Brontoforumus Archive

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


This board has been fossilized.
You are reading an archive of Brontoforumus, a.k.a. The Worst Forums Ever, from 2008 to early 2014.  Registration and posting (for most members) has been disabled here to discourage spambots from taking over.  Old members can still log in to view boards, PMs, etc.

The new message board is at http://brontoforum.us.

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 39

Author Topic: Oh! Bama  (Read 50522 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #200 on: July 05, 2008, 10:27:54 AM »

So okay.  There's the telecom amnesty thing, the "let's expand Bush's faith-based programs" thing, and now this, courtesy of Relevant Magazine (yeah, I've never heard of it either):

Quote
Strang: Based on emails we received, another issue of deep importance to our readers is a candidate’s stance on abortion. We largely know your platform, but there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?

Obama: I absolutely can, so please don’t believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it’s entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don’t think that “mental distress” qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.

I have a friend who recently went out-of-state on a fellowship to volunteer for the campaign.  She's been feeling like it's not really what she'd hoped it would be, and this is the final piece of news that's convinced her to come home 3 weeks earlier than planned.  She's still planning on supporting Obama, but I can see how it's hard to watch your savings dwindle wall you volunteer your time for someone who keeps throwing you to the wolves trying to court people who don't understand medical science.
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #201 on: July 05, 2008, 10:47:52 AM »

I think you're going to have to explain to me what's wrong with "don't abort a viable fetus unless you really have to".
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #202 on: July 05, 2008, 10:49:15 AM »

My perfect candidate is willing to murder every baby!
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #203 on: July 05, 2008, 11:19:06 AM »

I think you're going to have to explain to me what's wrong with "don't abort a viable fetus unless you really have to".

:strawman:

My problem is in the indication that mental illness is somehow dismissible or trivial and that only physical maladies are "valid".

That and I'm about fucking sick of politicians telling doctors how to do their job.  If a doctor's engaging in malpractice, lay the smack down, but don't start saying doctors are wrong if they recommend abortion or, say, pot.

Politicians shouldn't offer medical advice unless they've gone through med school themselves.  And even then some of them should STILL shut the hell up.
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #204 on: July 05, 2008, 11:29:41 AM »

I only wanted you to clarify your point.  Thanks for the emoticon though.

:disapprove:
Logged

Büge

  • won't give you fleaz
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65304
  • Posts: 10062
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #205 on: July 05, 2008, 06:17:24 PM »

Come on, Thad. You're a smart guy. You know that doctors don't need politicians to be jackasses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sUsHB4bujc
Of course, the reverse is often true.
Logged

Detonator

  • You made me come back for THIS?
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: 42
  • Posts: 3040
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #206 on: July 07, 2008, 03:58:05 PM »

So I've been thinking about this point, Thad, and I'd like to hear some example, hypothetical or real, where the difference between mental and physical distress is clear.  I'm not trying to argue the point, just trying to clear up the facts so I can see how big of a deal this is.

First of all, Obama said "mental distress" while you said "mental illness".  This seems to be a substantial diffrerence in terms, and I want to know how they would fit into cause for a late-term abortion.

Also, the difference between mental and physical stress is a pretty blurred line, since a significant amount of mental stress will take a physical toll.  Our brain is a physical thing and so is everything it controls.  Would a doctor not be able to convince a court that mental stress can take a permanent physical toll on a potential mother?  That seems like a grey area that could go either way, and maybe that's the problem.

Your input is appreciated.
Logged
"Imagine punching somebody so hard that they turned into a door. Then you found out that's where ALL doors come from, and you got initiated into a murder club that makes doors. The stronger you punch, the better the door. So there are like super strong murderers who punch people into Venetian doors and shit"

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #207 on: July 07, 2008, 04:05:37 PM »

It's just hard for a politician to come out and say that getting an abortion just because you don't want a baby and you're really sad that you're pregnant doesn't count as a valid medical reason.

And he's only talking about late-term abortions anyway.  She can still get vagvacced if she's prompt about it.
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #208 on: July 07, 2008, 04:16:31 PM »

Well, I understand the point now, which is that if Obama tries to override an actual physician's opinion of what's harmful to the mother he can go stick a rake up his ass.  I don't think he's actually going to do that, though, partly because I think he was just blathering unfortunately (he is a lot like Kerry in that he has to swallow a lot of his religious convictions in order to be a sensible politician), and partly because he was only talking about what he wasn't going to prohibit individual states from doing.  He's not talking about a federal third-trimester ban here, if anything he's holding up the federal allowance of first- and second-trimester abortions by saying "This is what you can restrict, by which I mean that's THE MOST that you can restrict."
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #209 on: July 07, 2008, 06:38:28 PM »

So I've been thinking about this point, Thad, and I'd like to hear some example, hypothetical or real, where the difference between mental and physical distress is clear.  I'm not trying to argue the point, just trying to clear up the facts so I can see how big of a deal this is.

