Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on February 28, 2009, 12:03:40 AM

Title: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on February 28, 2009, 12:03:40 AM
He's quickly turning out to be a partisan hack. 

White House set to reverse health care conscience clause

By Saundra Young
CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Obama administration plans to reverse a regulation from late in the Bush administration allowing health-care workers to refuse to provide services based on moral objections, an official said Friday.
The rule protects the rights of health care providers who refuse to participate in certain procedures.

The rule protects the rights of health care providers who refuse to participate in certain procedures.

The Provider Refusal Rule was proposed by the Bush White House in August and enacted on January 20, the day President Barack Obama took office.

It expanded on a 30-year-old law establishing a "conscience clause" for "health-care professionals who don't want to perform abortions."

Under the rule, workers in health-care settings -- from doctors to janitors -- can refuse to provide services, information or advice to patients on subjects such as contraception, family planning, blood transfusions and even vaccine counseling if they are morally against it.

"We recognize and understand that some providers have objections to providing abortions, according to an official at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The official declined to be identified because the policy change had not been announced. "We want to ensure that current law protects them.

"But we do not want to impose new limitations on services that would allow providers to refuse to provide to women and their families services like family planning and contraception that would actually help prevent the need for an abortion in the first place."

Many health-care organizations, including the American Medical Association, believe health-care providers have an obligation to their patients to advise them of the options despite their own beliefs. Critics of the current rule argue there are already laws on the books protecting health-care professionals when it comes to refusing care for personal reasons.

Dr. Suzanne T. Poppema, board chair of Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, praised Obama "for placing good health care above ideological demands."

"Physicians across the country were outraged when the Bush administration, in its final days, limited women's access to reproductive health care," she said. "Hundreds of doctors protested these midnight regulations and urged President Obama to repeal them quickly. We are thrilled that President Obama took the first steps today to ensure that our patients' health is once again protected."

But Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said, "Protecting the right of all health-care providers to make professional judgments based on moral convictions and ethical standards is foundational to federal law and is necessary to ensure that access to health care is not diminished, which will occur if health-care workers are forced out of their jobs because of their ethical stances.

"President's Obama's intention to change the language of these protections would result in the government becoming the conscience and not the individual. It is a person's right to exercise their moral judgment, not the government's to decide it for them."

An announcement reversing the current rule is expected early next week, the HHS official said. Any final action would have to be taken after a 30-day public comment period.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/27/conscience.rollback/index.html
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: 24KT on February 28, 2009, 12:23:27 AM
Damn Good Move!!! (http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/thumbup.gif)   (http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/thumbup.gif)
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: shootfighter1 on February 28, 2009, 06:00:30 AM
I'm not so certain.  Which docs (or related NPs or PAs) does this apply to?
I assume it means that all emergency room doctors will now be forced to Rx Abortive pills?  OB/GYN docs pushed to do an abortion?
If thats true then you can see it as discriminatory against the practitioner too.  ie...Someone with a moral objection to Abortive pills now cannot go into the broad specialty of ER medicine.  OB/GYN docs may be forced to do an abortion.  Thats limiting the field these people can go into because of mandated services by the gov which may be against their moral or religious beliefs.
Its obvious that a practitioner with strong feelings against abortion should not work in an abortion clinic.  However, I think this ruling applies mostly to Apportive pills in an emergency setting.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: George Whorewell on February 28, 2009, 07:04:19 AM
Yes, a doctor should be forced to give a woman her ninth abortion and provide condoms for 7 year olds. Why wasn't this law always in existance!?!?
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on February 28, 2009, 07:07:24 AM
Damn Good Move!!! (http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/thumbup.gif)   (http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/thumbup.gif)

Why?

Don't go cutting and pasting some bullshit, either.

Someone wanting an abortion can find another physician.

I know this is a strange concept but doctors have rights too.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on February 28, 2009, 10:36:12 AM
Why?

Don't go cutting and pasting some bullshit, either.

Someone wanting an abortion can find another physician.
I know this is a strange concept but doctors have rights too.

It's got nothing to do with forcing a doctor to perform an abortion:

Quote
It expanded on a 30-year-old law establishing a "conscience clause" for "health-care professionals who don't want to perform abortions."

Under the rule, workers in health-care settings -- from doctors to janitors -- can refuse to provide services, information or advice to patients on subjects such as contraception, family planning, blood transfusions and even vaccine counseling if they are morally against it.

"We recognize and understand that some providers have objections to providing abortions, according to an official at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The official declined to be identified because the policy change had not been announced. "We want to ensure that current law protects them.

