tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post2479600592731689076..comments2024-03-16T05:00:38.826-04:00Comments on Egnorance: We Shall Not Weary, We Shall Not Restmregnorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-86607267536674738472013-01-27T17:11:41.660-05:002013-01-27T17:11:41.660-05:00Michael,
What makes you think that it is the '...Michael,<br /><br />What makes you think that it is the 'pro-abortion crowd' who is bringing the lawsuit? It is the husband. And actually, the lawyers should be presenting the case the defendants want, not what they think will work. The hospital should be defending itself against malpractice and prove that it's not guilty. I think that they have a very strong case and a very good chance of succeeding.<br /><br />The unfortunate 7 month pregnant woman had a massive pulmonary embolus which was fatal within an hour. A clinical decision to perform an emergency Caesarean section within that hour, potentially saving the twins but impairing the chances of survival of the mother, would be an extremely difficult one, if not impossible.<br /><br />I think that a 7 month fetus is a person. The Catholic hospital should have had the courage of its convictions and agreed for the purposes of the court case that they do have rights and argue their case to set a precedent in Colorado.<br /><br />It's what the hospital in Oregon did when it was sued over the failure of antenatal screening (amniocentesis with chorionic villus sampling for cytogenetics) failed to diagnose trisomy 21. The hospital attempted a defense based on the fetus being a mosaic, with the placenta being diploid (but it failed). They didn't attempt your bullshit argument that the hospital had 'contracted' to produce a live baby, which it did - one with trisomy 21, which the parents were expecting to be avoided by their undergoing antenatal screening.bachfiendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14752055891882312204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-23729894970756956212013-01-27T14:05:14.433-05:002013-01-27T14:05:14.433-05:00In what way do I disrespect born people and people...In what way do I disrespect born people and people not attached to machines?mregnorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-71517160056907099042013-01-27T12:09:54.250-05:002013-01-27T12:09:54.250-05:0010 of the last 11 state-wide ballot initiatives to...10 of the last 11 state-wide ballot initiatives to restrict abortion have been defeated. If you’re right that too many people are to stupid or misinformed to understand what is going on, perhaps some more pictures of torn-up fetuses will help.<br /><br />-KW<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-29278205659786681172013-01-27T11:58:47.623-05:002013-01-27T11:58:47.623-05:00“All are wanted by God, and therefore to be respec...“All are wanted by God, and therefore to be respected, protected, and cherished by us. “<br /><br />Egnor, you’re falling way short on the “respected” part, and in your world view, protected and cherished only seem to apply to the unborn and people sustained by machines.<br /><br />-KW<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-22818999134275942262013-01-27T09:47:25.537-05:002013-01-27T09:47:25.537-05:00The GOP is certainly to the right of the Democrats...The GOP is certainly to the right of the Democrats. That much we agree on.<br /><br />HooAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-6252874146991317212013-01-27T09:30:45.890-05:002013-01-27T09:30:45.890-05:00I didn't say the Republican Party was smart. I...I didn't say the Republican Party was smart. I said it was right. mregnorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-1151880727520169742013-01-27T09:17:25.346-05:002013-01-27T09:17:25.346-05:00BTW, Michael, thanks for posting the Neuhaus speec...BTW, Michael, thanks for posting the Neuhaus speech. It's an eloquent and moving exhortation to keep fighting the good fight, to "keep on keeping on".<br /><br />Evil never rests, so it's incumbent upon those who side with righteousness to be constantly engaged in the fight, and to refresh themselves when they grow weary.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-2696194725321249442013-01-27T09:10:20.740-05:002013-01-27T09:10:20.740-05:00What the framers [of the US Constitution] knew to ...<i>What the framers [of the US Constitution] knew to be a crime at common law in the states when they made the Constitution, they did not intend to legalize; indeed the protection afforded to the unborn at common law accorded with their view of the protection to be afforded persons. When the framers reserved to the People all powers not expressly conferred upon the nation [i.e. the federal government], they did not intend to disable the People from legislating to protect life; indeed, in the distribution of governmental power intended by the founders, the states were to protect life by the ordinary laws against murder, manslaughter, and abortion.