by JivinJ
Mr. Alcorn, of course, doesn't volunteer to sacrifice his life to save the rest of the human race. It's much easier to push for abortions and population control efforts in developing nations.
Indeed, the argument that some abortions take place in particularly awful, particularly understandable circumstances is not a case against regulating abortion. It's the beginning of precisely the kind of reasonable distinction-making that would produce a saner, stricter legal regime.If anything, by enshrining a near-absolute right to abortion in the Constitution, the pro-choice side has ensured that the hard cases are more controversial than they otherwise would be. One reason there's so much fierce argument about the latest of late-term abortions - Should there be a health exemption? A fetal deformity exemption? How broad should those exemptions be? - is that Americans aren't permitted to debate anything else. Under current law, if you want to restrict abortion, post-viability procedures are the only kind you're allowed to even regulate.
I still have a long way to go in my medical training. I've never witnessed an actual abortion procedure...I wonder if she'll change her mind after actually seeing abortions performed especially since it's difficult to imagine someone who doesn't "claim that abortion is morally acceptable" regularly performing late-term abortions.
Comments:
Perhaps Alcorn's editorial is meant to be satire?
Posted by: Janet at June 9, 2009 1:42 PMMy faith in the "medical profession" is eroding daily. The female medical student is just one more who's being brainwashed into thinking she's "helping women" by doing abortions. She's immaturely rebelling against her religion and her parents views.
Posted by: Janet at June 9, 2009 1:49 PMNo, the article is not satire. It is a sincere effort to justify killing babies.
And like all other "overpopulation freaks", Mr. Alcorn is quite content to let others die so that he may have more room. That keeps him within his "comfort zone".
Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at June 9, 2009 2:02 PMthat medical student could go into High Risk Obstectrics and perform a GOOD service for the country to help women in high risk pregnancies. But instead, she believes that Tiller HELPED women and she wants to do the same.........This is VERY SAD.
And the couple she mentioned "needing Dr Tiller" that's just sickening.......just sickening. Even if the baby just lived for a few minutes, at least that baby wouldn't suffer a horrible death of being poisoned (the medicine inserted into the heart to cause a deliberate heart attack) and then be BURNED in the crematory in Wichita. No, that baby would be held for those few precious moments and then given a proper burial.
Posted by: LizFromNebraska at June 9, 2009 2:44 PMJust a guess here - the article was posted as an editorial with a famous pro-life name to attract more attention. The quality of argument presented is quite poor and filled with the usual drivel and Orwellian double speak.
Yahoooooooo!
Do not forget to remember the Alamo.
yor bro ken
Posted by: kbhvac at June 9, 2009 3:57 PMMy comment for the Alorn article at the Daily Sound:
So far I have not observed any with the euthanasia-population reduction philosophy volunteer to support their own ideology. None of these environmentalists are showing their sincerity by stopping their own use of oxygen and output of carbon.
Posted by: pharmer at June 10, 2009 1:46 PM