"But we do not want to impose new limitations on services that would allow providers to refuse to provide to women and their families services like family planning and contraception that would actually help prevent the need for an abortion in the first place
."
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on February 28, 2009, 10:38:06 AM
This is really about abortion.  We have a bill that will probably die in our state legislature designed to protect medical professionals who have moral objections to certain medical procedures, including abortion.  The only vocal critics are pro abortion people.  

I'm not sure a law is necessary, because I think the Free Exercise Clause already protects these folks, but the concept is correct.  
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on February 28, 2009, 10:48:49 AM
Would the same people have supported a law which required WWII Germans to be guards/janitors/doctors at concentration camps?

Issues like this become bigger than abortion. Roe v Wade, for example is about a patient's control over their bodies, not simply abortion.

I'm pro choice, in both directions. That being said, I wouldn't participate materially in an abortion unless it were an emergency. I personally don't consider the morning after pill an abortion but feel that's more or less a technical distinction. The abortion pill probably wouldn't be an issue for me but I wouldn't be digging around a uterus with a shop vac, LOL! Not saying it's wrong, just wrong for me. If their choice deserves respect, so should mine.

I'm not religious and that has nothing to do with my opinion.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on February 28, 2009, 10:49:56 AM
This is really about abortion.  We have a bill that will probably die in our state legislature designed to protect medical professionals who have moral objections to certain medical procedures, including abortion.  The only vocal critics are pro abortion people.  

I'm not sure a law is necessary, because I think the Free Exercise Clause already protects these folks, but the concept is correct.  

there is a law in place that prevent doctors from being forced to perform abortions and that is not changing.

Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on February 28, 2009, 10:51:57 AM
Would the same people have supported a law which required WWII Germans to be guards/janitors/doctors at concentration camps?

Issues like this become bigger than abortion. Roe v Wade, for example is about a patient's control over their bodies, not simply abortion.

I'm pro choice, in both directions. That being said, I wouldn't participate materially in an abortion unless it were an emergency. I personally don't consider the morning after pill an abortion but feel that's more or less a technical distinction. The abortion pill probably wouldn't be an issue for me but I wouldn't be digging around a uterus with a shop vac, LOL! Not saying it's wrong, just wrong for me. If their choice deserves respect, so should mine.

I'm not religious and that has nothing to do with my opinion.

do you think it a pharmacist should be allowed to reject service to someone seeking to have a prescription filled for birth control, over the counter contraceptives or the morning after pill?
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on February 28, 2009, 10:55:14 AM
do you think it a pharmacist should be allowed to reject service to someone seeking to have a prescription filled for birth control, over the counter contraceptives or the morning after pill?

No.

The doctors level of involvement and liability are different.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on February 28, 2009, 10:58:57 AM
No.

The doctors level of involvement and liability are different.

well that's all this is about.

scroll up and check out the large type quote from the article
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on February 28, 2009, 11:08:26 AM
well that's all this is about.

scroll up and check out the large type quote from the article

I read it but some things (like rights) tend to change by degrees. :)
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on February 28, 2009, 11:15:00 AM
Would the same people have supported a law which required WWII Germans to be guards/janitors/doctors at concentration camps?

Issues like this become bigger than abortion. Roe v Wade, for example is about a patient's control over their bodies, not simply abortion.

I'm pro choice, in both directions. That being said, I wouldn't participate materially in an abortion unless it were an emergency. I personally don't consider the morning after pill an abortion but feel that's more or less a technical distinction. The abortion pill probably wouldn't be an issue for me but I wouldn't be digging around a uterus with a shop vac, LOL! Not saying it's wrong, just wrong for me. If their choice deserves respect, so should mine.

I'm not religious and that has nothing to do with my opinion.

I agree it should be bigger than abortion, but in reality these disputes/arguments, etc. are usually about abortion.  It really should be a no brainer IMO.  You have a moral objection, you refer the patient to someone else, get another person to do what the patient wants, etc.  Shouldn't be a major issue at all. 
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on February 28, 2009, 12:25:56 PM
I agree it should be bigger than abortion, but in reality these disputes/arguments, etc. are usually about abortion.  It really should be a no brainer IMO.  You have a moral objection, you refer the patient to someone else, get another person to do what the patient wants, etc.  Shouldn't be a major issue at all. 

you keep ignoring the point that no doctor is forced to perform an abortion and (from the statement from the article above) that won't change.

Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on February 28, 2009, 12:28:49 PM
I agree it should be bigger than abortion, but in reality these disputes/arguments, etc. are usually about abortion.  It really should be a no brainer IMO.  You have a moral objection, you refer the patient to someone else, get another person to do what the patient wants, etc.  Shouldn't be a major issue at all. 

It's geeky but I'm really turned on (intellectually) by the issue of boundaries. The whole "where do individual rights begin and end and are they ever absolute?" thing almost never ceases to be interesting. That being said, I don't know if it's reasonable to say a Janitor has an absolute right to refuse mopping some particular patient's floor but the argument is still sort of interesting. :)
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 28, 2009, 12:40:06 PM
It's geeky but I'm really turned on (intellectually) by the issue of boundaries. The whole "where do individual rights begin and end and are they ever absolute?" thing almost never ceases to be interesting. That being said, I don't know if it's reasonable to say a Janitor has an absolute right to refuse mopping some particular patient's floor but the argument is still sort of interesting. :)

No one argues that cleaning a patients' particulr floor is murder or ending a life.

Many doctors believe that abortion is murder and taking an innocent life. 
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on February 28, 2009, 01:34:48 PM
No one argues that cleaning a patients' particulr floor is murder or ending a life.

Many doctors believe that abortion is murder and taking an innocent life. 

Many women believe men shouldn't have an opinion on abortion at all.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 28, 2009, 01:38:43 PM
Many women believe men shouldn't have an opinion on abortion at all.

That's fine, then let the man have the option and choice whether or not to pay child support.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on February 28, 2009, 02:04:58 PM
That's fine, then let the man have the option and choice whether or not to pay child support.

That isn't likely to happen, LOL!

Everyone will scream "what about the children?" and explain how children suffering for the choices of adults is wrong. :)
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on February 28, 2009, 02:24:00 PM
That isn't likely to happen, LOL!

Everyone will scream "what about the children?" and explain how children suffering for the choices of adults is wrong. :)

im not arguing with you about that, just the fact that the debate is always one sided.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on February 28, 2009, 04:20:47 PM
It's geeky but I'm really turned on (intellectually) by the issue of boundaries. The whole "where do individual rights begin and end and are they ever absolute?" thing almost never ceases to be interesting. That being said, I don't know if it's reasonable to say a Janitor has an absolute right to refuse mopping some particular patient's floor but the argument is still sort of interesting. :)

It is an interesting subject.  I've had this discussion with staunch abortionists and they are really unreasonable IMO.   

Seems like the janitor would have a difficult time working at a place that does work that he or she finds morally objectionable.  Should probably find another job. 
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on February 28, 2009, 07:25:50 PM
It is an interesting subject.  I've had this discussion with staunch abortionists and they are really unreasonable IMO.   

Seems like the janitor would have a difficult time working at a place that does work that he or she finds morally objectionable.  Should probably find another job. 

what is an abortionist?
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: 2ND COMING on February 28, 2009, 07:28:26 PM
an abortionist?

Like...really?
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 01, 2009, 11:08:50 AM
an abortionist?

Like...really?

Does abortionist = people who are pro-choice?

I don't know anyone who is pro-aborition

I've never heard any referred to as an "abortionist"

I've never heard a doctor who performs abortions called an abortionist except as a perjorative.  It's really an old fashioned definition from the time when abortions where illegal and referred to people who performed illegal abortions

It's certainly not a medical definition and no OBGYN or other doctor would refer to themselves as such.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on March 01, 2009, 11:43:27 AM
Does abortionist = people who are pro-choice?

I don't know anyone who is pro-aborition

I've never heard any referred to as an "abortionist"

I've never heard a doctor who performs abortions called an abortionist except as a perjorative.  It's really an old fashioned definition from the time when abortions where illegal and referred to people who performed illegal abortions

It's certainly not a medical definition and no OBGYN or other doctor would refer to themselves as such.

Pro-death bastard!!! :)
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 01, 2009, 11:48:44 AM
Pro-death bastard!!! :)

LOL


Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 01, 2009, 12:33:18 PM
LOL




If this shoe fits . . . . . .
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 01, 2009, 12:56:20 PM
If this shoe fits . . . . . .

irony really eludes you doesn't it?
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 01, 2009, 01:00:06 PM
irony really eludes you doesn't it?

Im only kidding.  I am not big on the abortion issue on way or the other.   On the one hand I think it is evil, however, on the other hand I really think the govt needs to back off.  I go back and forth on it.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 01, 2009, 01:14:30 PM
Im only kidding.  I am not big on the abortion issue on way or the other.   On the one hand I think it is evil, however, on the other hand I really think the govt needs to back off.  I go back and forth on it.

if you're Libertarian (which is sound like you are) then you should be for freedom of choice.  Personally you can still be against abortion but you should be for freedom of choice.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 01, 2009, 01:26:36 PM
if you're Libertarian (which is sound like you are) then you should be for freedom of choice.  Personally you can still be against abortion but you should be for freedom of choice.

That is the dilemma of course.  Murder is proscecuted because it is evil.  It someone considers abortion to be akin to murder why not prosecute that?

Its not an easy issue but my gut tells me that the govt should back off.  However, I also dont feel it is my obligation to pay for abortion either.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on March 01, 2009, 02:33:27 PM
That is the dilemma of course.  Murder is proscecuted because it is evil.  It someone considers abortion to be akin to murder why not prosecute that?

Its not an easy issue but my gut tells me that the govt should back off.  However, I also dont feel it is my obligation to pay for abortion either.

Would you rather pay $300 for an abortion or the cost of raising a welfare kid? Those costs include medical.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on March 01, 2009, 03:22:37 PM
Would you rather pay $300 for an abortion or the cost of raising a welfare kid? Those costs include medical.

That assumes every women who wants to have an abortion but can't will be on welfare.  I doubt that's the case. 

If we (society) are being consistent, we should either pass a human life amendment or remove all restrictions.  Either a baby has "right to life" or the woman has complete control and can kill the baby if she chooses. 

That said, easier said than done.  Good message board material but would never resolve the issue in real life.     
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 01, 2009, 03:29:10 PM
That assumes every women who wants to have an abortion but can't will be on welfare.  I doubt that's the case. 

If we (society) are being consistent, we should either pass a human life amendment or remove all restrictions.  Either a baby has "right to life" or the woman has complete control and can kill the baby if she chooses. 

That said, easier said than done.  Good message board material but would never resolve the issue in real life.     

Sure - why not reduce a complicated issue to a simplistic either/or choice.

That way you either have to be for abortions in the 3rd trimester or against abortions in the 3rd week

How about we leave things exactly the way they are and if you're personally against abortion then don't get one.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 01, 2009, 08:29:58 PM
Would you rather pay $300 for an abortion or the cost of raising a welfare kid? Those costs include medical.

Why do i feel like I have a gun to head, or to my wallet for lack of a better term, with that question?????
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 01, 2009, 09:03:28 PM
Would you rather pay $300 for an abortion or the cost of raising a welfare kid? Those costs include medical.

or the cost of incarceration....includi ng medical

or the cost of a college education.....including medical
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: shootfighter1 on March 01, 2009, 09:12:09 PM
I read a case where the emergency room physician did not want to give abortive pills and the family sued.  I can't remember what happened though.  Beyond an actual abortion proceedure, does this say doctors must prescribe abortive drugs?  I don't agree with that.  I am torn on abortion, but I believe people should have the choice in the first trimester.  However, I would never perform the proceedure.  I remember helping deliver two stillborn twins in residency.  Shit, that was sad.  They let me do most of it.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 01, 2009, 09:14:42 PM
I read a case where the emergency room physician did not want to give abortive pills and the family sued.  I can't remember what happened though.  Beyond an actual abortion proceedure, does this say doctors must prescribe abortive drugs?  I don't agree with that.  I am torn on abortion, but I believe people should have the choice in the first trimester.  However, I would never perform the proceedure.  I remember helping deliver two stillborn twins in residency.  Shit, that was sad.  They let me do most of it.

why would someone be in the emergency room looking for "abortive pills"

you don't mean the day after pill which actually prevents conception rather than aborting a fetus do you?
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on March 01, 2009, 09:20:46 PM
I read a case where the emergency room physician did not want to give abortive pills and the family sued.  I can't remember what happened though.  Beyond an actual abortion proceedure, does this say doctors must prescribe abortive drugs?  I don't agree with that.  I am torn on abortion, but I believe people should have the choice in the first trimester.  However, I would never perform the proceedure.  I remember helping deliver two stillborn twins in residency.  Shit, that was sad.  They let me do most of it.

Sounds pretty sad. 

Doing a first trimester abortion might even be worse because you have to dismember the baby. 
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 01, 2009, 09:27:28 PM
Sounds pretty sad. 

Doing a first trimester abortion might even be worse because you have to dismember the baby. 

why?



Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on March 01, 2009, 09:47:59 PM
why?





Do some homework on first trimester fetal development and the methods used to abort first trimester babies.   
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on March 02, 2009, 04:46:04 AM
I read a case where the emergency room physician did not want to give abortive pills and the family sued.  I can't remember what happened though.  Beyond an actual abortion proceedure, does this say doctors must prescribe abortive drugs?  I don't agree with that.  I am torn on abortion, but I believe people should have the choice in the first trimester.  However, I would never perform the proceedure.  I remember helping deliver two stillborn twins in residency.  Shit, that was sad.  They let me do most of it.

Maybe she was raped.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 02, 2009, 07:28:38 AM
Do some homework on first trimester fetal development and the methods used to abort first trimester babies.   

I actually have.

do you realize how tiny that thing is.

Why would it need to be dismembered?

Please grace us with your vast knowledge?
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on March 02, 2009, 07:34:01 AM
I actually have.

do you realize how tiny that thing is.

Why would it need to be dismembered?

Please grace us with your vast knowledge?

If you had done your homework you wouldn't be asking the question.   ::)
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 02, 2009, 07:51:38 AM
I actually have.

do you realize how tiny that thing is.

Why would it need to be dismembered?

Please grace us with your vast knowledge?

I seriously dont know how you guys can worked up over abortion considering WTF is going on, even as of today, with our country literlly on the verge of collapse.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 02, 2009, 08:01:27 AM
I seriously dont know how you guys can worked up over abortion considering WTF is going on, even as of today, with our country literlly on the verge of collapse.

I'm not worked up about it at all.

Things are fine the way they are.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 02, 2009, 08:03:15 AM
I'm not worked up about it at all.

Things are fine the way they are.

It goes on every election cycle.  Over and over and over. 

I would be much happier if they made adoption a lot easier, maybe pay the mother a stipend to carry the baby to term if she has a family lined up for adoption or something. 

I dont know, to me this entire issue seems really overdone.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on March 02, 2009, 08:52:53 AM
It goes on every election cycle.  Over and over and over. 

I would be much happier if they made adoption a lot easier, maybe pay the mother a stipend to carry the baby to term if she has a family lined up for adoption or something. 

I dont know, to me this entire issue seems really overdone.

It's better to get a baby from China. You're never gonna hear from a Chinese bitch again. Adopt an American kid and once the mother gets her life together, wants money or has second thoughts the kid is gone. Too much hassle with Americans.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 02, 2009, 11:46:33 AM
If you had done your homework you wouldn't be asking the question.   ::)

Classic Bum - when asked a simple question to support your own statement you're incapable of doing so.

I guess I should assume you're simply a liar
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on March 02, 2009, 12:44:16 PM
It's better to get a baby from China. You're never gonna hear from a Chinese bitch again. Adopt an American kid and once the mother gets her life together, wants money or has second thoughts the kid is gone. Too much hassle with Americans.

Not all that easy to adopt a kid from China.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on March 02, 2009, 12:45:22 PM
Classic Bum - when asked a simple question to support your own statement you're incapable of doing so.

I guess I should assume you're simply a liar


It's much simpler than that.  You have exceeded your quota of dumb questions in this thread. 
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 02, 2009, 02:42:11 PM
It's much simpler than that.  You have exceeded your quota of dumb questions in this thread. 

Bum - you seem confused.

Here's your statement:

Sounds pretty sad. 

Doing a first trimester abortion might even be worse because you have to dismember the baby

My only question was ONE WORD and that was WHY?

WHY would you have to DISMEMBER something so tiny.

Please educate us or withdraw your statement and admit you'r a liar.

Or play your usual game .....we all know you're full of shit most of the time anyway.

Cue the eye roll



Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: drkaje on March 02, 2009, 02:45:24 PM
Not all that easy to adopt a kid from China.

Could have just as easily said South America. All I'm saying is that people who adopt American have to worry about hearing from the mother again. People who give up kids for adoption occasionally hear from them as well.
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on March 02, 2009, 06:51:29 PM
Bum - you seem confused.

Here's your statement:

My only question was ONE WORD and that was WHY?

WHY would you have to DISMEMBER something so tiny.

Please educate us or withdraw your statement and admit you'r a liar.

Or play your usual game .....we all know you're full of shit most of the time anyway.

Cue the eye roll


Yawn.  Figure it out yourself.   ::) 
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Dos Equis on March 02, 2009, 06:52:49 PM
Could have just as easily said South America. All I'm saying is that people who adopt American have to worry about hearing from the mother again. People who give up kids for adoption occasionally hear from them as well.

I'm sure that happens, but aren't identities secret if that's what one or both sides want? 
Title: Re: White House set to reverse health care conscience clause
Post by: Straw Man on March 02, 2009, 07:09:11 PM
Yawn.  Figure it out yourself.   ::) 

I already did

You make shit up

You're a LIAR