</i><br /><br />(John T. Noonan, Jr., in <i>A Private Choice: Abortion in America in the Seventies</i>, page 6.New York: The Free Press, 1979)<br /><br />Roe v. Wade was an exercise of raw judicial power, and the imposition of Roe v. Wade on the states and the citizenry is nothing less than tyranny. It, along with the murderous industry it protects, is a national disgrace.<br /><br />On the grounds Noonan identifies, and on other grounds, I assert that the states have no obligation whatsoever to abide by Roe v. Wade. Will any states garner the moral and political courage to nullify the Supreme Court's decision?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-47575483894468803872013-01-27T08:47:13.751-05:002013-01-27T08:47:13.751-05:00> Legally, a fetus under 20 weeks isn't a p...> Legally, a fetus under 20 weeks isn't a person,<br />> and therefore not protected by law.<br /><br />Legal fiction does not change reality. A fetus is a distinct human being, whether recognized as such by law or not, and regardless of how the word 'person' might be used as a weasel-word.<br /><br />As for the 20-week mark, it's a small comfort to the many babies aborted beyond that mark who enjoy virtually no protection from the law. The welfare of the gravida is so broadly construed that the fetus is denied any of the normal legal protections of life, so effectively, from a legal standpoint, they are non-persons beyond 20 weeks as well. (We dare not use the phrase, "welfare of the mother", since motherhood implies the carrying of a child.)<br /><br />Kermit Gosnell offended the laws of Pennsylvania not so much because he was routinely aborting babies beyond 20 weeks, but because he was doing so in unsanitary conditions, with improperly trained personnel, and disposing of the so-called "products of abortion" -- dead babies -- in an illegal manner.<br /><br />> It's her body and her choice.<br /><br />There are at least two distinct bodies involved: one is the mother's, the other (in the case of a single fetus) is the baby's.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-48909978130002883222013-01-27T08:23:52.497-05:002013-01-27T08:23:52.497-05:00I am afraid the shoe is on the wrong foot, Dr. Egn...I am afraid the shoe is on the wrong foot, Dr. Egnor. The "stupid party" is what Bobby Jindal recently <a href="http://washingtonexaminer.com/full-text-bobby-jindals-dynamite-speech-to-the-republican-national-committee-in-charlotte/article/2519682#.UQUpvUo3xZF" rel="nofollow">called the GOP</a>.<br /><br />Hoo Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-10268979907707968402013-01-27T08:10:36.238-05:002013-01-27T08:10:36.238-05:00The Catholic hospital in question is not making a ...The Catholic hospital in question is not making a philosophical argument that fetuses are not persons. Their lawyers are making the (correct) legal argument that under the law fetuses of the age at issue are not persons for the purposes of tort litigation. <br /><br />The hospital's attorneys are merely pointing out the law, which has nothing to do with the Church's stand on human life. <br /><br />It is the pro-abortion crowd that is being dishonest, endorsing a lawsuit against a Catholic hospital in which, contrary to law, a fetus is considered a person for the purpose of litigation. mregnorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-82530996536682056672013-01-27T08:06:47.410-05:002013-01-27T08:06:47.410-05:00Which is less than the margin by which Americans b...Which is less than the margin by which Americans believe in teaching ID in schools, and support praying in schools, among many other culture war issues. <br /><br />40% of Americans admit that they don't know enough about RvW to have an opinion, and most of the 60% that remain almost certainly have a mistaken understanding of RvW. <br /><br />You asshats depend on stupidity ("fetuses aren't human beings", "overturning Roe would outlaw all abortions", "Darwinism is science") to advance your agenda. mregnorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-80269332015323970032013-01-27T08:02:39.964-05:002013-01-27T08:02:39.964-05:00Although, Michael will note that most of the '...Although, Michael will note that most of the '7' are Democrats, and therefore not 'people'.<br /><br />Legally, a fetus under 20 weeks isn't a person, and therefore not protected by law. A woman is legally entitled to choose whether she wishes to carry a pre-20 week fetus to term. It's her body and her choice.<br /><br />After 20 weeks, legally the fetus is a person. Except in the state of Colorado, in which the fetus has to be born before becoming a person. Which a Catholic hospital used hypocritically in defending itself against a malpractice suit involving 7 month twin fetuses.bachfiendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14752055891882312204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-19150099185212209062013-01-27T07:44:23.490-05:002013-01-27T07:44:23.490-05:00It seems that "We the Pople" approve of ...It seems that "We the Pople" approve of Roe v Wade. By a seven-to-three margin.<br /><br />HooAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com