(July 3, 2015 at 11:40 pm)answer-is-42 Wrote: @snakeoil. No you mentally deficient, forked tongue, spineless waste of lipids. You missed my point and did not answer my question. Do you believe that emergency healthcare is a right regardless of ability to pay or not. If you do then the financial burden is irrelevant and if you don't then say that (I would disagree with you). My point is morally as far as i can see based on bodily autonomy the most a pregnant woman can ask for is to terminate a pregnancy. That's as far as her right extends, and that had been done. If the fetus survives, why should she have the right to kill it? How is that morally different then killing a 6 month old she does not want or is unable to support? That you have not addressed. Try again
You know what? I give up. You're too stone fucking stupid to understand that the patient's rights are being violated if you, through some truly heroic measures, manage to save Baby Goo. As to your false analogy (the one you keep making even though why it's false has clearly been pointed out), I'm not answering that again.
I really hope you are not a doctor. If you are, I pity your patients.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.