it is informed consent if you are aware of the consequence of an action and you decide on that action then your are giving consent to those consequences if I ask to borrow your car to take to a friends house and I inform you he lives on a dirt road so if it rains the car will get muddy and you let me borrow the car knowing it might get muddy then you are giving consent for it to get muddy if it rains
right because that is what most people know of Roe v Wade is the original ruling and like I said most think if they over turn Roe v Wade it would make abortion illegal which it wont that is why the majority of people polled do not want to have it over turned because the vast majority agree in the case of rape, incest, and life of the mother should be allowed but polls show the vast majority people want greater restriction that Roe v Wade initially allowed like restricting abortions after 20 weeks
and like I said most think if they over turn Roe v Wade it would make abortion illegal (which it wont) that is why the majority of people polled do not want to have it over turned because the vast majority agree in the case of rape, incest, and life of the mother abortion should be allowed (which I agree with) but polls show the vast majority of people want greater restriction that Roe v Wade initially allowed like restricting abortions after 20 weeks
Which is why I argue the 70% number is misleading. Also about 70% don't care about abortion, so how many of those also said yes to keep Roe V Wade? Also a lot of people think Roe V Wade isn't about abortion at all. People really need to get more involved in the legal system and understand what exactly is going on. It might lead to some real change, like justices actually interpreting the constitution how it was originally intended to be, not how they think it should say with the times, which violates the amendment clause in the constitution and renders it useless. Not what was intended at all.
Aww baloney...abortion has NOTHING to due with the future of the country and what YOU think is best. I think freedom and liberty are what's best for this country for ALL citizens...and I bet a lot of Americans say they believe in freedom and liberty....
Actually it does, but you can have your opinions. Freedom and liberty are what's best, but guess what our freedoms and liberty are restricted by laws. I bet you support a majority of laws though don't you? I bet a lot of Americans will also tell you they agree abortion should have restrictions. In fact the last numbers I saw were 60% believe in having restrictions on abortion, but not completely banning the practice. Contrary to what you may think. I don't want to ban abortion completely
Been down this road before, informed consent is mainly applicable in medical law not criminal law - except for Miranda rights - informed consent also normally requires a signature, in much the same way contractual consent does. There is also the fact that even if a person is informed and gives consent they can withdraw that consent at any time eg. a nurse will inform the patient about the injection, the patient will consent to the injection .. but . .withdraw their arm prior to it actually taking place, the nurse MUST then gain consent again before continuing. As to your car analogy, if I first say yes, but then I change my mind, ring you and tell you that you cannot take my car down the dirt road if it rains then I am revoking the original consent given which if you ignore makes you liable for any dirt on the car, unless you can get me to give my consent again. Informed consent is define as Informed Consent Assent to permit an occurrence, such as surgery, that is based on a complete disclosure of facts needed to make the decision intelligently, such as knowledge of the risks entailed or alternatives firstly you would have to prove there has been a 'complete disclosure of the facts' secondly abortion would fall under the 'alternatives' In all forms of consent there is ALWAYS the option for the person originally giving the consent to withdraw it.
Won't work - I live in a state where abortion is illegal but I can assure you that as soon as "life and health of the woman" become a factor in law then you might as well not have a law
funny that because in a recent poll people were asked specifically if they knew what Roe vs Wade was about and 62% knew, and I see you ignored the other bits of the article your cited and I quoted. ... the poll also handed some heartening data to supporters of abortion rights: 55 percent of respondents say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 41 percent believe it should be illegal in all or most cases. And by a margin of 54 to 40 percent, Americans oppose legislation that makes it more difficult for abortion clinics to operate. All and most cases is not just rape, incest, and life of the female (there is no mother until birth unless she has other children) On a personal note, I would have little problem with elective abortion being restricted to a 20 week limit .. IF .. pro-lifers stop attacking comprehensive sex education, free contraception and trying to introduce TRAP laws in order to shut down clinics because I know, and all the figures show it, that a 20 week limit would have little effect on abortion IF pro-lifers left those other things alone ... but, we all know that pro-lifers will never accept a 20 week limit, give in to that and the next thing it will be is a 16 week limit, then a 12 weeks limit, then a 9 weeks limit and finally a 0 week limit. If pro-lifers are not prepared to compromise then why should we?
I think you better check again http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/Abortion.aspx 52% legal only under certain circumstances 26% legal under all circumstances 20% illegal under all circumstances CNN conducted a similar poll and had almost the exact same results legal under any circumstance 25% legal in most circumstances 12% legal in a few circumstances 41% illegal in all circumstances 21% http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/09/15/rel15e.pdf I highlighted "legal in a few circumstances 41%" is accepted as those few circumstances is rape incest and life of the mother and that is why the Roe v Wade poll high not to be repealed because most think a repeal would make abortion illegal under all circumstances Most Americans under 30 dont know Roe was about abortion http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ns-under-30-dont-know-roe-was-about-abortion/
OK let us go with that - how are you going to frame the legislation? Remembering that this has been tried in numerous jurisdictions throughout the world without success A search of international laws on abortion will show that it is almost an "all or nothing" situation. Either you bar abortion under all circumstances or you allow for "life and health of the mother" and find within a couple of years you have the same abortion rate as you do now.
Just goes to show really that various polls offer various outcomes, and remember the part I quoted was from your own cited link not one of mine. and to be honest public opinion polls are not really worth very much . .I wonder how many people actually understand your constitution and what it does and does not mean, on the evidence of some posters here they really don't understand very much more than a superficial coating. According to a Newsweek poll (yeah another poll) 70% of Americans don't know the basic facts about their own country - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...S-citizens-dont-know-basic-facts-country.html Off topic - Just look at the polls for gun laws - http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx - 49% want stricter gun laws!!!
you cant withdraw your consent after the action has already been taken if you call me on the phone to tell me not to take your car down the road and if it is to late i have already done so i cant be held responsible for it being muddy that would be the same as a women after a night of consensual sex wakes up the next morning and regrets doing so and withdraws her consent and accuses you of rape have you ever played the game Mumblety peg were two people with pocket knifes stand facing each other, feet shoulder width apart and you throw a pocket knife in the ground trying to be the closest to the others foot? both of you are aware of the consequences of the game you might end up with a knife in your foot but both give consent to play. now if the consequence does happen and you end up with a knife in your foot you cant then withdraw consent, stab the other to death and claim self defense because he put a knife in your foot
The act of sex is not the same act as pregnancy. The act of a man depositing sperm in a woman is not the same act as implantation in the uterine wall and you would still have to prove that there has been a 'complete disclosure of the facts' and that abortion would fall under ''alternatives' of what informed consent is. Even the courts do not agree with you on this - McFall vs Shimp As to your analogy, does the informed consent given in the game that leads to a knife in your foot stop you from seeking medical attention for the injury, are you refused treatment to avail yourself of the injury because you gave consent? In the same way a woman cannot kill the man who impregnated her, you cannot kill the knife thrower .. but you can seek medical attention to avail yourself of the injury, as can a woman seek medical attention to avail herself of he injuries and pregnancy is already recognized as an injury in some cases, and legally recognized as such in some state laws. does the person who throws the knife into your foot then climb inside your body, attach themselves to you and use your body in order to sustain their life. This is the elephant that all pro-lifers ignore, no person can be compelled by law to give up the right to who, what, where and when their body, or parts there of, are used by another in order to sustain their life, not even someone causing bodily harm to another can be forced to give even a pint of blood to their victim, even if their victim should then die . even after death you body cannot be violated.
