PZMinion Went Out With A Pathetic Whimper

August 22, 2008 at 4:00 pm (Uncategorized)

God, I’m glad they’re all gone.

Danio had some issues with the notion that doctors may be allowed to refuse performing abortions due to personal morals codes and conscience.  Dead babies for everybody!

I personally have no issues with abortion – a child in a loveless home will have a horrible upbringing, and there can be severe emotional repercussions when a mother puts a newborn up for adoption.  Not that I oppose adoption, but it’s a choice that should be made carefully and with deep consideration of the effects of gestation and childbirth.

Danio replies to this quote from HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt:

Is the fear here that so many doctors will refuse that it will somehow make it difficult for a woman to get an abortion? That hasn’t happened, but what if it did? Wouldn’t that be an important and legitimate social statement?

Why yes, yes it might.  It’s also extraordinarily unlikely.  I think this all goes back to the Hippocratic Oath taken by each doctor, presented here in part:

I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice.

I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy.

The abortive remedy part probably shouldn’t be taken too literally – I believe it would mean something more like, don’t treat a pregnant woman in a way that will endanger the child, if there are viable alternatives.  But this oath importantly provides for the moral conscience of the practitioner, not to provide treatments they would consider harmful.  This is to say, had my Mormon father become a doctor, he still would NEVER agree to perform an abortion, as he personally considers this to be very harmful.  According both to the all-important oath and the HHS, this is within his rights.

It’s a lot like the damn cracker/host issue – what’s good for you is good for you, and what’s good for me is good for me.  For crying out loud, don’t go around forcing doctors to do what they consider to be KILLING PEOPLE.  I would be absolutely shocked if so many doctors elected not to do abortions, that it became difficult to obtain one if necessary.  This is especially true considering the part where a doctor who morally opposes abortion wouldn’t adopt a specialty that would potentially involve performing abortions.

Danio responds:

I can scarcely get my mind around the fact that he is so openly, unapologetically endorsing a policy in which pious opinion would trump secular law. Once again, though, it shouldn’t be a surprise. After all, he himself states that “The Bush Administration has consistently supported the unborn”. Ah yes, even as they indiscriminately leech the quality of life (if not the life itself) from countless other self-aware, functioning humans on the planet, each and every blastocyst they encounter is ceremoniously wrapped in a mantle of sanctimonious protection.

Right.  First, opinion doesn’t trump law – just because abortion is legal, does NOT mean that a doctor MUST perform an abortion when asked.  It’s legal for my buddy to share my lunch, but that doesn’t mean I have to fork it over when asked.  Moreover, the moral opinion of said abortion-opposed doctors does not prevent the person seeking abortion to find a doctor willing to do it, nor does it have any impact whatsoever on those willing doctors and clinics.

This is without touching the sanctimonious tripe that forms the second half of that paragraph.  To say that the unborn “leech the quality of life from countless other self-aware, functioning humans” is a horrible thing to say, especially given that a) she clearly didn’t think that when pregnant with her own questionable bundles of joy, and b) the afflicted self-aware, functioning human had to have made a number of mistakes to wind up preggers in the first place.*

Although the final draft no longer contains the specific language broadening the definition of “abortion” to include anything from “conception” onward, it still threatens to withhold Federal money if health care organizations don’t allow their employees to exercise their rights of conscience.

Oh how horrible – medical institutions won’t get government money if they force their practitioners to unwillingly perform what might be thought of as morally questionable procedures.  If the happy godless want the religious to respect their “beliefs” (or lack thereof) so much, they might find they’ll get somewhere by practicing that same respect.

I must again emphasize that nowhere in this whole mess was a woman’s basic right to abortion EVER threatened.  It’s almost like Danio’s just trying to get pissed off.

*I am well aware that unfortunate incidents do happen – a good friend of mine accidentally got his wife pregnant while she was on depo-provera.  She had a beautiful baby girl, and the happy parents love their accident child to bits.  And my friend’s wife would have had no trouble getting an abortion if that’s what she’d wanted.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: