No more than I am part of the state financial system simply because I'm forced to pay taxes. If we're using that metric, then pretty much everything is a part of everything else. I don't see that as a reasonable generalization. Because it would destabilize society too much if unpenalized.
Private health providers are participating in the state's health system. The state is allowing them to participate. So that is your ONLY reason?
Private health providers are participating in the state's health system. The state is allowing them to participate. Isn't that how it works in the US?
Actually they are required to take an oath just like lawyers and judges They are harming the baby by killing it. Hense why they have the right to not preform the "medical procedure" if they are morally against it. Which naturally made the pro choicers try to piggyback off the LGBT movement by comparing a doctor not treating someone based on orientation as the same as not ending a living human. I still think scientists should start growing apes with human organs including human wombs. Cause why not?
Nope , they're not all required to take an oath....and oaths vary... They aren't killing a baby. They are killing a fetus which is NOT their patient...the woman is their patient... HenCe has nothing to do with it...they don't have to perform an abortion if they don't want to but according to you and your "do no harm" thing they HAVE to abort a fetus to save the woman's life. Sorry, I can't decipher that.. So you haven't changed your mind on ,"" save money, have an ape gestate your baby, IT'S FREEEEEE"" ? LOL! "Cause why not ? " Because there is no reason to......there is no purpose....
Yes most take an Oath after graduating just not the Hippocratic Oath. Remember almost everyone universally calls humans in the womb babies unless specifically talking about abortion. Yes if someone comes in for a life saving procedure they are required to perform it. Basically that pro choicers are trying to say that a doctor refusing to give a woman an abortion is the same as a doctor refusing to treat a Gay, Lesbian or Transgender person. There are many reason to grow human organs in animals they are going to grow them in pigs so that humans don't have to wait for someone to die to get an organ. Maybe growing wombs in apes is a bit extreme lol, but it would be cool to genetically modify the genome to give them the language gene. I am sure pro choicers care more about the pig that is going to be slaughered anyway not having to give up its human organs to save human lives than the actual humans because "choice"
Nope, you obviously haven't researched it and no oath says that doctors cannot perform abortions.. No, that is not true. What a fetus is called has no bearing on the fact it IS a fetus and NOT a human being with rights. So they HAVE to perform an abortion....which YOU say they took an oath not to do ( your "do no harm" thingy ) "Basically" no they are not. Uh, NOW it's pigs?? Before it was ""Free Ape Gestation Service " LOL!!! Another scrambled word salad but why you think Pro-Choicers don't like a good pork chop or a pile of ribs is a mystery... Uh, how do pigs "give up it's human organs" ???
They say the updated H-Oath before graduating all major medical schools have students say it. Although they are likely not actually bound legally by it like lawyers, the pro life movement would be better served by working to create a medical bar, that would simply ban the practice in cases where the mother's life is not at risk Baby is not a scientific term so it can indeed be used to describe a fetus, infant, or toddler. I am almost certain if they know how they must because they can't just let the patient die. Pigs for ORGAN DONATION. By growing human organs in pigs since pigs have the closest blood to humans.
But they haven't and they can't and NOTHING in any oath prohibits doing legal medical procedures. So what? It is still a fetus.....and can be aborted. Then you are contradicting yourself. Which has nothing to do with abortion or the topic.... Uh, NOW it's pigs?? What happened to your ""Free Ape Gestation Service " LOL!!! Again, nothing to do with abortion or ""Free Ape Gestation Service "
Because the debate is not a Hallmark movie about having babies....it is, and should be, based on facts....and the FACT is a fetus is NOT a baby (or a Princess, or a bun, or a watermelon) no matter who calls it that.....and facts are what should be used in the abortion debate.... Anti-Choicers have no facts to back up their assault on women's right to their own bodies so they try to make the fetus appear to look like the Gerber baby. I have seen Anti-Choicers admit they use hyperbolic words like "baby" to stir emotions....but emotions prove nothing.
They could and should, since the Bar of Medical practice would control who gets a medical license and who gets it removed and since its illegal to preform medicine without a license, they would be defacto banned from breaking the rules of the bar even if its legal under national laws. So would you call a week 25 preme and 25 week old in the womb different biologically? If they are the same then why would the law make it a crime to kill the preme but not the one in the womb who are literally at the same exact stage of growth. No I am not, because its different circumstances one is to save the mother's life, one is to save the mothers free time.
FoxHastings said: ↑ But they haven't and they can't and NOTHING in any oath prohibits doing legal medical procedures. WHY should they prohibit doctors from doing legal medical procedures? Horsepuckey Because there is a law giving the fetus protection after 23-24 weeks (viability). If it is in the womb it is a fetus. A preemie has been BORN...and THAT is what gives it rights as a human being. Ya, you are since you first came up with your "do no harm" schtick thinking it was the fetus they were not to harm ...and the fetus wasn't the patient.
Because what is legal is not always ethical, I am sure you would like to be able to prevent such doctors like the one who lied about vaccines causing autism from getting a degree. You would think differently if they legalised the "right to die" and someone you cared about asked a doctor to do assisted suicide and the bar stopped them right That is like saying, Magma and Lava are completely different. It's doing no harm by saving the mothers life.
Baloney, legal is legal, if it was unethical it wouldn't be legal. Another segue off into another unrelated issue like ""Free Ape Gestation Service " Another segue off into another unrelated issue like ""Free Ape Gestation Service " YOU cannot know what others think. But for your information if a loved one was suffering and wanted to die I SUPPORT their right to do that. See, you're wrong again No, it's not...lava and magma are not gestated nor born. It IS doing harm to the fetus....and the fetus was what YOU were referring to when you brought up "do no harm"..
A newBORN is a baby. There is no, and was no, argument that it isn't. AND, once born, has NO bearing on the abortion issue. Correct terminology is of concern in the abortion issue. WHY call a fetus a baby in relation to the abortion issue?
Zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, child, adolescent, adult. A baby is not a stage of development and thus can be used at any state.