Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #3  
Old 06-18-2014, 03:18 PM
joeydb's Avatar
joeydb joeydb is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southeastern PA
Posts: 3,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig View Post
geez. what a mess. and this from the guy who said they don't need to be the 'party of stupid'. or did he forget he said that? some of his actions in the last year or so would indicate he completely forgot all that.
So it's that simple huh? I mean - does any addressing of the fact that another human being will die when the life support is removed have any bearing here, or is it "tough sh*t" for the baby?

"Viability" cuts both ways. So if the baby is old enough to have a shot, a decision has to be made.

I don't necessarily support the law. I don't like government overreach. But Jindal is not automatically wrong for trying to save the baby.

Predictably NARAL sticks their nose in even when it's not an elective abortion - because any eroding of the ridiculous concept (that the baby's worth is solely based on how much the parents want the baby) must be avoided.

Again - not fond of the law. What should be done? Do nothing and the baby dies in an age where we could save him/her. Mandating keeping the mother on life support also sucks. Is there an in between course of action, i.e. advising the family of the chances of the baby making it, not disconnecting life support until the family is briefed so they can decide one way or the other, etc..?
Reply With Quote
 



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.