• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Baby Abortion Survivor Was "Swimming" In Toilet "Trying To Get Out"

Protecting the Constitution > Protecting the sensitivities of the abortion banners

And then we have that falsehood again..
 
Qu'est que c'est? No. I wouldn't. Why? Do you even know who you're speaking to? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though.

The onus is on you to prove this is systematic in the country or even somewhere close. What? Are you playing the "You have to prove I'm wrong" game? Nah buddy. Find me a statistic showing cases like these are regular. Then we'll go from there. However, we know they're no. What is known so far is that this is a rare issue.

Why? Well, the popularity of the case and the lack of cases before it. Now, Conservatives are turning into a situation similar to the 1980s mass pedophilia outbreaks. It's not really happening but they still want to prove it is. Chances are 1 year from now, nothing will have come from the dozens of new inspections and life will continue as normal.



Accurate? By who's accounts? Yours? Lolz. Please, stop it with the emotionality. It's depressing to watch.

Again, who's been asking the right questions? We don't know whether there is a nationally systemic problem. Maybe not, but maybe so. I don't think that you can claim that a "lack of cases" is proof of anything. It took 17 years for facts to emerge about Gosnell and his charnel house.
 
Again, who's been asking the right questions? We don't know whether there is a nationally systemic problem. Maybe not, but maybe so. I don't think that you can claim that a "lack of cases" is proof of anything. It took 17 years for facts to emerge about Gosnell and his charnel house.

We also don't know if the dinosaurs are all extinct, but I'm not buying any dinosaur insurance.
 
Again, who's been asking the right questions? We don't know whether there is a nationally systemic problem. Maybe not, but maybe so. I don't think that you can claim that a "lack of cases" is proof of anything. It took 17 years for facts to emerge about Gosnell and his charnel house.

WHERE ARE THE STATISTICS? Why has nobody kept track of incidents like this? If they're "systematic" - there should at least be one pro-life watch dog out there with the evidence to back it up. However, there aren't. There aren't dozens of butcher shops lightly disguised as abortion clinics and in the last 10 years not a SINGLE group has thought to keep track of the dozens that should - theoretically - exist. Why? It seems after such a horrible incident - there would be AT LEAST - one pro-life abortion clinic watch dog ready to come up with facts. There aren't.
 
WHERE ARE THE STATISTICS? Why has nobody kept track of incidents like this? If they're "systematic" - there should at least be one pro-life watch dog out there with the evidence to back it up. However, there aren't. There aren't dozens of butcher shops lightly disguised as abortion clinics and in the last 10 years not a SINGLE group has thought to keep track of the dozens that should - theoretically - exist. Why? It seems after such a horrible incident - there would be AT LEAST - one pro-life abortion clinic watch dog ready to come up with facts. There aren't.

Hatuey, you are being very cruel

This one guy is all the abortion banners have. If it weren't for him, they would have no reason to fantasize about baby murdering butchers. Why are you working so hard to deny them this one small pleasure of theirs?
 
WHERE ARE THE STATISTICS? Why has nobody kept track of incidents like this? If they're "systematic" - there should at least be one pro-life watch dog out there with the evidence to back it up. However, there aren't. There aren't dozens of butcher shops lightly disguised as abortion clinics and in the last 10 years not a SINGLE group has thought to keep track of the dozens that should - theoretically - exist. Why? It seems after such a horrible incident - there would be AT LEAST - one pro-life abortion clinic watch dog ready to come up with facts. There aren't.

I don't have an answer to your question. But I am sure you'll agree that it's stupifying that Gosnell's clinic wasn't inspected for 17 years. If it wasn't, why shouldn't we wonder about other clinics that have "flown under the radar"?
 
I don't have an answer to your question. But I am sure you'll agree that it's stupifying that Gosnell's clinic wasn't inspected for 17 years. If it wasn't, why shouldn't we wonder about other clinics that have "flown under the radar"?

