Justice Kavanaugh’s first test on abortion comes this week

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
And yes, it could be considered OK to kill the baby in order to save the mother's life.
I understand where you think you are coming from. Just because we cannot save every baby in an emergency it's killing the baby. But you should, if you are not an NPC, understand our position that failing to save someone is not killing them.

And still, you haven't answered the question. Why is what you call "abortion" wrong, but not murder? If the baby is not a human, and not alive, what could be wrong when it is killed?
 

chair

Well-known member
Apparently some of you have confused the modern comments in my link with the actual ancient text.

Here is teh Mishnah itself:
Mishnah Six

1)If a woman is having trouble giving birth, they cut up the child in her womb and brings it forth limb by limb, because her life comes before the life of [the child].

2) But if the greater part has come out, one may not touch it, for one may not set aside one person’s life for that of another.​

The pertinent points are:
1. Cases where one had to make a decision between the mother's and the child's life did happen. Despite in insistence of some here that such things could never happen.
2. In this text, the basis appears to be that birth defines the child as a complete human. Once the child is born, or mostly born, one can't hurt the child in order to save the mother. This differs from the "life starts at conception" idea that is common today.

Now, why would aborting an unborn child be wrong, if it is not murder? Here are some ideas:
1. The child is a potential human, and thus has value.
2. If you claim that the child is 'just part of the mother's body, so she can do what she wants with it' - well, if a woman showed up at a hospital and asked to have her right leg removed- would that be OK?
3. The unborn child isn't just a potential daughter or son to her mother. That potential child is part of the community's future. We don't often think in those terms in modern western society, but there is something there, if you think about it.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
1. Cases where one had to make a decision between the mother's and the child's life did happen. Despite in insistence of some here that such things could never happen.

Nope.

The decision did not have to be made. The baby could have been delivered without cutting him to pieces first.

2. In this text, the basis appears to be that birth defines the child as a complete human. Once the child is born, or mostly born, one can't hurt the child in order to save the mother. This differs from the "life starts at conception" idea that is common today.
So you think location determines personhood.

1. The child is a potential human.
Reality says otherwise. Of course, the baby is an actual human being. The only reason to deny his personhood is to justify killing him.


Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Well if you dont have the $ you should not have sex. Easy solution to the problem.
INFANT MOTALITY RATES - BY COUNTRY

Infant mortality rate compares the number of deaths of infants under one year old in a given year per 1,000 live births in the same year. This rate is often used as an indicator of the level of health in a country.

RANK - COUNTRY - DEATHS/PER 1000 LIVE BIRTHS - YEAR
******************************************************************************


163 Russia 6.80 2017 est.
164 Chile 6.60 2017 est.
165 Saint Pierre and Miquelon 6.50 2017 est.
166 Puerto Rico 6.40 2017 est.
167 Qatar 6.20 2017 est.
168 Cayman Islands 5.90 2017 est.
169 Gibraltar 5.90 2017 est.
170 United States 5.80 2017 est.
171 Serbia 5.80 2017 est.
172 Bosnia and Herzegovina 5.50 2017 est.
173 Faroe Islands 5.40 2017 est.
174 New Caledonia 5.20 2017 est.
175 Latvia 5.20 2017 est.
176 Slovakia 5.10 2017 est.
177 Hungary 4.90 2017 est.
178 French Polynesia 4.60 2017 est.
179 Greece 4.60 2017 est.
180 Canada 4.50 2017 est.
181 Cuba 4.40 2017 est.
182 Poland 4.40 2017 est.
183 New Zealand 4.40 2017 est.
184 Australia 4.30 2017 est.
185 United Kingdom 4.30 2017 est.
186 Wallis and Futuna 4.30 2017 est.
187 Taiwan 4.30 2017 est.
188 San Marino 4.30 2017 est.
189 Portugal 4.30 2017 est.
190 Liechtenstein 4.20 2017 est.
191 Denmark 4.00 2017 est.
192 European Union 4.00 2016 est.
193 Isle of Man 4.00 2017 est.
194 Slovenia 3.90 2017 est.
195 Jersey 3.80 2017 est.
196 Estonia 3.80 2017 est.
197 Lithuania 3.80 2017 est.
198 Ireland 3.60 2017 est.
199 Andorra 3.60 2017 est.
200 Belarus 3.60 2017 est.
201 Netherlands 3.60 2017 est.
202 Switzerland 3.60 2017 est.
203 Malta 3.50 2017 est.
204 Israel 3.40 2017 est.
205 Germany 3.40 2017 est.
206 Guernsey 3.40 2017 est.
207 Belgium 3.40 2017 est.
208 Austria 3.40 2017 est.
209 Luxembourg 3.40 2017 est.
210 Italy 3.30 2017 est.
211 Anguilla 3.30 2017 est.
212 Spain 3.30 2017 est.
213 France 3.20 2017 est.
214 Macau 3.10 2017 est.
215 Korea, South 3.00 2017 est.
216 Hong Kong 2.70 2017 est.
217 Czechia 2.60 2017 est.
218 Sweden 2.60 2017 est.
219 Bermuda 2.50 2017 est.
220 Finland 2.50 2017 est.
221 Norway 2.50 2017 est.
222 Singapore 2.40 2017 est.
223 Iceland 2.10 2017 est.
224 Japan 2.00 2017 est.
225 Monaco 1.80 2017 est.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html
*********************************************************************************

"Abstinence" has never been a successful strategy throughout recorded history, so why would conservatives expect it to become a winning strategy in the 21stC!

