Abortion -cpr on the fetus?

[Cato]

As to CPR, it isn't performed because it doesn't assist in terminating the pregnancy, which is, after all, the goal of the operation.

Fucking hell. My earlier proctologist quip was a joke, but you will now need one if you hope to get your foot out of his ass.

[popsthebuilder]

What do you mean by out of place. Like if the child would surely suffer. You would need to be damned sure. If a plant is not but a root does it not strive to regrow until death? If the child was able to demonstrate in some way that they welcomed death then yes. Perhaps in extreme cases prior to birth.

[Thumpalumpacus]

What's your degree in?  Xtian science?

He/she claimed a MD, my guess is proctology.

Well that's a good thing, because he's clearly got an advanced case of rectocranial inversion.

[brewer]

I'll probably regret getting involved in this but here goes.

I don't think that you are using the term "abortion" correctly to make your point. The act of performing an abortion by trained staff (medical or surgical) ensures that the fetus is not viable (dead) at the time of exit from the cervix/womb. I'd think an MD would know that.

If you are discussing preterm delivery, where abortive steps have not been taken, and the fetus has been delivered alive, and there are medical staff present that have the ability and facilities to sustain life and did not make the attempt then you need to report those instances to your attorney general. See Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002. If you are referring to the Kermit Gosnell case (the only one I know of, if there are others please let me know) he is considered a rouge and was convicted of murder.

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/0...abortions/

Do you have any documented instances of your left to die or intentionally killed scenario? Or are you just stirring the pot?

[Thumpalumpacus]

As to CPR, it isn't performed because it doesn't assist in terminating the pregnancy, which is, after all, the goal of the operation.

Fucking hell. My earlier proctologist quip was a joke, but you will now need one if you hope to get your foot out of his ass.

Oh no, he ain't having it that easy <wanders off to don his cowboy boots>

[bennyboy]

You sir or madam do not know what you are talking about. Between the 2 of us, one of us has an MD. It's not you.  Additionally I agree that neuronal development accelerates at 28 weeks, but that does NOT mean that it hasn't already stated. Premature infants are born at < 28 weeks and survive. Some are developmentally delayed, but that is irrelevant to the moral discussion. You are now going into the territory of determining a worthwhile life and that is a different slippery slope. My question was primarily of survival.  By the way, I have personally cared for an infant born at 24 weeks due to medical complication /emergency (ecclampsia) she had a Rough initial road but is a very happy 9 year old now.
Again, stick to what you know (it ain't biology) and talk about the morality of allowing a living fetus to die outside the body of another without medical support that isnknown and available. You still haven't given a good Moral arguement for this.

Let's start with the philosophical basis for not killing one's children, at any age, post-partum.  Why shouldn't I decide that my 5 year-old son isn't developing properly and pull the plug?  The answer, I think, is that he has a name, and feelings, and memories, and most of the other things that define human EXPERIENCE.  It's not because his heart is beating: if he were chronically unable to experience anything (like if he were brain dead), we would be fine with pulling the plug.

Some animals, like adult pigs, have developed a higher intelligence than a new-born infant.  They also have memories and feelings.  And yet, we'll slit a pig's throat in a second for a couple slices of bacon.  Why is this?

The answer is that this is not so much a philosophical question as an emotional question dressed in philosophical clothing.  Or a religious one. You see a fetus as a person, and start having fantasies about what it could be some day. What dies is not that person, which currently has no more to feel than a tadpole, and probably less. What dies are your fantasies-- and I don't see why a pregnant woman should be burdened with maintaining your happy daydreams.

[brewer]

The point is that abortion in any form other than a conclusion to physical rape is wrong. We should be accountable for our own actions.

You are so wrong. What about threat to the mothers life? Nonviable fetus even if full term? Fetal reduction to save the lives of the mother and other fetuses.

[Ravenshire]

@snakeoilwarrior
First of all does that mean if a man has a heart attack and

No matter what the rest of your argument here is, it's based on a false analogy.

[brewer]

You sir or madam do not know what you are talking about. Between the 2 of us, one of us has an MD. It's not you.  Additionally I agree that neuronal development accelerates at 28 weeks, but that does NOT mean that it hasn't already stated. Premature infants are born at < 28 weeks and survive. Some are developmentally delayed, but that is irrelevant to the moral discussion. You are now going into the territory of determining a worthwhile life and that is a different slippery slope. My question was primarily of survival.  By the way, I have personally cared for an infant born at 24 weeks due to medical complication /emergency (ecclampsia) she had a Rough initial road but is a very happy 9 year old now.
Again, stick to what you know (it ain't biology) and talk about the morality of allowing a living fetus to die outside the body of another without medical support that isnknown and available. You still haven't given a good Moral arguement for this.

You threw out the MD, now time to step up or shut up. Just private message me the details, I'll keep them confidential.

[Ravenshire]

The point is that abortion in any form other than a conclusion to physical rape is wrong. We should be accountable for our own actions.

And just how the fuck is a crack-whore who decides to abort rather than raise a child in that environment not being accountable?!? Contrary to popular belief very few, if any, people get abortions on a whim or use it as a method of birth control. They are, for the most part, people who understand that they cannot give these children the things they need in life so choose not to have them. How the fuck is that not being accountable? Really, I wish more people were held accountable for bringing children into abject poverty, for knowingly birthing children with genetic issues that will do nothing but cause suffering throughout their short life, for bringing children into abusive homes, for any of the myriad other horrible situations a child can be, but doesn't have to be, born into. You really want to discuss accountability?