[Politics] Should infanticide be legalized?

[OneManArmy]

"So in this particular example, if a mother's in labour, I can tell you exactly what would happen," he told WTOP's Ask the Governor programme Wednesday.

"The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47066307

Everyone I talk to about this or on my FaceBook wall are completely outraged. However, FoxNews suggested there were 13% of the public that support this type of abortion (I can't find polling data anywhere on this). I've personally not seen/heard of 1 person in support of this, so I thought I would ask TW to get both sides.

 

[samUwell]

I do not.

 

[bowl of blood]

so they (the demdems trying to pass the bill) are basically saying that if you have a child that is going to come out as a retarded crab that can't breathe and dies on the pregnancy table that you should be able to snuff it and flush it before delivery, even if it's only like two weeks in advance

what am i missing, because while that is pretty dark it doesn't seem that insane. it is also very confusing to me that it is being called infanticide? because the point is that the baby is going to die anyway, and they want to be able to kill it early to save putting the mother through labour for a thing that will not live, and might even kill her

edit: that quote means absolutely nothing without context. what infant would be delivered? what resuscitated? it doesn't make any sense standalone

 

[TheVoiceOfReason]

Yes, up to the age of 18 at least. Maybe even 30.

 

[OneManArmy]

so they (the demdems trying to pass the bill) are basically saying that if you have a child that is going to come out as a retarded crab that can't breathe and dies on the pregnancy table that you should be able to snuff it and flush it before delivery, even if it's only like two weeks in advance

what am i missing, because while that is pretty dark it doesn't seem that insane. it is also very confusing to me that it is being called infanticide? because the point is that the baby is going to die anyway, and they want to be able to kill it early to save putting the mother through labour for a thing that will not live, and might even kill her

edit: that quote means absolutely nothing without context. what infant would be delivered? what resuscitated? it doesn't make any sense standalone

I'm not trying to be attacking, but it didn't seem to me like this was written into the bill. From what i'm hearing, it solely has to do with the 'health' of the mother, which the bill fails to define.

Therefore, if the mother, after the child is born, decides she has taken on too much mental distress during the pregnancy, they could "stuff and flush".

The bill was tabled by party lines... not even killed.. only tabled.

What am i missing here?

 

[bowl of blood]

i don't think that's what it said though, that's why the quote is so confusing

it said it "removes restrictions" on "third trimester abortions"

third trimester abortions are not murder of living babies so even if they were completely unrestricted that would not be infanticide. currently you cannot have one in va unless the mother is in "imminent danger", but you definitely can still have one, if that condition is met. so if it's infanticide, then infanticide is already legal.

not that i am in favor of removing the restrictions but it seems like someone is trying to make this into a narrative that it is not. i do not see how infanticide factors in except through a contextless and confusing quote.

 

[Amadeus]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that the bill doesn't actually suggest removing all restrictions on third trimester abortions.

I may even venture so far as suspecting that there are a bunch of conservatives making it sound like it does.

 

[Mr Jimmy Pop]

No I do not support this nonsense unless woman’s life is threatened buy the delivery. What kind of a human being of a doctor would even consider doing this procedure ?

 

[cael]

they already do 3rd trimester abortions

the doctor has to kill the fetus before it can be removed

the law would just make it slightly less restrictive for when it could be done, it's not a free-for-all

 

[bowl of blood]

No I do not support this nonsense unless woman’s life is threatened buy the delivery. What kind of a human being of a doctor would even consider doing this procedure ?

probably what is happening is that there is some woman who they don't really think is going to die but has like a 50% chance of major womb retardation if she goes through delivery and the woman is like okay no thanks hit flush and the doctors are like well the law says it has to be imminent danger and that is an incredibly strict barrier so you will just have to take it and you probably won't be able to get pregnant ever again, oh yeah the baby's going to die either way

i mean medical reform typically involves politicians inventing bureaucracy because they think they're smarter than doctors and then doctors having to find ways to work around it to actually do the moral and humane thing so in general i am in favor of keeping washington out of hospitals but if you think that politicians should get to make your health decisions then you do you

 

[bowl of blood]

like basically if you have to ask the question "what kind of a human being of a doctor would even consider doing this" you might want to follow up with "well, maybe they aren't doing this and i should look more closely before supporting a law to ban something that i don't think any sane person would do"

 

[Hologram]

how come if a pregnant woman gets murdered it's considered a double homicide, but if the child gets aborted by it's mother it's not murder?

 

[bowl of blood]

because punishing murderers is incredibly popular and finding ways to punish them more harshly is what some people consider an improvement to society

unsurprisingly it is generally not these people who support abortion rights

have you even fucking read haidt

 

[JustinCase]

this guy thinks so

 

[havax]

because punishing murderers is incredibly popular and finding ways to punish them more harshly is what some people consider an improvement to society

unsurprisingly it is generally not these people who support abortion rights

have you even fucking read haidt

i think more innocent babies should be killed and more murderers should be punished less harshly, don't you?

because you know, it's not always the murderers fault that he/she murdered someone, but it is totally the baby's fault for needing to have a mother as a host to continue living, fucking parasites.

 

[Amadeus]

i think more innocent babies should be killed and more murderers should be punished less harshly, don't you?

because you know, it's not always the murderers fault that he/she murdered someone, but it is totally the baby's fault for needing to have a mother as a host to continue living, fucking parasites.

define innocent pls

 

[havax]

define innocent pls

oh dear christ

 

[Amadeus]

oh dear christ

humor me

 

[Esteban_Villa]

I think kids should be given a second look at age 13 for abortion
By then you have a pretty good idea if they're gonna be a fuck up or not

 

[Esteban_Villa]

Oh God amadeus is her playing 20 questions