“Abortion saves lives”
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (43)
sorted by:
The problem is that such as situation is not so cut and dry. For example, you can have a failed pregnancy but since there is still a fetal heartbeat a doctor's hands are tied to do anything. This forces the woman to wait until she's in a health emergency like developing sepsis or other life-threatening development, before the doctors can lift a finger. "Hey your wife has a ticking time bomb but we have to wait until it explodes rather than remove it before it can hurt her" is not an ideal situation.
We are in this position because abortionists can not be trusted. They were the ones that turned "health of the mother" into a opening you can drive a truck through. These fuckin whiney doctors you hear on the news are the ones unable to parse an ethical dilemma. Their profession's behavior is what lead to "harsh" legislation that creates the type of situations they complain about.
But how do you parse an ethical dilemma when the line in the sand has been drawn on a fetal heartbeat?
The "line in the sand" exists precisely because the medical profession decided they were comfortable terminating viable pregnancies for whatever reason. They parsed a dilemma and . . . chose poorly. The populations of most American states disliked that state of affairs so they implemented democratic restrictions on that sort of behavior. So now abortionists must tackle a different dilemma: what to do in the very rare case of a pregnancy that will actually kill the mother and laws that involve extreme prohibitions. If you take them at their word and they are not cowards, then they will perform the abortion. That's how you parse an ethical dilemma.