This is not how the law was crafted. The law which catholics tried to pass (here in Slovakia too), said that hospital cannot fire a doctor for refusing to perform abortions on moral grounds in any case except for danger to health of the mother. The doctor doesnt have to tell the hospital in advance he wants to do so (before he was hired). Now if you think about it, it means that the doctor can be hired to perform abortions, then refuse, and the hospital has to hire another, without firing him - paying him to do nothing! And no mention before the work contract was signed is needed. In essence it would legalise fraud.
I have never shot a prospective girl-murderer - but, then, I am not a self-satisfied cowboy who believes in letting babies live to shoot one another and be executed for it so that rich swine should sell guns.
I do not think that Doctors should be forced to perform abortions. Abortion is a contentious issue strong arguments on both sides. It is precisely because there is no consensus, that it is wrong for one side to force their views on others. This is why those that want the state to criminalize abortion are hypocrites. They are fine with forcing their beliefs on others for things that they agree with but cry murder if someone tries to impose rules contradictory to their beliefs on them. You either agree with forcing moral beliefs on others or you do not .. you can not have it both ways. There are plenty of Doctors willing to perform abortions such that those who have a problem with it should not be compelled to.
Nor have I ever shot anyone! And as a cowboy I am a complete failure as I cannot ride a horse worth a (*)(*)(*)(*). Wow you need to get a tin foil hat a few sizes larger, I think your circulation has been cut off. SO you would prefer killing babies pre-emptively if you deem them likely to commmit violent crimes later in life. Interesting.
Of course moral behavior from everyone would stop just about everything bad in the world that humans cause.... ...but that's an expectation just waiting to fester into a resentment. The world is full of flawed humans, and if we try to ignore the flawed ones, they'll make problems.
No one should be forced to do anything against their will or conscience. It is one of the corner stone arguments for not making abortions illegal, women should not be forced to gestate. Having said that, there are essential differences between talking about a principle and certain particular situations. A doctor, any doctor becomes one to serve the needs of patients not to promote their own morality. Still, doctors a human beings to and to the extent that they have reservations or objections about certain procedures they can mitigate them by choosing the where and what they practice, thus being able to avoid circumstances that would place them in moral, religions or ethically conflicting situations. For instance a neurologist will not be in a situation that would necessitate the performance of an abortion. But surely there must be Catholic and I am using that only for the purposes of the discussion, OBGYN practitioners, but I dare say they do not work at PP. The difficult situation arises when a Catholic doctor in an emergency room is faced with a case that necessitates an abortion because the life of the pregnant woman is in peril. Will the doctor abide by Catholic dogma or the need of the patient? Being an emergency room the need of the patient comes first, there should never be any question about that. Again the doctor can and should avoid any and all possible circumstances where personal convictions would cause harm to someone. Just imagine what would happen if a police officer because of some personal conviction would not want to intervene in situation, or a fireman or any other number of professionals who take on the noble jobs of serving others.
Agreed but since a woman having an abortion in the early stages of pregnancy is not considered homicide I do not see how your comment is relevant.
In the case of first or second trimester abortions....homicide is legal. Homicide is also legal when you pull the plug on DNR's. Homicide is also legal when we execute convicted criminals. Homicide is also legal when a US soldier kills an armed enemy
I think to force a being into a world where it has no place prepared and no-one properly to care for it is so evil that I have no patience with the blatherers who get satisfaction out of trying to turn women into cows.
I agree actually, but where you are terribly misguided is that you do not beleive the child is "in the world" until birth. That is an erroneous notion. Not sure how demanding a woman not commit premedtated homicide on her own child is turning women into cows though. SOunds like a lot of drug enduced halucinogenic nonsense to me.
You want to force people to bear young they don't want and can't support you are a people-farmer, like the worst slave-ownsers and the SS.
Not at all. I am not forcing people to have sexual intercourse at all. Congrats, your Nazi reference solidifies the fact that you cannot support the horrific practice of abortion, so you attack and demonize those who know this and point it out to you.
I have seen similar claims from Americans boasting their own superiority. In both cases I tend to dismiss it as rubbish. Rarely when author is speaking in relation to a particular aspect of policy it is claimed that one side of the Atlantic manages better than the other and when they can bolster their argument with facts and I might be inclined to agree. But generally it should be dismissed as trolling and nothing more. Tosh absolute tosh! Then why not use the figures for Europe as a whole? Because you specifically said 'Eastern' Europe. Again Eastern Europe a progressive area? because I have never heard it characterized in those terms before. Them being Eastern Europeans? I have certainly never seen an Eastern European on this board boasting of the progressiveness of the region. You seem to have taken everything stereotype you have ever heard about Western European family planning policy, misapplied them to Eastern Europe and are now trying and failing to cover your mistake. Western Europe is broadly speaking progressive, with countries applying variations on the policies you listed in the quote above and misapplied to Eastern Europe. They also as an aggregate have a lower abortion rate to the US. So I put the question which I have already asked to you again.
I do not believe anyone has accused you of that, but you would force a woman to gestate against her will.
Nope, I would force her not to kill. Gestation would never happen if she didn't take the risk! I would never force her to take the risk.
Lets set aside the killing aspect for a moment just for the sake of focusing on the risk you are implying. On what basis do you interpret anyone's sexual activity with risk taking and on what basis do you equate risk taking with consent to anything? as I said you were not accused of that.
What level of risk? It is a fact that humans are sexual creatures and will engage in it. So to do it "safely" one should know what level is the risk as it is done with numerous other "risky" undertakings. Also why is assuming risk equal to consent. It is not so in any other human endeavor, why this alone?
Thsi is assiniine. Assuming risk is assuming risk. "Consent" is irrelevant. When you take a risk and the natural consequence is the creation of another human being, there is no rational reason that you should then be allowed to kill that person at will because you didn't want that person to exist!
Do you want to discuss this or just make silly remarks? Principles are principles and can not be isolated for a single purpose. If you wish to use the risk argument you have to support it.
99% of the time, when women have sex, they don't fall pregnant, so why the big deal over a very small risk?
