic arson occurred in Oregon in March 1976 and the first bombing occurred in February 1978 in Ohio.[17] Incidents have included:

December 25, 1984: An abortion clinic and two physicians' offices in Pensacola, Florida were bombed in the early morning of Christmas Day by a quartet of young people (Matt Goldsby, Jimmy Simmons, Kathy Simmons, Kaye Wiggins) who later called the bombings "a gift to Jesus on his birthday."[18][19][20] The clinic, the Ladies Center, would later be the site of the murder of Dr. John Britton and James Barrett in 1994 and a firebombing in 2012.

May 21, 1998: Three people were injured when acid was poured at the entrances of five abortion clinics in Miami, Florida.[21]

October 1999: Martin Uphoff set fire to a Planned Parenthood clinic in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, causing US$100 worth of damage. He was later sentenced to 60 months in prison.[22]

May 28, 2000: An arson at a clinic in Concord, New Hampshire resulted in several thousand dollars' worth of damage. The case remains unsolved.[23][24][25] This was the second arson at the clinic.[26]

September 30, 2000: John Earl, a Catholic priest, drove his car into the Northern Illinois Health Clinic after learning that the FDA had approved the drug RU-486. He pulled out an ax before being forced to the ground by the owner of the building, who fired two warning shots from a shotgun.[27]

June 11, 2001: An unsolved bombing at a clinic in Tacoma, Washington destroyed a wall, resulting in $6,000 in damages.[22][28]

July 4, 2005: A clinic Palm Beach, Florida was the target of an arson. The case remains open.[22]

December 12, 2005: Patricia Hughes and Jeremy Dunahoe threw a Molotov cocktail at a clinic in Shreveport, Louisiana. The device missed the building and no damage was caused. In August 2006, Hughes was sentenced to six years in prison, and Dunahoe to one year. Hughes claimed the bomb was a "memorial lamp" for an abortion she had had there.[29]

September 13, 2006 David McMenemy of Rochester Hills, Michigan, crashed his car into the Edgerton Women's Care Center in Davenport, Iowa. He then doused the lobby in gasoline and started a fire. McMenemy committed these acts in the belief that the center was performing abortions; however, Edgerton is not an abortion clinic.[30] Time magazine listed the incident in a "Top 10 Inept Terrorist Plots" list.[31]

April 25, 2007: A package left at a women's health clinic in Austin, Texas, contained an explosive device capable of inflicting serious injury or death. A bomb squad detonated the device after evacuating the building. Paul Ross Evans (who had a criminal record for armed robbery and theft) was found guilty of the crime.[32]

May 9, 2007: An unidentified person deliberately set fire to a Planned Parenthood clinic in Virginia Beach, Virginia.[33]

December 6, 2007: Chad Altman and Sergio Baca were arrested for the arson of Dr. Curtis Boyd's clinic in Albuquerque. Altman's girlfriend had scheduled an appointment for an abortion at the clinic.[34][35]

January 22, 2009 Matthew L. Derosia, 32, who was reported to have had a history of mental illness [36] rammed an SUV into the front entrance of a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Paul, Minnesota.[37]

January 1, 2012 Bobby Joe Rogers, 41, firebombed the American Family Planning Clinic in Pensacola, Florida with a Molotov cocktail; the fire gutted the building. Rogers told investigators that he was motivated to commit the crime by his opposition to abortion, and that what more directly prompted the act was seeing a patient enter the clinic during one of the frequent anti-abortion protests there. The clinic had previously been bombed at Christmas in 1984 and was the site of the murder of Dr. John Britton and James Barrett in 1994

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence#Arson.2C_bombing.2C_and_property_crime

[Robbie333]

Corporations/ churches are about eugenics,

abortion & contraceptives are about holding back the horrible inertia of misogyny throughout history that uses an umbilical cord as a leash.