you cant give consent to give that pint of blood have it withdrawn from you. the other is in the process of receiving said blood and then you have a change of mind and demand that process to be stopped and have the needle removed from the other the act of sex has already taken place there for the consquencces of that act has which you are informed of has been accepted, and because the consent for that act that is linked to the consequences cant be withdrawn nor can the consequences It would be the same as if i asked if I could use your lawn mower and you agree and tell me the consequences for using your mower would be to pay you next month 50 dollars i agree to that consequence and use it I cant use your mower then withdrawn my consent to pay you that 50 dollars now me using your mower and me paying you 50 dollars are two separate acts but im compelled to pay you that 50 dollars because we agreed on using your mower and the consequences a pregnant women gave consent for that baby to live within her when she gave consent to that act of sex and consent to the consequences to having sex
By what authority? That isn't true of any other risky behavior, so why would it be true for having sex?
Are you someone who argues about limiting government power? Or are you a statist that just opposes abortion? Because if you're the former, what you support when it comes to abortion is about as far from limiting government power as you can get. You're basically in favor of giving the government absolute power, power that extends inside a woman's body into her internal organs. My friend, if you want the government to have that authority, there better not be a damn word out of your mouth about how government power should be limited or you're really just a big stinking hypocrite. I don't know you or your views so I'm making an assumption that you're one of those fake small government supporters simply because I've seen too many people at this point argue that abortion should be illegal while complaining about government overreach. If that is not how you feel, if you're someone who supports government power, then obviously you're not a hypocrite. I've just never seen someone who feels like that take an anti-abortion position.
There should be no law that forces a woman to risk her health, life, and permanent bodily damage. A lot of Americans are factually ignorant about abortion, and hold their views based on emotion, religion and misogyny. That's why individual rights are not subject to a vote.
contrat law says so you cant give consent for X be informed that Y will happen if you do X agree to X then not be compelled to the obligations of Y
I believe the unborn are humans and should be granted the rights of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness as any other human is granted. it is that simple. that is one of the prime objective of our government is to protect those simple rights and if you think some one is for big government when they want those rights protected you are very misguided
What is misguided is thinking that people live inside of other people and that a person's body stops belonging to them whenever someone like you sees fit to usurp control over them. That is how you support absolute government power. When you allow a government to start making laws about how a person is allowed to regulate the inside of their own body, it doesn't matter how you dress it up or how many noble causes you hide behind, what you stand for sir is unlimited government reach. If they can craft laws about the inside of your body, there is no logical argument to stop them from crafting laws about anything. Certainly not things like health care, guns. energy, welfare, etc etc because those things exist outside of a person, outside of the only thing a person is born with(their body). I do not doubt that your intentions are good, but you have to understand that a conversation about government power cannot be truthfully had if you won't even admit that the power of the government over the inside of a person's body is second to only complete and total mind control when we're talking about absolute government power. Believing as you believe, regardless of your intentions, means that if you were to be having debates about how the government can't or shouldn't do something, you've got no ground to stand on and no credibility to speak of.
contract are not required to be written down and signed there are verbal contracts and presumed contracts for example you ask some one to do a task for you and you will do a different task for her when she completes your task that is a contract Contract A voluntary, deliberate, and legally binding agreement between two or more competent parties. Contracts are usually written but may be spoken or implied Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/contract.html#ixzz2x4pWLOnf
women gave consent for the creation of the baby and for that baby to live within her when she gave consent to have sex. when you give consent to have sex you are also giving consent to the consequences of having sex
There should be no law that allows a a person to willingly kill the unborn in the name of freedom and liberty, unless that persons life is truly in danger. No not every pregnancy qualifies. A lot of Americans are factually ignorant, which is why 70% support Roe V Wade. They don't even know what it did. Most Americans don't really have a view at all on abortion,or realize what it actually is. Yet a majority consider them self pro life last I checked it was 51/43 on pro-life/pro-choice. You are right they hold views based on emotions, religion misandry/misogyny as well as misinformation on both sides of the debate, you misleadingly only posted some pro-life reasons. They do not care to get actual facts. Individual rights actually are subject to a vote, that is why we have the amendment clause in the constitution. Knowledge is not a requirement to have a say.
