• 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!

"The House of Horrors" Gosnell case

Vote:

  • Yes, there probably are more abortion doctors like Gosnell

    Votes: 23 79.3%

  • No, Gosnell is an anomaly

    Votes: 6 20.7%
  • Total voters
    29
sangha said:
It's always nice to see the anti-abortion rights side demonstrate the moral superiority of their side by telling lies about the issue.
Click to expand...

Do you have anything of substance to post or are you just going to piss in the wind?

SmokeAndMirrors said:
I don't live in a fantasy land where people never have sex unless they want to be parents. Is that where you live?
Click to expand...

I live in the land of taking responsibility for one's choices, and not passing on the burden to those who had no choice in the matter.

Apparently you live in a world of no sexual responsibility. It makes the rape metaphor all the more apt.

I also don't feel some sort of need to punish women for having the audacity to enjoy their sex lives.
Click to expand...

No, just the baby.

Defenseless indeed. Taking over several organ systems of an adult human hardly seems defenseless.
Click to expand...

Actually its a natural function of the body. I suggest basic sex ed. See your local elementary school.


I'm sorry, I just can't find it in me to hate women enough for that.
Click to expand...

Good one. Here, let me try.

I can't find it in me to hate babies enough to justify killing them for other peoples choices. How's that?


A baby, as a self-sufficient, detached organism, has every right.
Click to expand...

A baby is not a self-sufficient organism. It's still a "parasite" by technical biological definition, and it continues to be until it no longer drains resources from its parents without contributing of its own.

Do you believe parents have responsibility to take care of the kids they create? Why?

A ZEF feeding off someone else's livelihood? No.
Click to expand...

A baby doesn't feed off of someone else' livelihood? Interesting, I don't know why so many people waste time supporting them then.

Because it is clear the woman's rights are so drastically more important.
Click to expand...

I get it. You think you should have the right to kill your baby because you want to have sex in whatever fashion you desire without having to deal with the consequences. I respectfully disagree and I don't consider freedom from responsibility a right.
 
AGENT J said:
I view this as it needs to be viewed

its a DOCTOR who is, or seems to be VIOLATING and BREAKING LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS and PROTOCOLS.

If true he needs to be prosecuted to the fullest of the law.

as far as what to do about it? not sure. Not sure what all the actual failures are.

Doctor violations
Employee violations
oversight org violations or lack or enforcement, letting things slide etc etc
Click to expand...

According to the grand jury report, the biggest culprit is "letting things slide" because they didn't want to "impede women's access."
http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/PDFs/GrandJuryWomensMedical.pdf
 
Redress said:
This is why I tend to avoid abortion threads.
Click to expand...

Me as well. It seems this issue allows little reasonable debate, and I suppose I can understand why. Both sides are usually pretty passionate.
 
Republic Now! said:
Me as well. It seems this issue allows little reasonable debate, and I suppose I can understand why. Both sides are usually pretty passionate.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between passionate and dishonest. If you call abortion "murder", you are being dishonest. If you say it is just another medical treatment like every other, you are being dishonest.
 
Republic Now! said:
responsibility
Click to expand...

sorry to quote you like that but i didnt really have anything directly i wanted to quote.
Im not really familiar with you and your stance that i remember. So i currently have no reason to not think you are among the HONEST and LOGICAL pro-lifers here so i just wanted to ask your opinion on responsibility.

Some people feel obligated and are driven by morals and responsibility to abort.

Do you deem them factually wrong or do you just disagree

and no matter the answer if you want their ability to exercise their opinion taken away by law why?
why should your opinion be valued higher than theirs and why should it be forced on them, IF thats what you want believe.
 
Redress said:
There is a difference between passionate and dishonest. If you call abortion "murder", you are being dishonest. If you say it is just another medical treatment like every other, you are being dishonest.
Click to expand...


I can use the term homicide if you prefer, but really it's a matter of semantics. We call acts of dictators "mass murders" even though they're technically not, since the actions were legal under the system they were committed in. We consider it unjust however, and consider the term appropriate. I feel the same way about abortion. I'm engaging in hyperbole, not dishonesty.

AGENT J said:
sorry to quote you like that but i didnt really have anything directly i wanted to quote.
Im not really familiar with you and your stance that i remember. So i currently have no reason to not think you are among the HONEST and LOGICAL pro-lifers here so i just wanted to ask your opinion on responsibility.

Some people feel obligated and are driven by morals and responsibility to abort.

Do you deem them factually wrong or do you just disagree

and no matter the answer if you want their ability to exercise their opinion taken away by law why?
why should your opinion be valued higher than theirs and why should it be forced on them, IF thats what you want believe.
Click to expand...

If I understand what you're talking about, you mean the people who feel they can't give the child a good life and, while they may even want the child, feel they would be making it suffer, so they choose instead to not put it through that experience.

