• cmarie

    If H.R. 3803 were in effect in 2009, she and the doctors who advised her on her options and performed the procedure would have been subject to criminal prosecution.

    What “procedure” is that?  Obviously at 22 weeks it’s not a d&c.  Could you describe it please?  Many thanks

  • crowepps

    When coping with a anencephalic fetus, the gross deformity itself and the fact that the deformity is a death sentence is far ickier than any details of a procedure used to remove it before it can feel pain, in order to safeguard the woman’s health, and forestall her having to spend another FOUR MONTHS using up her own body to grow a pre-dead fetus as large as possible before its inevitable death.

    Since a woman who chooses for her own reasons to endure that four months of despair is entirely free to do so, and most of us have the empathy to recognize just how difficult that is for her and how much of a sacrifice she is voluntarily making, it puzzles me very much why anybody would want to INFLICT a similar four months of torture on a woman unwilling to see any reason for or unable to bear prolonged physical risk and fruitless emotional pain.

    Catholic dogma sure is focused on creating those circumstances which will result in the maximum possible amount of suffering for women.

  • oak-cliff-townie

    Let me help here.

    Necessary  procedures  D&C and others are what women who are the good graces of the  All Coitus =  Conception crowd have .

    An abortion is what everyone else has .

    Hope that helps

  • logician

    It is interesting that you talk about there being no reason or science asscociated with those in favor of HR 3803, but then go on to report that the 3 individuals testifying are all members of the medical field. The contrary witness is an individual speaking from an emotional perspective. 


    It seems a disservice to your own viewpoint that you indicate that legislation should be passed using science and reason as a barometer, but your only attack for Levatino’s testimony is that he “offensively” indicated that it may be easier for a patient than a doctor to go though an abortion; a point which you make, again, from an emotional (rather than rational) perspective and is subjective in nature one way or the other.

Mobile Theme