Please...

are we really going to start the whole Hitler association lie thing again?

how about that Hitler was a Catholic?

how about the Vatican used concentration camp detainees as slaves?

how about how the Vatican helped Nazi's escape prosecution?

(sigh)

Yes, us Catholics are certainly very evil Nazis. Horrible people we are. Why I volunteer so much to help the poor and feed the hungry I will never know. Maybe I should just shoot them and be a good Catholic.

[preacherman76]

Yeah funny how the people who oppose abortion on the grounds that it is murder don't seem to have as many qualms about murdering fully-grown adults.

Arson, bombing, and property crime

According to NAF, since 1977 in the United States and Canada, property crimes committed against abortion providers have included 41 bombings, 173 arsons, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats, 1630 incidents of trespassing, 1264 incidents of vandalism, and 100 attacks with butyric acid ("stink bombs").[12] The New York Times also cites over one hundred clinic bombings and incidents of arson, over three hundred invasions, and over four hundred incidents of vandalism between 1978 and 1993.[16] The first clinic arson occurred in Oregon in March 1976 and the first bombing occurred in February 1978 in Ohio.[17] Incidents have included:

December 25, 1984: An abortion clinic and two physicians' offices in Pensacola, Florida were bombed in the early morning of Christmas Day by a quartet of young people (Matt Goldsby, Jimmy Simmons, Kathy Simmons, Kaye Wiggins) who later called the bombings "a gift to Jesus on his birthday."[18][19][20] The clinic, the Ladies Center, would later be the site of the murder of Dr. John Britton and James Barrett in 1994 and a firebombing in 2012.

May 21, 1998: Three people were injured when acid was poured at the entrances of five abortion clinics in Miami, Florida.[21]

October 1999: Martin Uphoff set fire to a Planned Parenthood clinic in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, causing US$100 worth of damage. He was later sentenced to 60 months in prison.[22]

May 28, 2000: An arson at a clinic in Concord, New Hampshire resulted in several thousand dollars' worth of damage. The case remains unsolved.[23][24][25] This was the second arson at the clinic.[26]

September 30, 2000: John Earl, a Catholic priest, drove his car into the Northern Illinois Health Clinic after learning that the FDA had approved the drug RU-486. He pulled out an ax before being forced to the ground by the owner of the building, who fired two warning shots from a shotgun.[27]

June 11, 2001: An unsolved bombing at a clinic in Tacoma, Washington destroyed a wall, resulting in $6,000 in damages.[22][28]

July 4, 2005: A clinic Palm Beach, Florida was the target of an arson. The case remains open.[22]

December 12, 2005: Patricia Hughes and Jeremy Dunahoe threw a Molotov cocktail at a clinic in Shreveport, Louisiana. The device missed the building and no damage was caused. In August 2006, Hughes was sentenced to six years in prison, and Dunahoe to one year. Hughes claimed the bomb was a "memorial lamp" for an abortion she had had there.[29]

September 13, 2006 David McMenemy of Rochester Hills, Michigan, crashed his car into the Edgerton Women's Care Center in Davenport, Iowa. He then doused the lobby in gasoline and started a fire. McMenemy committed these acts in the belief that the center was performing abortions; however, Edgerton is not an abortion clinic.[30] Time magazine listed the incident in a "Top 10 Inept Terrorist Plots" list.[31]

April 25, 2007: A package left at a women's health clinic in Austin, Texas, contained an explosive device capable of inflicting serious injury or death. A bomb squad detonated the device after evacuating the building. Paul Ross Evans (who had a criminal record for armed robbery and theft) was found guilty of the crime.[32]

May 9, 2007: An unidentified person deliberately set fire to a Planned Parenthood clinic in Virginia Beach, Virginia.[33]

December 6, 2007: Chad Altman and Sergio Baca were arrested for the arson of Dr. Curtis Boyd's clinic in Albuquerque. Altman's girlfriend had scheduled an appointment for an abortion at the clinic.[34][35]

January 22, 2009 Matthew L. Derosia, 32, who was reported to have had a history of mental illness [36] rammed an SUV into the front entrance of a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Paul, Minnesota.[37]

January 1, 2012 Bobby Joe Rogers, 41, firebombed the American Family Planning Clinic in Pensacola, Florida with a Molotov cocktail; the fire gutted the building. Rogers told investigators that he was motivated to commit the crime by his opposition to abortion, and that what more directly prompted the act was seeing a patient enter the clinic during one of the frequent anti-abortion protests there. The clinic had previously been bombed at Christmas in 1984 and was the site of the murder of Dr. John Britton and James Barrett in 1994

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence#Arson.2C_bombing.2C_and_property_crime

Im telling you that the people who are involved in medical ethics are now saying its Ok to kill babies And this is what you come out with????????????????????

[Wyvernkeeper]

Im telling you that the people who are involved in medical ethics are now saying its Ok to kill babies And this is what you come out with????????????????????

Yeah I am, it's called pointing out the hypocrisy of the anti-abortion crowd. Those people who say, 'it's not ok to kill babies, but totally fine to attack places where pregnant mothers might be.'

'The people' involved in medical ethics, are not one unit. This is just a report by some people putting forward a particular opinion in a journal and it isn't even American.. So don't worry, those evil OzzyBrit doctors arn't on their way to sacrifice your firstborn just yet.

Religious people are perfectly within their rights to keep unplanned pregnancies but they have no right deciding for other people. View it as murder if you wish but realise that it is for the individual's conscience, not some self-appointed religious leader to deal with. (And presuming that you are a man,) realise that it is not your decision on whether a woman terminates or not.

Besides, this is primarily an issue involving women. Yet most of those people who seem to think their opinion matters on the subject are men... It is as Randy pointed out before using the umbilical cord as a leash. Usually men don't even notice these things, yet they are the ones shooting their mouths off about a woman's right to their own body.

This notion that women are not capable of making their own decisions is just misogyny dressed up as protection of the young, clothed in the rhetorical garb of religiously-justified nonsense. Abortion does not cause societal breakdown, the presence of unwanted children within a family often can. Abortion following a pregnancy caused by rape is not going to be a pleasant experience, but if that's what it takes to prevent the victim suffering psychological trauma for decades, then it is the preferred option. But more fundamentally, it is a woman's right to choose and the fact that thousands of women might be denied such treatment - resulting in trauma and a life that they did not want - so that some Senator can denounce abortion as anti-Gd and appear squeaky clean in the eyes of religious people, just to win a few more votes is absolutely disgusting.

Why is the blame always on the woman and not the man who got her pregnant... Biological distinctions are no excuse for bad morality. Likewise, Gd smote all the firstborn in Egypt on the tenth plague... I'm guessing that few of the 'pro-lifers' have much problem with that idea.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Wyvernkeeper

[Daughter of the Nine Moons]

Hi Preacherman, do you have a copy of the full JME article as all that is available in your link (without purchase) is the abstract that you quoted?

Edit to add: This is written by Australian authors in a British medical journal and has nothing do with the Americas or US. Moving to a more appropriate forum

Hi Preacherman,

Do you have the full article available, as I'm sure you will agree a 91 word abstract does not give anyone a chance to fairly assess the article.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Daughter of the Nine Moons

[Cute_Gingrich]

Hi Preacherman,

Do you have the full article available, as I'm sure you will agree a 91 word abstract does not give anyone a chance to fairly assess the article.

Here's the full article, copied directly from BMJ, without formatting:

http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.full

Edited March 1, 2012 by Saru
Replaced copied text with a link

[Cassea]

Really the report is just basically making clear. That we're reducing "unborn" to "pile of flesh" and only after they are born are they people. I've never understood this thinking. So if you have a late stage abortion it's abortion. But if you go behind a dumpster and give birth and then just walk away. It's murder. Why?

[H.H. Holmes]

Really the report is just basically making clear. That we're reducing "unborn" to "pile of flesh" and only after they are born are they people. I've never understood this thinking. So if you have a late stage abortion it's abortion. But if you go behind a dumpster and give birth and then just walk away. It's murder. Why?

Apparently, the mere act of birth is enough of a marker to decide whether a baby/fetus is worthy of any human rights. Even a few weeks before the expected birth date, that fetus/baby is a viable person that can survive outside the mother's womb, especially with the advances in medical care for premature babies.

I don't believe that any sane person would argue that killing a newborn baby is alright, but for some reason that same baby has no such consideration mere days or weeks before birth to some people.

[Cassea]

Apparently, the mere act of birth is enough of a marker to decide whether a baby/fetus is worthy of any human rights. Even a few weeks before the expected birth date, that fetus/baby is a viable person that can survive outside the mother's womb, especially with the advances in medical care for premature babies.

I don't believe that any sane person would argue that killing a newborn baby is alright, but for some reason that same baby has no such consideration mere days or weeks before birth to some people.

It really makes no sense at all to me. Especially "partial birth" abortions. Like if it's still half inside it doesn't count. No wonder these teenaged mothers who give birth at their proms, or other times. Think nothing of dumping the baby in the trash can. This is what society teaches us is ok.

[+HerNibs]

Partial Birth Abortions are not legal.

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (Pub.L. 108-105, 117 Stat. 1201, enacted November 5, 2003, 18 U.S.C. § 1531,[1] PBA Ban) is a United States law prohibiting a form of late-term abortion that the Act calls "partial-birth abortion", often referred to in medical literature as intact dilation and extraction.[2] Under this law, "Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both." The law was enacted in 2003, and in 2007 its constitutionality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart.

Nibs

[Cassea]

That doesn't mean they didn't occur. They had to be banned because they were being done. Abortion has been around since 1973. So this means for almost 30 years exactly. Partial birth abortions were being performed.

[+HerNibs]

That doesn't mean they didn't occur. They had to be banned because they were being done. Abortion has been around since 1973. So this means for almost 30 years exactly. Partial birth abortions were being performed.

Right. Just pointing out that they are now illegal. I'm very pro-choice but very anti late term.

Unless the health of the mother is threatened I think abortion should be limited to the first trimester.

Nibs

[H.H. Holmes]

Right. Just pointing out that they are now illegal. I'm very pro-choice but very anti late term.

Unless the health of the mother is threatened I think abortion should be limited to the first trimester.

Nibs

This is how I feel, the time limit should be (and is in the United States) the end of the first-term or beggining of the second term for most abortions. The only exception would be where the mother's life would be put in danger from complications that develop further into the pregnancy.

Edited February 28, 2012 by H.H. Holmes

[FurthurBB]

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.http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.abstract

I will wage a personal war, and sacrifice my life the day this actualy happens. Medical ethics??? My God.

The title is misleading because this is infanticide, not eugenics and has nothing to do with abortion.

[Rlyeh]

*snip*

Edited February 28, 2012 by Daughter of the Nine Moons
removed inflammatory comment

[Daughter of the Nine Moons]

Here's the full article, copied directly from BMJ, without formatting:

Thank you!

[FurthurBB]

It really makes no sense at all to me. Especially "partial birth" abortions. Like if it's still half inside it doesn't count. No wonder these teenaged mothers who give birth at their proms, or other times. Think nothing of dumping the baby in the trash can. This is what society teaches us is ok.

If this is because society teaches us it is okay, why were they doing it 100 years ago? Sorry, that logic fails.

[FurthurBB]

Right. Just pointing out that they are now illegal. I'm very pro-choice but very anti late term.

Unless the health of the mother is threatened I think abortion should be limited to the first trimester.

Nibs

I agree.

[preacherman76]

The title is misleading because this is infanticide, not eugenics and has nothing to do with abortion.

Infanticide and abortion are a Eugenics dream.