"""Partial birth""" abortions are a meme politicians use to scare people
>1.3% of abortions take place in the third trimesters
>99% of them are due to serious health complications endangering the health of the mother
Don't fall for (((their))) misinformation, make informed decisions on women's reproductive health issues.
I want abortions to be illegal, so more women in the US can try to do "illegal" abortions and then fail and give birth to retarded children
But minorities are by far the most likely to seek abortions, it is literally pro white to abort
>a doctor
>ending a life
You can't justify this.
Abortions before the point when babies can survive outside of the womb (~20 wks) should be where the dispute is, there shouldn't be any dispute about a doctor killing something that is developed enough to live outside of the mother. That is killing and it is something unacceptable for anyone to do, let alone a doctor.
>Also I will, according to my ability and judgment, prescribe a regimen for the health of the sick; but I will utterly reject harm and mischief
just sterilize every nigger in america. problem solved.
>we aren't going to help you, have fun birthing a baby and dying, potentially losing the baby and mother at once
>it will do fine in a single parent household/foster system
Bongs baka
>Also I will, according to my ability and judgment, prescribe a regimen for the health of the sick; but I will utterly reject harm and mischief.
Are you too stupid to understand what health complications can occur in late stages of pregnancy? You think people will wait until their third trimester to get an abortion for no reason?
There is clear medical issues that affect both the mother and child in a majority of these already rare cases.
>a doctor whose entire profession is based around the fundamental principle of healing people and saving lives should take the decision to kill a baby developed enough to survive outside of the womb
>because muh feels
>when you're so dumb you unintentionally straw man
But if he doesn't perform the abortion the mother will die, and there is a chance the child will die too.
What is the magic healing man to do!
Somebody will die, should he listen to the wishes of the patient, mother, and living human being?
Or should he put his feelings about the unborn child first and allow both to die?
>b-but theres a chance it can live outside the womb!
No wonder england got cucked so hard anglos are nigger tier retarded
Do you understand how your legal system works or what doctors are meant to do? Do you think just because there's reason and benefit to doing something like taking a life that makes it okay?
Doctors should not act to end any life, no matter what the outcome is. The only reason that abortion (and especially late-term abortion) is legal is because of feminism. It's like euthanasia, some countries have even legalised and decriminalised that now, yet it's still fundamentally murder.
I'm not even talking about it in terms of an average person, because its doctors who do these abortions anyway. I wasn't quoting the Hippocratic Oath for no reason. It continues to be used (particularly in the US) in either its original or modified form by schools and students, because it's based on principles of their profession that have existed throughout history.
There are no circumstances that doctors should take a life. It fundamentally contradicts their profession.
Abortion is a moral disputed area because of feminism and the debate over when life begins, but now that medical science is sufficiently developed to allow a baby to survive outside of its mother after around 20 weeks there really cannot be justification for a doctor or a legal system to allow that baby to be deliberately killed. Even if it saves the mother.
The law is the issue, because feminism and other meme movements are eroding and changing it (as I said, euthaniasia is legalised/decriminalises in some legal systems now), but there shouldn't be any doubt about what the role or responsibilities of a doctor should be. They're one of the most prized and respected members of society for a reason - because they (should) always act in accordance with helping life - and no matter what your stance on abortion or the sanctity of life you cannot dispute that a baby that can survive outside the mother isn't a human life and therefore should be afforded protection in law.
that a baby that can survive outside the mother isn't a human life. All I'm saying is that it therefore should be afforded protection in law.*
>my baby has the right to threaten my life because it is developed past a certain point
Kek always a laugh hearing retarded foreigners try to say how laws in America work.
>there is no circumstance when a doctor should take a life
>i use simple absolutes because engaging my brain is too much work
Yep doctor should totally let mother and child both die instead of using modern medicine to save the mother. Jesus youre really retarded senpai, good thing youre not a doctor and your shitty opinions are just netween us desu
>my life is more important than my baby, better pay someone to kill him/her so I don't die
Why are woman so selfish?
% of them are due to serious health complications endangering the health of the mother
that racist to say that a healthy black child endanger the mother, even if true
...
It's not the current policies we worry about, it's that Hillary Clinton supported 3rd term abortions across the board and she is running for President.
This was brought up at the 3rd debate.
That's because there was a direct link to the mothers health being compromised.
This isn't about shillary but abortion in general
>ACROSS. THE. BOARD.
She didn't vote for late term abortions specifically when there was a health issue, she voted against banning 3rd term abortions.
Tbh i don't really care about late term abortions because it just means less niggers overall
>'''''''simple absolutes'''''''
You mean like law and morality, the two relevant aspects of this?
Why do you think it's still illegal to kill others even if it saves far more? Is that just a stupid 'simple absolute' too?
Speaking of simple absolutes, why do you assume that in every single circumstance a late-term abortion done because of risk to the mother that the mother would be guaranteed to die? Let's imagine that you could observe the world with both outcomes and see that without the abortion the mother would have survived - by slim chance - and yet she had it done in the real outcome. A doctor, a person singlely most responsible for saving and healing life, would have killed a baby that didn't need to die. (It's just a hypothetical to get you thinking, so don't just shitpost that it's another 'simple absolute').
Let me repeat it again just in case it might click this time:
>Also I will, according to my ability and judgment, [...] utterly reject harm and mischief.
This is part of an oath that's been sworn by doctors in Western medicine for centuries, and is continued today. It's part of the foundation of what a doctor is. Utterly reject harm.
A doctor is someone who, in their principles regarding life, is meant to treat it as a 'simple absolute'. Their profession is meant to utterly reject harm. It is meant to save and heal people.
...