It's not exactly fair to that person to decide their life isn't worth living for them is the short answer.

The problem with that line of thinking is that you have a third party deciding whether an individual's life is worthwhile. I don't consider suicide fundamentally immoral, but the decision is an individual one. I don't like the idea of means testing quality of life to decide if people should live or not. Everyone should be given the opportunity to live, and again, if they're lives are unbearable, I don't judge them for ending it of their own free will.

Once you decide it becomes morally justified to kill another person on the basis of quality of life, you follow a line of thought that leads to some pretty dark places. I may consider your quality of life too low to be worth living, but you may disagree. (I don't actually know what your quality of life is, but you see the point). I don't feel that I have the moral authority to decide that you should therefore not live it, regardless of how certain I am in your misery.
 
Last edited:
Republic Now! said:
1.)Actually abortion is classified as murder if it's not consented to by the mother. I don't make the logical leap that it suddenly it's murder anymore just because our legal system is hypocritical.



2.)If I understand what you're talking about, you mean the people who feel they can't give the child a good life and, while they may even want the child, feel they would be making it suffer, so they choose instead to not put it through that experience.

3.)It's not exactly fair to that person to decide their life isn't worth living for them is the short answer.

4.)The problem with that line of thinking is that you have a third party deciding whether an individual's life is worthwhile. I don't consider suicide fundamentally immoral, but the decision is an individual one. I don't like the idea of means testing quality of life to decide if people should live or not. Everyone should be given the opportunity to live, and again, if they're lives are unbearable, I don't judge them for ending it of their own free will.

5.)Once you decide it becomes morally justified to kill another person on the basis of quality of life, you follow a line of thought that leads to some pretty dark places. I may consider your quality of life too low to be worth living, but you may disagree. (I don't actually know what your quality of life is, but you see the point). I don't feel that I have the moral authority to decide that you should therefore not live it, regardless of how certain I am in your misery.

That's a different ethical debate, however.
Click to expand...

1.) this is still inaccurate since abortion doesnt have to kill the ZEF. Killing the ZEF without the mothers consent is murder in some cases not abortion, unless the ZEF dies afterwards and its attribuated to abortion. Just going for accuracy ;)

2.) yes thats part of it but some of them are driven by other reasons and thier morals.

3.) I understand your opinion and assignment of that but those people feel its "not exactly fair" to bring that child into the world under the terms you listed and others. Not being a dick just pointing out that this logic brings us back full circle to why are they wrong and you are right.

im NOT saying you made that claim just pointing out the generality of it.

4.) 3rd party? im not sure i follow, theres two parties the woman and the ZEF, im guessing you just mean the ZEF isnt making the choice and the ZEF is effected.
but again since the woman is also directly effected why shouldnt she have any say, IF thats what you believe?
Her life is at risk, that risk may be minute, it may be large but her life is at risk.

5.) well person is subjective and "quality of life" wouldnt be the only reason, just a possible reason. And legally there no dark place to go to in my opinion because the whole abortion debate is only a debate because of where the ZEF resides, its a risk of life to the woman and how it becomes viable.

take that away and the debate is over.

so "my quality of life" being discussed isnt even close to the same discussion, that example isnt a parallel.
I would agree you have no right to decide whether i should live because i dont reside inside of you, im already viable and im no threat to you.

but im guessing you see the difference since you said thats a different discussion.

Thank you for answering by the way. Always nice to talk to anybody in the abortion threads that isnt extreme and all dishonest because of emotions no matter if they are pro life/choice.
 
Republic Now! said:
I can use the term homicide if you prefer, but really it's a matter of semantics. We call acts of dictators "mass murders" even though they're technically not, since the actions were legal under the system they were committed in. We consider it unjust however, and consider the term appropriate. I feel the same way about abortion. I'm engaging in hyperbole, not dishonesty.
Click to expand...

Other people using the word wrong does not make your usage of the word less wrong. Dishonest hyperbole would be the accurate description of the use of the word murder when it comes to abortion, and you have shown you cannot even claim ignorance.

By the way, you can be passionate about an issue without using dishonesty or hyperbole. Being passionate is just an excuse.
 
Josie said:
Do you think there are more Kermit Gosnells in this country?
Click to expand...

Sure, why not?

If so, what should be done about this?
Click to expand...

We could start by erasing the stigma to acquiring abortions by the ignorant and the religious, so that women can openly get into contact with licensed, professional, and safe abortion providers and not men like Kermit Gosnell.
 
Republic Now! said:
I can use the term homicide if you prefer, but really it's a matter of semantics.
Click to expand...

Personally, I stick to homicide. It's simple and accurate. No hyperbole, and it gets the point across. It should be murder, but the definition of murder requires illegality. Murder is a specific criminal charge.
 
