Yogi said:

---

For what it's worth, a man is already "forced" to accept the birth of his child whether he wants the child or not.

Under current law, the male cannot abort his responsibilities to the child. Only the female can.

So, if we were really into "equal" rights, then men would have equal opportunity to abort their parentage/ obligations to the child/ unborn child.

---

You have a point, but a man, with self control, can use a condom and essentially eliminate the risk of parentage.

TexasScientist said:

---

Yogi said:

---

For what it's worth, a man is already "forced" to accept the birth of his child whether he wants the child or not.

Under current law, the male cannot abort his responsibilities to the child. Only the female can.

So, if we were really into "equal" rights, then men would have equal opportunity to abort their parentage/ obligations to the child/ unborn child.

---

You have a point, but a man, with self control, can use a condom and essentially eliminate the risk of parentage.

---

Are not women capable of "self control"?

Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image

Genesis 9:6

Doc Holliday said:

---

Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image

Genesis 9:6

---

So what does that mean?

Edmond Bear said:

---

22 pages of posts and one thing is consistent, people who defend abortion just gloss over the baby....as if a human life is not even part of the discussion...or if it is, it is just a trifling thing.

---

3/5ths of a person was trifling as well

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

Are you now saying that the psychological health of the mother is included in the NY abortion law? The CNN case also cited financial reasons. I agree that the new "health" standard includes these things and others

In the case cited by CNN, wouldn't fetal viability justify the abortion without having to rely on the "health" standard?

Waco1947 said:

---

Quote:

---

I am pro choice My position respects the rights of women.

---

You are pro choice, but that choice does not respect the rights of women.

Half of the babies aborted/killed would grow up to be a women.

Heck of a way to respect girls/women, allow them to be freely killed in the womb.

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image

Genesis 9:6

---

So what does that mean?

---

What goes around....comes around .

"the pain of others"

Like the pain and terror of a baby being killed for convenience?

If a woman has no right to live, then she has no rights at all.

I guess we've come to the moral intersection where those say they support the rights of women find themselves in conflict with the rights of children.

Yogi said:

---

A libertarian being against the government "forcing" certain types of human behavior - I can buy to a certain extent.

From a Democrat, whose party wants nothing more than to control the behavior and lifestyles of the masses... Not at all.

That's such a disingenuous argument coming from those whose "cure" for the Earth's warming climate is significant government/ political class control over individual behavior.

---

Apparently you don't know any Dems. You believe the GOP's cartoon version.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground ignoring the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either the life or health of the mother and nothing to do with the life or health of her unborn offspring.

That's an odd statistic. Do you have stats?
Even you don't have stats why do you make such a statement?

Waco1947 said:

---

That's an odd statistic. Do you have stats?
Even you don't have stats why do you make such a statement?

---

That is not an odd statistic, that is what research says. There are many reasons given for abortions, 90 percent of them are not related to the life or health of the mother or the life or health of her unborn offspring.

Focusing on a very small portion of abortions is a poor argument to support wholesale killing of unborn humans. That is why I make the statement.

Waco1947 said:

---

That's an odd statistic. Do you have stats?
Even you don't have stats why do you make such a statement?

---

The stats with references have been in front of you multiple times. Seems disingenuous to ask for them again.

Waco1947 said:

---

That's an odd statistic. Do you have stats?
Even you don't have stats why do you make such a statement?

---

What percentage of the aborted unborn are not created in the image of God?

Waco1947 said:

---

Yogi said:

---

A libertarian being against the government "forcing" certain types of human behavior - I can buy to a certain extent.

From a Democrat, whose party wants nothing more than to control the behavior and lifestyles of the masses... Not at all.

That's such a disingenuous argument coming from those whose "cure" for the Earth's warming climate is significant government/ political class control over individual behavior.

---

Apparently you don't know any Dems. You believe the GOP's cartoon version.

---

Like this cartoon character?

Maybe this one?

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

Are you now saying that the psychological health of the mother is included in the NY abortion law? The CNN case also cited financial reasons. I agree that the new "health" standard includes these things and others

In the case cited by CNN, wouldn't fetal viability justify the abortion without having to rely on the "health" standard?

---

Actually, the child COULD have technically "survived" birth, so doctors wouldn't take the chance. Also, i believe there was a straight ban on late term abortions unless of "life of the mother." She had to fly to another state to have the procedure -which is effing ridiculous.

That is my point. Women aren't lining up to kill babies in their 3rd trimester. They're ONLY doing it because they have to. You guys are trying to make this about moral absolutes, but they don't exist in this realm. The universe of your God may be as simple as your idea of him. Mature minds know that isn't the case.

So you love the person and do your best by them. New York's law -at least in this case- does right by women. The versions people like you have forwarded, do not.

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground ignoring the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either the life or health of the mother and nothing to do with the life or health of her unborn offspring.

---

I get why you're so ****ing desperate to change the subject. But we're talking about late term abortions.

Stop trying to make Fetch happen.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

Are you now saying that the psychological health of the mother is included in the NY abortion law? The CNN case also cited financial reasons. I agree that the new "health" standard includes these things and others

In the case cited by CNN, wouldn't fetal viability justify the abortion without having to rely on the "health" standard?

---

Actually, the child COULD have technically "survived" birth, so doctors wouldn't take the chance. Also, i believe there was a straight ban on late term abortions unless of "life of the mother." She had to fly to another state to have the procedure -which is effing ridiculous.

That is my point. Women aren't lining up to kill babies in their 3rd trimester. They're ONLY doing it because they have to. You guys are trying to make this about moral absolutes, but they don't exist in this realm. The universe of your God may be as simple as your idea of him. Mature minds know that isn't the case.

So you love the person and do your best by them. New York's law -at least in this case- does right by women. The versions people like you have forwarded, do not.

---

This is from your twitter research?

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

Are you now saying that the psychological health of the mother is included in the NY abortion law? The CNN case also cited financial reasons. I agree that the new "health" standard includes these things and others

In the case cited by CNN, wouldn't fetal viability justify the abortion without having to rely on the "health" standard?

---

Actually, the child COULD have technically "survived" birth, so doctors wouldn't take the chance. Also, i believe there was a straight ban on late term abortions unless of "life of the mother." She had to fly to another state to have the procedure -which is effing ridiculous.

That is my point. Women aren't lining up to kill babies in their 3rd trimester. They're ONLY doing it because they have to. You guys are trying to make this about moral absolutes, but they don't exist in this realm. The universe of your God may be as simple as your idea of him. Mature minds know that isn't the case.

So you love the person and do your best by them. New York's law -at least in this case- does right by women. The versions people like you have forwarded, do not.

---

This is from your twitter research?

---

Do you lie all the time? Or just when you don't have an argument.

Snopes or nothing, right?

How sad of a human being do you have to be that you care more about internet point scoring than learning a little more about the world and trying to better yourself?

BrooksBearLives said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground ignoring the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either the life or health of the mother and nothing to do with the life or health of her unborn offspring.

---

I get why you're so ****ing desperate to change the subject. But we're talking about late term abortions.

Stop trying to make Fetch happen.

---

I'm not "desperate to change the subject." Abortion is the subject, it includes abortions that are due to "the life and health" of the mother and/or unborn child at any time during pregnancy, as well as the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either. Most prolife advocates would trade a legitimate "life and health" exception for prohibiting the 90 percent of abortions that are for other reasons.

Why do you feel compelled to consistently use words that get filtered out by the site's automated censor?

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

Are you now saying that the psychological health of the mother is included in the NY abortion law? The CNN case also cited financial reasons. I agree that the new "health" standard includes these things and others

In the case cited by CNN, wouldn't fetal viability justify the abortion without having to rely on the "health" standard?

---

That is my point. Women aren't lining up to kill babies in their 3rd trimester. They're ONLY doing it because they have to.

---

This is incorrect.

"Data suggest that most women seeking later terminations are not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment. Five general profiles of women who sought later abortions, describing 80% of the sample...were raising children alone, were depressed or using illicit substances, were in conflict with a male partner or experiencing domestic violence, had trouble deciding and then had access problems, or were young and nulliparous."

BrooksBearLives said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground ignoring the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either the life or health of the mother and nothing to do with the life or health of her unborn offspring.

---

I get why you're so ****ing desperate to change the subject. But we're talking about late term abortions.

Stop trying to make Fetch happen.

---

+1 for Mean Girls reference.

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground ignoring the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either the life or health of the mother and nothing to do with the life or health of her unborn offspring.