The reason you don't have an answer to my question is that there simply isn't the epidemic of butcher shops you're wishing into existence.
 
Again, who's been asking the right questions? We don't know whether there is a nationally systemic problem. Maybe not, but maybe so. I don't think that you can claim that a "lack of cases" is proof of anything. It took 17 years for facts to emerge about Gosnell and his charnel house.

Reading the grand jury report, it seems abortion clinics in PA were given special exemption under ridge, due to such oversight being seen as a deterrent against their services. So clinics were allowed to operate with a lower degree of oversight than other out patient facilities. But despite the minor level of oversight existing, Gosnell failed numerous inspections and complaints were still filed against him. But it seems the health department was committed to ignoring these, even going so far as apparently withholding evidence from the grand jury

There was also an attitude, within the medical community, that encouraged not reporting observations and treatments for patients that developed complications from abortion procedures. Going so far as even not reporting resulting deaths
 
The reason you don't have an answer to my question is that there simply isn't the epidemic of butcher shops you're wishing into existence.

No, the reason I don't have an answer is the same reason that you don't: We don't have the facts. Oh, and at in at least one state's big city, there was a demonstrable systemic failure. There may be others.

Which is my point.

You don't know any more than I do whether there are other horror stories out there.
 
WHERE ARE THE STATISTICS? Why has nobody kept track of incidents like this? If they're "systematic" - there should at least be one pro-life watch dog out there with the evidence to back it up. However, there aren't. There aren't dozens of butcher shops lightly disguised as abortion clinics and in the last 10 years not a SINGLE group has thought to keep track of the dozens that should - theoretically - exist. Why? It seems after such a horrible incident - there would be AT LEAST - one pro-life abortion clinic watch dog ready to come up with facts. There aren't.

well, in the case of PA, it seems they were given minimal oversight, with that not even being enforced. There was also collusion within the medical community to not report treating botched procedures that even resulted in death. So not only was there no interest in keeping track of such incidents, there wasn't much of a means too
 
No, you're wrong. They're people too and not just some label.

Yeah, I went back and altered the post to make it clearer I was using that sarcastically.
 
Protecting the Constitution > Protecting the sensitivities of the abortion banners

Funny. I did a search function on the Constitution and didn't see "abortion" in there anywhere.

I did come across the part where it talked about not being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. It was, as I recall, against it.


A fetus is not a person

Reminds me of a case I read about back in the late 19th Century. A man was let off for murder on the argument that the law only forbade the killing of a man; it said nothing about whether or not one was allowed to kill a chinaman. A Chinaman, you see, like a nigger, or a fetus, is not a real person, and therefore killing them? Not against the law.

The linguistics are the same - find a different name, insist that the individual in question isn't a real "person" (You know - not like "you and I" are "real persons"), and then use that to justify its abuse.
 
Again, who's been asking the right questions? We don't know whether there is a nationally systemic problem. Maybe not, but maybe so. I don't think that you can claim that a "lack of cases" is proof of anything. It took 17 years for facts to emerge about Gosnell and his charnel house.

Bingo. And even now there will be strong push-back against any kind of sweeping investigation which might "unfortunately" uncover more.

:( Sick.
 
From the Chicago Tribune:

"The abortion industry tut-tuts it all as a deplorable, yet a single, isolated incident. It ignores the clinics being investigated for botched abortions or hazardous facilities in Alabama, New Mexico, Minnesota, Maryland, Colorado and Florida. There may be more, since abortion record-keeping is abysmal.

Even Illinois, by law, doesn't keep records of infants born alive during an abortion, an Illinois Department of Public Health spokeswoman said in an email. Amazingly, Illinois abortion clinics hadn't been inspected for up to 15 years before the Gosnell case broke, an Associated Press investigation found."

Investigations of abortion clinics nearly nonexistent - Chicago Tribune

The article goes on to say that because of the Gosnell case, the Dept. of Public Health finally acted and that two of nine clinics were closed, at least temporarily, for violations that "threaten the public interest, health, safety and welfare."