Notice that while conservatives are shedding large quantities of "crocodile tears" over the fate of the foetus, they remain eerily silent when it comes to making those financial investments, as a nation, to promote the health of America's newborns!

The fact that the United States ranks only 170th of 225 nations with respect to infant mortality speaks volumes as to America'a priorities/lack of priorities with respect to its newborns!
 
Last edited:

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
"Abstinence" has never been a successful strategy throughout recorded history...



In fact, there is only a single case in recorded history of abstinence failing to prevent pregnancy


baby-jesus-in-manger-with-mary-and-wise-men.jpg
 
Last edited:

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
The fact that the United States ranks only 170th of 225 nations with respect to infant mortality speaks volumes as to America'a priorities/lack of priorities with respect to its newborns!


indeed it does - here's some data from the CDC that points toward the problem:

m5946qsf.gif

gr-infant-mortality-624.gif

m6301qsf.gif


What are good predictors of high infant mortality rates?

young, black mothers
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Justice Kavanaugh’s first test on abortion comes this week

Having the same infant mortality rate as Serbia and ranking behind 45 other nations and territories appears to be a strange way of "rewarding" those mothers who actually followed the "Pro-Life" advice, committing to a full term pregnancy, only to lose their newborns in the first year because America refuses to invest in a 21stC medical system that could have saved them!

Blacks and Hispanics should not have to settle for 2nd class medical care - if they lived in Canada, with its universal healthcare system and an infant mortality rate of 4.50 per 1000, their infant mortality rates would be closer to the national average where access to medical care is based on need, not ability to pay!
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
I doubt jg will bother to read this or understand it if he does, but for others who might be interested:



Why American infant mortality rates are so high
Spoiler
The United States has a much higher infant mortality rate than other developed countries; why is this, and is there anything we can do?
October 11, 2016


It has been widely reported that the United States has a relatively high infant mortality rate compared with other developed countries: More than 23,000 American infants died in 2014, or about 6 for every 1,000 live births, putting us on par with countries like Serbia and Malaysia. Most other developed countries—as geographically diverse as Japan, Finland, Australia and Israel—have lower rates, closer to 2 or 3 deaths out of every 1,000. However, carefully parsing out the data shows that the story is more complicated than those simple statistics.

Explaining the numbers

The first nuance is one of definition. Infant mortality is defined as the death of babies under the age of one year, but some of the differences between countries can be explained by a difference in how we count. Is a baby born weighing less than a pound and after only 21 weeks’ gestation actually “born?” In some countries, the answer is no, and those births would be counted as stillbirths. In the United States, on the other hand, despite these premature babies’ relatively low odds of survival, they would be considered born—thus counting toward the country’s infant mortality rates.

These premature births are the biggest factor in explaining the United States’ high infant mortality rate. Pre-term births can have many different maternal causes, many of which—such as high blood pressure, diabetes, Zika and other infections and age—are not entirely within an expectant mother’s control. Other factors, such as stress level, might be able to be managed, but are not entirely controllable. On the other hand, some controllable risk factors include the use of tobacco, alcohol, cocaine and other drugs. The major issue of the lack of universal access to quality prenatal care should also be considered in any discussion of preterm births and infant mortality. Also, because about 50 percent of pregnancies in the United States are unplanned, some women might not be aware they are pregnant in time to get early prenatal care, and this may be part of the reason for premature births in this country.

Across all categories, larger, heavier babies and those at later gestational ages tend to have better survival rates. “Still, at any given gestational age, American physicians are just as capable—if not more so—as other health care professionals around the world at expertly caring for premature neonates,” said Mark Sicilio, MD, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the Texas A&M College of Medicine.

Infertility treatments, which often lead to twins or triplets (who have poorer survival rates, perhaps primarily because they are likelier to be premature), have also been blamed for infant mortality numbers.

Or perhaps the blame for infant deaths lies in some sort of pollutant, virus or other toxin causing birth defects? Although these may be factors, and a major Zika outbreak causing miscarriages and microcephaly wouldn’t help the United States’ numbers, these are not currently the primary documented causes either.
The widening gap

Generally, especially compared to the worldwide statistics, American babies have good survival rates in their first few weeks of life. It is only after they reach one month of age that differences between the United States and other developed countries start to widen.

Perhaps not surprisingly, babies born to wealthier and better educated parents in the United States tended to fare about as well as infants born in European countries. On the other hand, those babies born to mothers in the United States without these advantages were more likely to die than any other group, even similarly disadvantaged populations in the other countries.

This might be due in large part to the prevalence of unintentional injuries and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) among American babies. Many parents are still not following sleep recommendations to prevent SIDS. More than 20 percent of babies in the United States are still not being put on their backs—the safest position—to sleep.

