The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Pittsburgh
Next: Incompatible jpeg?
From: Bob Larter on 27 Sep 2009 10:01 Ray Fischer wrote: > Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> SMS wrote: >>> Bob Larter wrote: >>> >>>> Don't you think it's kind of hypocritical that on the one hand >>>> right-wingers oppose abortion, calling it murder, and yet on the other >>>> hand, they support the death penalty? >>> Actually no. With abortion I can at least understand their opposition, >>> even if I don't agree with it. >>> >>> At what number of weeks in the pregnancy would you say that abortion is >>> no longer acceptable? Clearly few people would support it at 38 weeks. >>> What about 27 weeks? >> Given that my son was born at 26 weeks, & is now a perfectly healthy 8 >> year old, abortions as late as that do bother me a lot. > > Less than 1% of all abortions occur in the 3rd trimester and those few > are almost always done for medical need. In such cases, I don't have a problem with them. >> That said, I >> still believe that the woman's right to choose trumps the rights of the >> foetus. >> >>> While their opposition to RU486 is pretty >>> ridiculous, at least you can see where they are coming from in opposing >>> abortion after the fetus is more than a few weeks old. >> My personal dividing line is at the point where the foetus is viable >> outside the womb. Currently, I think that's around 24 weeks. > > Only if you have a million dollars to spend on medical care. A more > practical limit of viability would be around 33 weeks. Not so. Here in Australia, where we have free, universal healthcare, my son's birth & followup treatments didn't cost his mother or I a single cent. -- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Larter on 27 Sep 2009 10:03 SMS wrote: > Bob Larter wrote: > >> Given that my son was born at 26 weeks, & is now a perfectly healthy 8 >> year old, abortions as late as that do bother me a lot. That said, I >> still believe that the woman's right to choose trumps the rights of >> the foetus. > > My daughter was 27 weeks, son was 32 weeks, and both are fine. The > memory of the NICU ordeals will remain with me forever, as I'm sure it > does with everyone that goes through it. You're not kidding. >>> While their opposition to RU486 is pretty ridiculous, at least you >>> can see where they are coming from in opposing abortion after the >>> fetus is more than a few weeks old. >> >> My personal dividing line is at the point where the foetus is viable >> outside the womb. Currently, I think that's around 24 weeks. > > There are cases where there are extremely serious problems that are not > known until the third trimester, cases where there is no reason to > continue the pregnancy. This is where the right-wingers come up with > their "only god can decide" schtick. Of course they don't apply the same > criteria to other parts of others lives. Of course not. -- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Larter on 27 Sep 2009 10:28 Bill Graham wrote: > > "Bob Larter" <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:4ab33be9$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >> Bill Graham wrote: >>> >>> "wrbrown13" <wrbrown3(a)bellsouth.net> wrote in message >>> news:xz99h2s243hc$.9skloajqavx8.dlg(a)40tude.net... >>>> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:36:20 -0700, Bill Graham wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Bob G" <mrbobjames(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:adbcdb79-6c7f-4021-8fc0-3adf608d7083(a)w10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... >>>>> >>>>>> Republicans would rather get jerked around by the corporations >>>>>> than by >>>>>> the government. Wait until you get a horrible diseaase and your >>>>>> health >>>>>> insurance company drops you like a hot potato. >>>>>> >>>>>> The fact is that this nation is now an oligarchy (and has been for >>>>>> some time) and not a democracy. >>>>>> >>>>>> How does that go, from the corporations, by the corporations, and for >>>>>> the corporations? >>>>> >>>>> That is what litigation is supposed to correct.....You still have >>>>> the right >>>>> to sue. But I never said that government couldn't regulate. Your >>>>> health >>>>> insurance policy should list the stuff it doesn't cover, in large >>>>> ten point >>>>> type.......I would vote for a law like that. >>>> >>>> >>>> Now there's a thought. Sue a large corporation who has any number of >>>> lawyers on their staff and can drag litigation out intil you don't >>>> have a >>>> penny to your name. Great in theory, but a joke in reality. >>> >>> They usually settle out of court. Why? Because juries are very >>> sympathetic to the little guy, and have been known to award many >>> millions of the big companies money to him. >> >> After years of litigation, during which the plaintiff may have died of >> their illness. > > Better yet....Then his poor widow collects even more money.... Gee, I'm sure that's a huge comfort to her. -- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bob Larter on 27 Sep 2009 10:35 C J Campbell wrote: > On 2009-09-18 00:46:40 -0700, Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> said: > >> C J Campbell wrote: >>> And no -- bureaucratizing health care is unlikely to get rid of waste >>> and corruption. Far to the contrary. A national health care plan >>> would vastly increase waste and corruption. >> >> Really? In every other country with 'socialised' health care, they >> spend much less than the USA does. > > They also ration their health care. Rubbish. My family & I have taken full advantage of our 'socialised' health care system, & I've never even heard of it being rationed. Believe me, it'd be front page news if it happened. > If we included all the patients from > countries with socialized health care who come to the US for care as > part of the cost of their care, and subtracted it from what we spend, I > think the numbers would be dramatically reversed. How many Australians come to the USA for medical treatment? -- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ray Fischer on 27 Sep 2009 14:32
Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Ray Fischer wrote: >> Bob Larter <bobbylarter(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> SMS wrote: >>>> Bob Larter wrote: >>>>> Don't you think it's kind of hypocritical that on the one hand >>>>> right-wingers oppose abortion, calling it murder, and yet on the other >>>>> hand, they support the death penalty? >>>> Actually no. With abortion I can at least understand their opposition, >>>> even if I don't agree with it. >>>> >>>> At what number of weeks in the pregnancy would you say that abortion is >>>> no longer acceptable? Clearly few people would support it at 38 weeks. >>>> What about 27 weeks? >>> Given that my son was born at 26 weeks, & is now a perfectly healthy 8 >>> year old, abortions as late as that do bother me a lot. >> >> Less than 1% of all abortions occur in the 3rd trimester and those few >> are almost always done for medical need. > >In such cases, I don't have a problem with them. How generous of you to grant a woman a choice with her pregnancy. >>> That said, I >>> still believe that the woman's right to choose trumps the rights of the >>> foetus. >>> >>>> While their opposition to RU486 is pretty >>>> ridiculous, at least you can see where they are coming from in opposing >>>> abortion after the fetus is more than a few weeks old. >>> My personal dividing line is at the point where the foetus is viable >>> outside the womb. Currently, I think that's around 24 weeks. >> >> Only if you have a million dollars to spend on medical care. A more >> practical limit of viability would be around 33 weeks. > >Not so. Here in Australia, where we have free, universal healthcare, my >son's birth & followup treatments didn't cost his mother or I a single cent. Somebody has to pay for it. 24-week preemies are VERY expensive and lifelong medical problems are a near certainty. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net |