Redress said:
Other people using the word wrong does not make your usage of the word less wrong.
Click to expand...

What's so wrong about it?

Dishonest hyperbole would be the accurate description of the use of the word murder when it comes to abortion, and you have shown you cannot even claim ignorance.

By the way, you can be passionate about an issue without using dishonesty or hyperbole. Being passionate is just an excuse.
Click to expand...

Dishonesty implies deception. What am I being deceptive about?

Also, hyperbole is not always a terrible thing.

JayDubya said:
Personally, I stick to homicide. It's simple and accurate. No hyperbole, and it gets the point across. It should be murder, but the definition of murder requires illegality. Murder is a specific criminal charge.
Click to expand...

Why is it suddenly so important to use the literal definition of murder when talking about abortion when such consideration is not made for any other topic whatsoever?

Ultimately, if it upsets people so bad that I choose to use the word, they can go cry to themselves about it in the corner.
 
JayDubya said:
Personally, I stick to homicide. It's simple and accurate. No hyperbole, and it gets the point across. It should be murder, but the definition of murder requires illegality. Murder is a specific criminal charge.
Click to expand...

as already proven many times its 100% not accurate if you are talking about abortion.

in America "Abortion" is FACTUALLY neither homicide or murder.

if you disagree by all means factually prove me wrong :)
 
Republic Now! said:
Why is it suddenly so important to use the literal definition of murder when talking about abortion when such consideration is not made for any other topic whatsoever?

Ultimately, if it upsets people so bad that I choose to use the word, they can go cry to themselves about it in the corner.
Click to expand...

I'm somewhat inclined to agree with you, but I don't like the headaches associated with not being literal and specific and correct in one's language on this topic.

Which is why I tend to be all of those things.

Abortion is the premeditated and aggressive killing of a human being; it would specifically be murder only if it were illegal with the criminal charge of murder applying to those who perpetrated the act. Any killing of any human being, however, is a homicide.
 
Josie said:
Do you think there are more Kermit Gosnells in this country? (If you don't know the story, you need to know...)

Abortion Doctor Trial: Coverage of Kermit Gosnell Case Sparks Debate

If so, what should be done about this?
Click to expand...

In any profession there is a small percentage of people who have no shame or regard for other people. They have little or no conscience and sometimes it involves murder or bankrupting thousands to make a big bottom line.

In medicine it there should always be ethics boards and there had to be numerous people who turned a blind eye to this so they are complicit as well.

I remember once hearing a group of urologists smug as using a less effective chemotherapeutic agent to treat prostrate cancer provided a significantly bigger bottom line and these guys were earning close to a million. The choice they were making was "effective"
yet not the most effective.

I have no answers.

Do not harm seems to be lost in the equation in some cases.

I have not followed this case and yet I hope he is in jail.
 
AGENT J said:
as already proven many times its 100% not accurate if you are talking about abortion.

in America "Abortion" is FACTUALLY neither homicide or murder.

if you disagree by all means factually prove me wrong :)
Click to expand...

It is homicide. Homicide is the killing of a human being. The fetus is a human being, even if you don't consider it a person.
 
Republic Now! said:
It is homicide. Homicide is the killing of a human being. The fetus is a human being, even if you don't consider it a person.
Click to expand...

amoung other facts that get in the way of this, we are talking about "abortion"

abortion isnt a killing If the ZEF lives, which happens, hence this whole thread. The life of the ZEF is meaningless to the "abortion".

Hence Abortion is not factually homicide.
 
Well, if we're being technical, the term "ZEF" is somewhat disingenuous since the zygote phase lasts less than a week, and most women do not even realize pregnancy by that point, much less abort.


AGENT J said:
amoung other facts that get in the way of this, we are talking about "abortion"

abortion isnt a killing If the ZEF lives, which happens, hence this whole thread. The life of the ZEF is meaningless to the "abortion".

Hence Abortion is not factually homicide.
Click to expand...

No, the aborted does not survive the act. The doctor induced pregnancy before killing them, instead of killing them in the womb which is what usually occurs with earlier term abortions.
 
Republic Now! said:
1.)Well, if we're being technical, the term "ZEF" is somewhat disingenuous since the zygote phase lasts less than a week, and most women do not even realize pregnancy by that point, much less abort.




No, the aborted does not survive the act. The doctor induced pregnancy before killing them, instead of killing them in the womb which is what usually occurs with earlier term abortions.
Click to expand...

1.) not sure how that makes the term disingenuous? i could use EF if you like that but doesnt change the discussion at all.
2.) false, you are giving me an example of this case, the fact remains there have been abortions (which is only a medical procedure to stop pregnancy) that the ZEF lives.