“It is extremely important that parents put their babies to sleep safely, on their backs in a crib with a firm mattress and no blankets, stuffed animals or pillows,” Sicilio said. “Studies have also shown an increased risk of SIDS with bed-sharing, or even allowing the infant to fall asleep on a sofa or chair with an adult. Further, allowing infants to remain asleep in car seats or strollers after arriving at their destinations is also discouraged.”

There are racial and ethnic differences in infant mortality that might help explain the differences between the United States and Europe. For example, African American and American Indian/Alaska Native babies are at higher risk of SIDS than Caucasian, Hispanic or Asian American babies. As most other developed countries have a comparatively small population with African heritage (and very few people of American Indian descent) these statistics might also help explain the numbers. Still, they probably don’t tell the whole story.

“Much research has been done on other SIDS environmental risk and protective factors,” Sicilio said. “Using a pacifier, for example, seems to decrease the risk of SIDS, perhaps because sucking on it keeps part of the brain stimulated even during sleep.”
Benefits of home nurse visits

Social programs in many European countries that provide free home visits from nurses for new parents might help increase protective factors and decrease risky ones. The nurses can give the baby a checkup, but perhaps more importantly, they can provide advice for preventing SIDS and can inspect the home for possible hazards. Although some of these home-visit programs exist in the United States, they are not nearly as widespread as they are in other countries.

“We have considerable research evidence of the beneficial effects of home nurse visits for new moms, with special emphasis on the health benefits to their children,” said Lisako McKyer, PhD, associate dean for climate and diversity and associate professor at the Texas A&M School of Public Health. “For example, research reveals that infants in homes which experienced regular visits from nurses and similar paraprofessionals had better psychological outcomes for both mother and infant, which means lower health care costs over the course of their lives.”

Part of the answer for different mortality rates may also lie in differing breast-feeding rates. Some European countries, especially those in Central Europe, have higher rates of babies being exclusively breastfed for the first six months of their lives. “As the Academy of Pediatrics says, breast is best,” Sicilio emphasizes.

Home nurse visits may be beneficial here as well, as studies have shown that they are linked to higher breastfeeding rates. Home nurse visits also seem to be very important to the most vulnerable segments of society, including teen mothers and those coping with addiction or other problems. “Visits to the vulnerable were especially valuable,” McKyer said. “They help to ameliorate the effects of other stressors on new moms and their infants and tend to result in safer home environments for children.”

These safer homes translate to less money spent on treating sick and injured infants, which is especially important considering the cost of care for the rest of the baby’s life. “We can invest a few hundred dollars on the front-end during the first year of babies’ lives to save about $1 million over the course of each of their lifetimes,” McKyer added. “Home nurse visits are also linked to reductions in emergency room visits within the first 10 days of a baby’s life from jaundice and/or dehydration, compared to infants who did not receive home nurse visits.”


In the end, more research is needed to determine how these and other factors really do help explain differences in infant deaths between the United States and other developed countries. For example, could the more generous parental leave policies of Europe help save infants’ lives? Research seems to indicate that maternity leave does reduce infant mortality rates, but the exact mechanism is unclear. It is possible that at least part of the reason is a disproportionally high rate of SIDS cases in child care settings.

“Parental leave policies have tremendous influence on health outcomes for both mom and baby, as well as long-term economic impact,” McKyer said. “Studies show that in countries where there is a generous parental leave policy, there are tremendous effects on morbidity and mortality rates of infants and young children. They’re considerably less likely to get sick enough to require hospitalization or to die. Again, it’s investing on the front end so that we’re not paying on the back end.” This work leads to other questions about how we might be able to bring American infant mortality rates more in line with other developed counties.

“We need to close the infant mortality gap in the United States,” Sicilio said. “I believe we are equipped to do just that.”

https://vitalrecord.tamhsc.edu/american-infant-mortality-rates-high/

 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Justice Kavanaugh’s first test on abortion comes this week

I've already been down this "squirrel hole" before which is why I deliberately chose the CIA World Factbook as my source, which in turn has a vested interest in presenting America in the best possible light by adjusting its statistics so that its comparing "oranges with oranges!"

The fact that America chooses not to invest in parental leave and a range of other preventative programs doesn't invalidate the comparisons - it only begs the question as to why groups like "Pro-Life" aren't demanding for the introduction of such supports, instead of seemingly losing all interest in the welfare of the nation's children the moment they are born!
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Justice Kavanaugh’s first test on abortion comes this week

I've already been down this "squirrel hole" before which is why I deliberately chose the CIA World Factbook as my source, which in turn has a vested interest in presenting America in the best possible light by adjusting its statistics so that its comparing "oranges with oranges!"

The fact that America chooses not to invest in parental leave and a range of other preventative programs doesn't invalidate the comparisons - it only begs the question as to why groups like "Pro-Life" aren't demanding for the introduction of such supports, instead of seemingly losing all interest in the welfare of the nation's children the moment they are born!
So your argument is that the other side doesn't want childcare programs, therefore babies should be murdered in the womb.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
 
Top