NARAL (PDF; text isn't selectable so I'm copying this by hand; may be typos):

Quote
A health exception must also account for the mental health problems that may occur in pregnancy.  Severe fetal anomalies, for example, can exact a tremendous emotional toll on a pregnant woman and her family.
  • Gilda Restelli was nearly 30 weeks pregnant when doctors discovered that her fetus had only fragments of a skull and almost no brain.  She and her husband had been told by medical experts that their baby had almost no chance of survival after birth.  Restelli quit her job, not because she was physically incapacitated, but because she could no longer bear the hearty congratulations of strangers who were unaware of the tragic circumstances surrounding her pregnancy.  The Restellis made the agonizing decision to end the pregnancy, and even though state law included a health exception, the couple had to battle government officials to ensure doctors would not be prosecuted for providing abortion care.
  • [...]
  • When two doctors confirmed that, among other ailments, Tammy Watts's fetus had no eyes and extensive internal organ abnormalities including kidneys that were already failing, Tammy and her husband recognized that their much-wanted child would never survive.  After her experience, Tammy said: "You can't take this away from women and families.  You can't.  It's so important that we be able to make these decisions, because we're the only ones who can."
First of all, Obama said "mental distress" while you said "mental illness".  This seems to be a substantial diffrerence in terms, and I want to know how they would fit into cause for a late-term abortion.

Yes, but he also said, "I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy."  As in, mental health doesn't enter into it.

Also, the difference between mental and physical stress is a pretty blurred line, since a significant amount of mental stress will take a physical toll.  Our brain is a physical thing and so is everything it controls.  Would a doctor not be able to convince a court that mental stress can take a permanent physical toll on a potential mother?  That seems like a grey area that could go either way, and maybe that's the problem.

That's an excellent point, and I found a good article that brings it up, Abortion Restrictions and the Drive for Mental Health Parity: A Conflict in Values?  (PDF again.)

Quote
The drive toward full mental health parity in the insurance coverage context is historic because it highlights an increased understanding and acceptance of mental illness.  This may be attributed in large part to recent breakthroughs in brain research that point increasingly to the physical origin of many mental disorders.  Explains Chris Koyanagi, policy director for the Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, "We are increasingly understanding the interrelatedness of various physical and mental health disorders, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to separate one from the other.  All body systems, including the brain, are based on the same biological process, which we are now interpreting.  This distinction between systems based on the terms 'physical' and 'mental' is meaningless.  Science is a long way ahead of policymakers in terms of understanding mental illness."

So it's another case of the government being well behind modern science in our understanding of how things work.  People's gut reaction is still to dismiss mental health issues as less significant than physical ones, when in fact the distinction is largely artificial.  People yak about the power of positive thinking to overcome mental issues, but thinking positively works about as well to overcome severe depression as it does to overcome kidney failure.

It's just hard for a politician to come out and say that getting an abortion just because you don't want a baby and you're really sad that you're pregnant doesn't count as a valid medical reason.

I can't tell if you're joking or not, but the reason people don't like saying things like that is because it's an offensively condescending thing to say.

The careless, vapid slut who doesn't do anything about her pregnancy for six months and then decides she's sad because she's fat and just has to terminate the pregnancy is a :strawman: argument on par with Reagan's welfare queens.  It may be true in rare cases, but it's a very distorted and out-of-touch characterization of a group that deserves sympathy and help, not derision.
Logged

sei

  • Tested
  • Karma: 25
  • Posts: 2085
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #210 on: July 08, 2008, 02:07:08 AM »

Just out of curiosity, do conditions resulting in (high probabilities of, if not certain) mental retardation fall under the "physical issue" umbrella?

(Down syndrome, Fragile X, etc.)
Logged

Royal☭

  • Supreme Court Judge President
  • Tested
  • Karma: 88
  • Posts: 6301
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #211 on: July 08, 2008, 02:15:44 AM »

Is it often the case that the mother suffers mental retardation after pregnancy?

sei

  • Tested
  • Karma: 25
  • Posts: 2085
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #212 on: July 08, 2008, 02:18:09 AM »

Yes, also during, but that's tangential at best.

Mumble, mumble, "states may restrict or even prohibit abortion except when necessary to protect a woman’s life or health.
...
(The mental health exception is also critical because it has been the aegis under which most abortions in cases of severe fetal  abnormality have been justified.)"