It comments, "Some supervisory, sanitation and other violations sound eerily similar to Gosnell's."

So in Illinois pregnancy termination centers hadn't been inspected in 15 years. I hope that Illinois is the only state with such slipshod oversight, and as I've said, none of us knows yet.

But I hope if there are problems, they're all exposed because we can surely all agree that that this is a benefit to the public welfare.
 
Lack of evidence is not lack of existence.
 
It is horrible what happened here. I believe if they are found guilty...nothing short of life in prison should be used. I'm more in favor of death if absolutely proved guilty.

However, I don't think this makes any case for abortions to be illegal. As a matter of fact, I think it does the opposite. Why? Well, if abortions become illegal they will go underground and more atrocious things like this will happen.
 
Are you for real?


Definition in first link:



And pretty much the same definition in the other two links. Birth control PREVENTS conception. If you get pregnant while on birth control, that means your birth control FAILED, and you are PREGNANT!

You're not considered pregnant until the fertilized egg attaches to the uterine wall and the body starts producing pregnancy hormones.

Many types of birth control prevent more than jusr fertilization. Like UIDs, they also prevent implantation.




other than that, I don't understand the.debate you're having.
 
It is horrible what happened here. I believe if they are found guilty...nothing short of life in prison should be used. I'm more in favor of death if absolutely proved guilty.

However, I don't think this makes any case for abortions to be illegal. As a matter of fact, I think it does the opposite. Why? Well, if abortions become illegal they will go underground and more atrocious things like this will happen.

That doesnt excuse the state for completely droping the ball on keeping the facilities up to health code, sterile for medical procedures and adhering to a rather lenient state law code regarding abortion facilities.

Your line of thinking is why they kept excusing Gosnell's clinic in the first place. Dont enforce the law according to a socio-political agenda, just enforce it.
 
That doesnt excuse the state for completely droping the ball on keeping the facilities up to health code, sterile for medical procedures and adhering to a rather lenient state law code regarding abortion facilities.

Your line of thinking is why they kept excusing Gosnell's clinic in the first place. Dont enforce the law according to a socio-political agenda, just enforce it.

Don't blame my line of thinking. I agree that what that clinic did was criminal. It was disgusting and they should pay a heavy price. I don't excuse the state for dropping the ball. Obviously, they did.

My entire point is that if we make it 100% illegal...what do you think will happen? It won't be automatic rainbows and lollipops. We will be dealing with underground abortions which are likely just as disgusting as this is.
 
:shrug:
when I talk like what? When I describe the refusal to ascribe human terminology to an unborn child as dehumanization? Well, I mean, duh? It ain't praise-poetry.

And you respond like Sanga too
 
It is horrible what happened here. I believe if they are found guilty...nothing short of life in prison should be used. I'm more in favor of death if absolutely proved guilty.

However, I don't think this makes any case for abortions to be illegal. As a matter of fact, I think it does the opposite. Why? Well, if abortions become illegal they will go underground and more atrocious things like this will happen.

The issue here, as the grand jury stated, is protection of the health of women and infants, not abortion.

And regardless of our individual views, I think we have the right to expect our states and cities to exercise due diligence.
 
The issue here, as the grand jury stated, is protection of the health of women and infants, not abortion.

And regardless of our individual views, I think we have the right to expect our states and cities to exercise due diligence.

Agreed.

Abortion became a center argument in this thread which is why I gave my opinion on it.
 
It
is dehumanization, and it's linguistically purposeful. Much easier to kill the undesireables if they aren't perceived actually human, you know.

You all talk like you're brainwashed or something. Pro choices really don't talk or approach this issue as if they are all Nazis.

You're basically debating a boogie man version of pro choices.

Do you ever think that maybe most people support abortion rights simply because making abortion illegal would create many undersired legal, social, and medical issues?
 
Back
Top Bottom