---

I get why you're so ****ing desperate to change the subject. But we're talking about late term abortions.

Stop trying to make Fetch happen.

---

I'm not "desperate to change the subject." Abortion is the subject, it includes abortions that are due to "the life and health" of the mother and/or unborn child at any time during pregnancy, as well as the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either. Most prolife advocates would trade a legitimate "life and health" exception for prohibiting the 90 percent of abortions that are for other reasons

---

IMO you are correct DC.

Legitimate 'life and health' concerns are not the problem .

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

Are you now saying that the psychological health of the mother is included in the NY abortion law? The CNN case also cited financial reasons. I agree that the new "health" standard includes these things and others

In the case cited by CNN, wouldn't fetal viability justify the abortion without having to rely on the "health" standard?

---

It was almost certainly a viable fetus. Regarding the two conditions mentioned by CNN:

Agenesis of the corpus callosum: "There are currently no specific medical treatments for callosal disorders, but individuals with ACC and other callosal disorders may benefit from a range of developmental therapies, educational support, and services. It is important to consult with a variety of medical, health, educational, and social work professionals. Prognosis varies depending on the type of callosal abnormality and associated conditions or syndromes. It is not possible for the corpus callosum to regenerate. Neuropsychological testing reveals subtle differences in higher cortical function compared to individuals of the same age and education without ACC, although some individuals with callosal disorders have average intelligence and live normal lives."

Polymicrogyria: "The Polymicrogyria (PMG) malformation cannot be reversed, but the symptoms can be treated. The removal of affected areas through hemispherectomy has been used in some cases to reduce the amount a seizure activity. Few patients are candidates for surgery. The global developmental delay that affects 94% can also be mitigated in some patients with occupational, physical, and speech therapies. The important aspect to realize is PMG affects each patient differently and treatment options and mitigation techniques will vary. Many services are available to help, most children's hospitals can direct caregivers guidance where to get the information they need to seek assistance."

Democrats are murderers!

Ok, carry on, just needed to get that off my chest

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground ignoring the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either the life or health of the mother and nothing to do with the life or health of her unborn offspring.

---

I get why you're so ****ing desperate to change the subject. But we're talking about late term abortions.

Stop trying to make Fetch happen.

---

I'm not "desperate to change the subject." Abortion is the subject, it includes abortions that are due to "the life and health" of the mother and/or unborn child at any time during pregnancy, as well as the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either. Most prolife advocates would trade a legitimate "life and health" exception for prohibiting the 90 percent of abortions that are for other reasons.

Why do you feel compelled to consistently use words that get filtered out by the site's automated censor?

---

Why do you consistently get wrapped around the axle on tangential information that has no bearing on the subject at hand?

Who gives a ****? What does my being an ******* matter in regards to the veracity of my argument?

BrooksBearLives said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground ignoring the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either the life or health of the mother and nothing to do with the life or health of her unborn offspring.

---

I get why you're so ****ing desperate to change the subject. But we're talking about late term abortions.

Stop trying to make Fetch happen.

---

I'm not "desperate to change the subject." Abortion is the subject, it includes abortions that are due to "the life and health" of the mother and/or unborn child at any time during pregnancy, as well as the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either. Most prolife advocates would trade a legitimate "life and health" exception for prohibiting the 90 percent of abortions that are for other reasons.

Why do you feel compelled to consistently use words that get filtered out by the site's automated censor?

---

Why do you consistently get wrapped around the axle on tangential information that has no bearing on the subject at hand?

Who gives a ****? What does my being an ******* matter in regards to the veracity of my argument?

---

The fact that 90 percent of abortions have nothing to do with the life and health of the mother is not tangential information. A number of abortions that can be characterized as "late term" also fall into this category.

The success of an argument depends on three elements. Your credibility is damaged by the tone of your argument, making both your logical appeals and your emotional appeals less effective.

The question remains: why do you feel compelled to consistently use words that get filtered out by the site's automated censor? There are to real possibilities: (1) you may not care that it weakens your arguments or (2) you may not know that it weakens your arguments.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

Are you now saying that the psychological health of the mother is included in the NY abortion law? The CNN case also cited financial reasons. I agree that the new "health" standard includes these things and others

In the case cited by CNN, wouldn't fetal viability justify the abortion without having to rely on the "health" standard?

---

Actually, the child COULD have technically "survived" birth, so doctors wouldn't take the chance. Also, i believe there was a straight ban on late term abortions unless of "life of the mother." She had to fly to another state to have the procedure -which is effing ridiculous.

That is my point. Women aren't lining up to kill babies in their 3rd trimester. They're ONLY doing it because they have to. You guys are trying to make this about moral absolutes, but they don't exist in this realm. The universe of your God may be as simple as your idea of him. Mature minds know that isn't the case.

So you love the person and do your best by them. New York's law -at least in this case- does right by women. The versions people like you have forwarded, do not.

---

This is from your twitter research?

---

Do you lie all the time? Or just when you don't have an argument.

Snopes or nothing, right?

How sad of a human being do you have to be that you care more about internet point scoring than learning a little more about the world and trying to better yourself?

---

Still no link? Name calling isn't an argument

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

Are you now saying that the psychological health of the mother is included in the NY abortion law? The CNN case also cited financial reasons. I agree that the new "health" standard includes these things and others

In the case cited by CNN, wouldn't fetal viability justify the abortion without having to rely on the "health" standard?

---

Actually, the child COULD have technically "survived" birth, so doctors wouldn't take the chance. Also, i believe there was a straight ban on late term abortions unless of "life of the mother." She had to fly to another state to have the procedure -which is effing ridiculous.

That is my point. Women aren't lining up to kill babies in their 3rd trimester. They're ONLY doing it because they have to. You guys are trying to make this about moral absolutes, but they don't exist in this realm. The universe of your God may be as simple as your idea of him. Mature minds know that isn't the case.

So you love the person and do your best by them. New York's law -at least in this case- does right by women. The versions people like you have forwarded, do not.

---

This is from your twitter research?

---

Do you lie all the time? Or just when you don't have an argument.

Snopes or nothing, right?

How sad of a human being do you have to be that you care more about internet point scoring than learning a little more about the world and trying to better yourself?

---

Still no link? Name calling isn't an argument

---

Anyone else notice that you've never presented your own links to refute the information? Just a genetic fallacy argument attacking the source of the information backing up the argument?

I have.

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The right to abortion to preserve the health of the mother, broadly interpreted, is the law of the land according to the US Supreme Court. New York's revisions have simply brought New York state law up to date with federal law.

---

I'm interested in the 'health of the mother' standard. Do you have a link for the court language?

---

Roe v. Wade: "For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

Doe v. Bolton: "We agree with the District Court...that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman."

---

Thanks. Health seems to be a broader standard than the life of the mother.
Wiki:
The Court's opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined "health" as follows:
Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

---

Explain to me how -in this instance- the "health of the mother" shouldn't be taken into account?

Quote:

---

She had to choose how her daughter would die

When people ask how many kids she has, Dana Weinstein tells them she has three living children. That's because the daughter she lost 9 years ago remains part of her.

She was happily married, the mother of a 2-year-old boy and thrilled to be pregnant again. She read stories and wrote a journal to the baby, and she relished when her son rolled his toy cars over her growing belly. Because she was over 35 and in "advanced maternal age," she said, her care included additional sonograms later in her pregnancy.

When she and her husband went in for one at 29 weeks, they were told that the ventricles, or network of cavities, in their baby's brain were larger than normal, she said. The doctor and technician said they weren't "outrageously larger," Weinstein remembered, so she didn't worry. They could deal with whatever this was, she and her husband reasoned. Plus, everything else about their baby was perfect.
Still, she was sent to the Children's National in Washington for further testing. Weinstein, who lives in Rockville, Maryland, was at 31 weeks, well into her third trimester, when they got an appointment. Then came the gut punch.

There are hard-to-spell words for the brain abnormalities their baby had: agenesis of the corpus callosum and polymicrogyria. In simpler terms, as Weinstein described it, a special MRI showed that the baby didn't have the part of the brain that connects the right and left hemispheres. And where a healthy brain "looks like a cauliflower," she said, their baby's brain had concave areas and "pockets of empty."

"What does this mean? What does this mean?" she kept asking, before they were whisked off to specialists who could explain.

Doctors expected their baby would not be able to suck or swallow, Weinstein recalled. They said she most likely would suffer from uncontrollable seizures upon birth and, because of that, a resuscitation order would be necessary. For as long as she lived, doctors predicted, their baby would require medical intervention. And, as Weinstein understood it, she'd have no mental capacity to dream, love or enjoy life.

Her questions came fast. Couldn't rehab help? What if they took stem cells from her son's umbilical cord blood that she'd banked? Maybe they could regrow what her daughter needed?
Their baby's brain was destined to be this way from the start, experts said. It could not have been detected earlier and would not improve. They never could have seen it coming. The multiple doctors she surveyed, searching for hope, told her the same.

"It's just a fluke," Weinstein said. "Basically, anyone who could get pregnant could be that fluke."
They heard what a resuscitation order would entail. They listened to what an existence, short-lived or otherwise, would look like. They were briefed on hospice care.

At first, no one talked about the possibility of abortion this late in her pregnancy. Weinstein believes this was in part because the doctor to whom the hospital had referred rare patients like her in the past, Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas, had been murdered by an anti-abortion extremist weeks earlier.
She could carry the baby for six more weeks and deliver it, she was told. But that extended the nightmare she was living in, she said, one in which they had to choose how their daughter would die. She worried about what their choice would do to their son, their family, their marriage.

The endless kicks in Weinstein's belly, the persistent movements that had given her so much joy, became unbearable. She feared that the baby was simply seizing and, worse yet, might be suffering. She fell apart and couldn't sleep. While she had proudly worn cute maternity clothes to show off her bump, she now hid in her husband's clothes. She dreaded the well-meaning question from strangers -- "When are you due?" -- and refused to leave the house.

"That agony of every moment till I could end her pain was just awful," Weinstein said. Together with her husband, they decided to get an abortion. For this baby they loved, she said, it felt like the "more peaceful path for her passing."

She had to fly across the country to Colorado to get the procedure. She felt lucky to have supportive parents who were able to charge the abortion expense, $17,500, on their credit card. She traveled with her husband, her mother and her son so she could have him to hold while at the hotel.

The doctor used a sonogram to find the baby's heart. He gave Weinstein an injection through her stomach to stop its beating. She felt her daughter's last movements before she passed away. A few days later, on the very day that marked her 32nd week of pregnancy, she delivered their deceased baby.

"I'm not going to talk through that part of it," said Weinstein, who stayed calm on the phone but predicted she'd break down right after we hung up. "But I would like to say it was not a baby being ripped limb to limb. I delivered an outward-looking beautiful baby."

Now 47, she and her husband went on to have two healthy daughters. The first one, now 8, Weinstein refers to as her "rainbow baby."

"We call her that," she said, "because after a storm, what's more beautiful than a rainbow?"

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/25/health/abortion-late-in-pregnancy-eprise/index.html

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground blindly refusing to engage in the kind of empathy that would lead them to see the pain of others.

---

I am sick to death of those who are so invested in having what they feel is the moral high ground ignoring the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either the life or health of the mother and nothing to do with the life or health of her unborn offspring.

---

I get why you're so ****ing desperate to change the subject. But we're talking about late term abortions.

Stop trying to make Fetch happen.

---

I'm not "desperate to change the subject." Abortion is the subject, it includes abortions that are due to "the life and health" of the mother and/or unborn child at any time during pregnancy, as well as the 90 percent of abortions that have nothing to do with either. Most prolife advocates would trade a legitimate "life and health" exception for prohibiting the 90 percent of abortions that are for other reasons.

Why do you feel compelled to consistently use words that get filtered out by the site's automated censor?

---

Why do you consistently get wrapped around the axle on tangential information that has no bearing on the subject at hand?

Who gives a ****? What does my being an ******* matter in regards to the veracity of my argument?

---

The fact that 90 percent of abortions have nothing to do with the life and health of the mother is not tangential information. A number of abortions that can be characterized as "late term" also fall into this category.

The success of an argument depends on three elements. Your credibility is damaged by the tone of your argument, making both your logical appeals and your emotional appeals less effective.

The question remains: why do you feel compelled to consistently use words that get filtered out by the site's automated censor? There are to real possibilities: (1) you may not care that it weakens your arguments or (2) you may not know that it weakens your arguments.

---

If you think it weakens my ****ing argument, then you don't know how a ****ing argument works.

Your style-over-substance approach is ****ing telling.