Abortion can is preformed if the ZEF is already dead, an abortions is preformed if the ZEF is a live and when the abortion is over whether the ZEF is a live of dead has no impact to the abortion.

while the super vast majority of abortions result in the death of the ZEF since they are preformed before viability abortion by definition is not dependent of the life of the ZEF.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) not sure how that makes the term disingenuous? i could use EF if you like that but doesnt change the discussion at all.
Click to expand...

No more so than my use of the word murder, no.

2.) false, you are giving me an example of this case, the fact remains there have been abortions (which is only a medical procedure to stop pregnancy) that the ZEF lives.
Click to expand...

These are failed abortions. By definition, a successful abortion implies killing the fetus.

Abortion can is preformed if the ZEF is already dead, an abortions is preformed if the ZEF is a live and when the abortion is over whether the ZEF is a live of dead has no impact to the abortion.
Click to expand...

This is induction of labor, which, while it can be an aspect of abortion, is not by itself abortion.

while the super vast majority of abortions result in the death of the ZEF since they are preformed before viability abortion by definition is not dependent of the life of the ZEF.
Click to expand...

Actually it is:

Abortion - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as
a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage
b : induced expulsion of a human fetus
c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy — compare contagious abortion
Click to expand...

If the fetus lives, it is not abortion.
 
Republic Now! said:
1.)No more so than my use of the word murder, no.



2.)These are failed abortions. By definition, a successful abortion implies killing the fetus.



3.)This is induction of labor, which, while it can be an aspect of abortion, is not by itself abortion.



4.)Actually it is:

Abortion - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

5.)If the fetus lives, it is not abortion.
Click to expand...


1.) Zef is accurate, murder is not
2.) false not all abortions have to terminate a ZEF, sorry you are factually wrong
3.) false again by the medical definition of abortion
4.) actually its not, your ONE definition doesnt cover them all sorry, there are many,would you like more?

Dicitionaries
Definition of abortion in Oxford Dictionaries (British & World English)
1 [mass noun] the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks:concerns such as abortion and euthanasia
abortion noun (END OF PREGNANCY) - definition in British English Dictionary & Thesaurus - Cambridge Dictionary Online
END OF PREGNANCY
American Heritage Dictionary Entry: abortion
b. Any of various procedures that result in the termination of a pregnancy. Also called induced abortion.
Abortion | Define Abortion at Dictionary.com
1.Also called voluntary abortion. the removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus in order to end a pregnancy.
2.any of various surgical methods for terminating a pregnancy, especially during the first six months.

Medical
abortion - definition of abortion in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
1. expulsion from the uterus of the products of conception before the fetus is viable.
2. premature stoppage of a natural or a pathological process.
2. Any of various procedures that result in such a termination of pregnancy.
Abortion definition - Medical Dictionary definitions of popular medical terms easily defined on MedTerms
Abortion: In medicine, an abortion is the premature exit of the products of conception (the fetus, fetal membranes, and placenta) from the uterus. It is the loss of a pregnancy and does not refer to why that pregnancy was lost.
Abortion -- Medical Definition
Definitions:
1. Expulsion from the uterus of an embryo or fetus before viability (20 weeks' gestation [18 weeks after fertilization] or fetal weight less than 500 g). A distinction made between abortion and premature birth is that premature infants are those born after the stage of viability but before 37 weeks' gestation. Abortion may be either spontaneous (occurring from natural causes) or induced (artificially or therapeutically).
2. The arrest of any action or process before its normal completion.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/abortion.html
An abortion is a procedure to end a pregnancy. It uses medicine or surgery to remove the embryo or fetus and placenta from the uterus. The procedure is done by a licensed health care professional.

definition of an abortion preformed on a fetus already dead
Dilation and evacuation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dilation and evacuation (also sometimes called dilation and extraction) literally refers to the dilation of the cervix and surgical evacuation of the contents of the uterus. It is a method of abortion as well as a therapeutic procedure used after miscarriage to prevent infection by ensuring that the uterus is fully evacuated.[1][2]

In various health care centers it may be called by different names:

D&E (Dilation and evacuation)
ERPOC (Evacuation of Retained Products of Conception)
TOP or STOP ((Surgical) Termination Of Pregnancy)


5.) false, by the medical definition the abortion is 100% successful because the PREGNANCY was terminated.
 
Last edited:
JayDubya said:
For the record dude, if you're skeptical about something, you can just politely ask for citations rather than being passive aggressively rude about it.

From the abortion subforum today:



Like I said. At least two. There was a prominent paper by some European ethicists widely talked about in this forum as well, I believe more than just those two agreed with their findings, but I'd have to find the thread.

Again, I'm not even making a value judgment here, just noting that these folks exist, which rendered the statement I was replying to false. Which is what I said...
Click to expand...

I don't remember which thread--there are two with similar subject lines, and I think it's the one with the warning at Post #140. Anyway, I think you're talking about cpwill's posts about the abstract of an article from the British Medical Journal: After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom