A Significant Distinction
A proponent of partial birth abortion has written an op/ed that's noteworthy, not only for its insouciant attitude toward a procedure that involves partially delivering an unborn child and then sucking its brains out, but also for its misleading denunciation of the ban on the procedure. Here are two examples:
Last week, the US Supreme Court removed intact D & E -- a variant procedure now called "partial-birth abortion" by its opponents -- from the list of options that women and their doctors have to terminate a pregnancy after the first trimester.
and
If the Bush administration and a conservative Supreme Court can ban one procedure, then it can ban other abortion procedures . . .
First of all, the US Supreme could "removed" nothing. It simply declined to override legislation that banned -- not abortion -- but only one particularly barbaric method for it.
Second, it may be convenient to attribute the legislation to "the Bush administration and a conservative Supreme Court," but, in fact, it's Congress that passed the legislation, a measure supported by 70% of Americans.
Perhaps the author of this piece, a doctor, needs to review the Hippocratic Oath: First, do no harm.
Last week, the US Supreme Court removed intact D & E -- a variant procedure now called "partial-birth abortion" by its opponents -- from the list of options that women and their doctors have to terminate a pregnancy after the first trimester.
and
If the Bush administration and a conservative Supreme Court can ban one procedure, then it can ban other abortion procedures . . .
First of all, the US Supreme could "removed" nothing. It simply declined to override legislation that banned -- not abortion -- but only one particularly barbaric method for it.
Second, it may be convenient to attribute the legislation to "the Bush administration and a conservative Supreme Court," but, in fact, it's Congress that passed the legislation, a measure supported by 70% of Americans.
Perhaps the author of this piece, a doctor, needs to review the Hippocratic Oath: First, do no harm.
posted by LadybugUSA at 5:20 PM
2 Comments:
Perhaps the author, a doctor, can explain how he is not killing a human being when performing an abortion.
Years ago, we had in this country hired guns, who were not held in high regard even if their services were wanted or considered needed. At the very least, their targets were usually fully grown adults who could have some chance of fighting back. Today's hired guns are the abortion doctors, and they are far more heinous than the shootists of old, because their targets are the most vulnerable of our kind.
Perhaps this doctor should remember the Hypocritic Oath ... First, be not a moron.
Post a Comment
<< Home