So, a man kills his dog. Since both are animals, the man is put into prison for killing his dog. Correct?
Why do people who have zero medical knowledge think they have any right to voice an opinion on a complex medico legal situation?
Google is your friend http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S1414-32832017000300629&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en
Sounds like a real ethical dilemma. I hate to be the one to make this accusation but racism may likely have been the deciding factor here that tipped the scales. Let's consider this: A fetus at 22 weeks, no woman who was actually there to assert her bodily rights. Sure the fetus may have had deformed legs but there are a lot of babies born with deformed legs and they're still loved. 22 weeks, that's only 2 weeks away from viability. Of course the fetus wouldn't have gotten to that point if it weren't for all the roadblocks and delays. Still, 14 weeks isn't an embryo. My personal take on it, if I had been a member of a bioethics panel, would be to allow the abortion at 14 weeks just because that's on the threshold and the baby wouldn't have had legs to walk with. But they didn't know that fact at 14 weeks.
If there was deformation of the skeleton there was a high probability that there were other problems as well and it WAS the decision of the family and the judge BTW please stop altering my responses and read rule 15
Oh, so that makes it ok? I know the woman expressed her prior wishes that she didn't wish to remain on lifesupport, but perhaps she had not considered the possibility that she might be pregnant. As it is, the woman was not there right then, only her body. So we're basically comparing the rights of a woman who is no longer there to her (former) body, versus the rights of a developing fetus who is there (or at least partially there).
See, here's another question you couldn't answer Here's another question you'll ignore. WHERE did I say that I believe a fetus should have protections after viability ? Answer ( because you won't answer): I didn't say that...
It sounds like you're trying to tell us that fetuses shouldn't have rights at any stage, without going on record as saying so. Your logic points to that fact, however.
Why does it not make it OK Bottom line - not your wife, your family your child and you do not know all the facts
Now you're telling us that other people's desires trump the rights of fetus, besides the desires of the woman. That's an interesting take on "pro-choice"
"Pro-Choice in this forum and context ONLY applies to women's right to choose gestation or abortion....no matter how many of your twisted weird scenarios you come up with... Interesting that Anti-Choicers repeatedly compare women to machines and dogs...and swear they aren't misogynists....
Oh, just wait! He probably has some sick scenario where alien spaniels impregnated a woman once some where someplace and OH DEAR! What should we do about it!!