EDIT: Fucking Christ, PDFs with that magazine/newspaper column layout are annoying to read.
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #213 on: July 08, 2008, 07:22:43 AM »

It's just hard for a politician to come out and say that getting an abortion just because you don't want a baby and you're really sad that you're pregnant doesn't count as a valid medical reason.

I can't tell if you're joking or not, but the reason people don't like saying things like that is because it's an offensively condescending thing to say.

The careless, vapid slut who doesn't do anything about her pregnancy for six months and then decides she's sad because she's fat and just has to terminate the pregnancy is a :strawman: argument on par with Reagan's welfare queens.  It may be true in rare cases, but it's a very distorted and out-of-touch characterization of a group that deserves sympathy and help, not derision.

Most of the time, even I can't tell if I'm joking or not.

Anyway, and here I'm making assumptions, I don't think Obama meant "mental problems" when he said "mental distress."  Of course, I made that clear when I said awful, awful things about pregnant ladies.

But primarily, I don't think that anyone who voluntarily has unprotected sex and ends up with a baby deserves my sympathy once she doesn't want it anymore.  Of course, I also don't think the fetus deserves my sympathy when it gets killed.  I just don't have any sympathy for anyone, ever.  So there.

Of course, I strongly suspect that what I'm talking about and what everybody else is talking about are two entirely different things, so I'm going to exit this discussion, good day sir.
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #214 on: July 08, 2008, 09:53:16 AM »

Devil's wishy-washy advocate:

I find it kind of hard to believe that there's a form of mental distress so severe that it can't be treated without an abortion, but that's the doctor's call, not mine or Obama's.

...of course being a doctor does not automatically mean that you're smart, competent or morally sound.  My sister's pretty sick right now on account of one who failed to be all three (he's getting his papers now).

What's interesting about those examples cited is that they both involve fetuses that are nonviable.  I'd like to see the same call made on "The child will be high-functioning retarded, and it's causing the mother mental distress."
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #215 on: July 08, 2008, 10:25:32 AM »

Devil's wishy-washy advocate:

I find it kind of hard to believe that there's a form of mental distress so severe that it can't be treated without an abortion, but that's the doctor's call, not mine or Obama's.

:strawman: again.

I would be curious to see what the medical profession would look like if it were based entirely around prescribing only the treatments absolutely necessary for survival rather than, you know, the BEST treatment for each given case.

...of course being a doctor does not automatically mean that you're smart, competent or morally sound.  My sister's pretty sick right now on account of one who failed to be all three (he's getting his papers now).

Right, and that's a point I tried to make in the first place -- it IS the government's job to step in in case of malpractice.  But on the whole, I trust doctors to know more about medicine than politicians.

What's interesting about those examples cited is that they both involve fetuses that are nonviable.  I'd like to see the same call made on "The child will be high-functioning retarded, and it's causing the mother mental distress."

I think posing a bunch of "What-if...?" hypotheticals is what got us into the mess we're in in the first place.  If you can find a case where that actually happened, let's put it on up there; failing that, I don't see much point in debating it.
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #216 on: July 08, 2008, 10:57:13 AM »

Devil's wishy-washy advocate:

I find it kind of hard to believe that there's a form of mental distress so severe that it can't be treated without an abortion, but that's the doctor's call, not mine or Obama's.

:strawman: again.

I would be curious to see what the medical profession would look like if it were based entirely around prescribing only the treatments absolutely necessary for survival rather than, you know, the BEST treatment for each given case.

No, that's a :strawman:.

There are plenty of ways to deal with "mental distress" besides aborting a viable fetus.  The "second best" method in most scenarios probably works just fine and has the rather large advantage of not involving the abortion of a viable fetus.  Which tends to cause a lot of mental distress.
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #217 on: July 08, 2008, 11:12:18 AM »

mental distress is less harmful than new humans esp unwanted ones, ok srsly i'm done
Logged

Cannon

  • Hopes for a great many things
  • Tested
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 508
    • View Profile
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #218 on: July 08, 2008, 11:18:06 AM »

...For now, anyway.
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Oh! Bama
« Reply #219 on: July 08, 2008, 11:56:16 AM »

There are plenty of ways to deal with "mental distress" besides aborting a viable fetus.  The "second best" method in most scenarios probably works just fine and has the rather large advantage of not involving the abortion of a viable fetus.  Which tends to cause a lot of mental distress.

You're going to need to cite some numbers, concrete examples, or really anything at all resembling actual information instead of vague conjecture about hypothetical situations.

Like this, for example: numerous studies show that the "people who get abortions feel mental distress" argument is, in general, wrong, and the vast majority feel relief.

If you can produce a contradictory set of statistics for the special case of late-term abortions, I'll give it a look.  But like I said, I'm not really interested in debating hypotheticals here.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 39