Politics: Onward from New Hampshire

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Not Me
I think the "just say no" aspect to it makes it appropriate for the PB.

Or their boyfriends guilted them into doing it. I am standing firm, though.

"Guilted?" Is that the word women are using these days when they don't want to take responsibility for their actions? I guess it's better than "no means no."

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
from this week's weekly Standard:

That was a cheap shot. I don't think the guy uses botox. Those pics purporting to show that he did only showed that he was raising his eyebrows a bit in the one picture.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by sgtclub
"Guilted?" Is that the word women are using these days when they don't want to take responsibility for their actions?

I am not talking about anal rape. I am talking about emotional manipulation.

Women do it, too, it is just that when we do it, it is not to get the guy to have sex. Pretty much just getting naked will work for that.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Not Me
I am not talking about anal rape.

Neither am I.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Well, I'm glad to see you think that women can be trusted with neither a choice nor a child.

Who said that women cannot be trusted with a child?

As for being trusted with a choice, abortion is indeed a choice, and for severe birth defects or life of the mother, one that I agree with. It is just that you don't need to perform a partial birth abortion to kill the baby. There are other procedures that will kill the baby just as dead and which aren't as horrifying.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Neither am I.

Then what are you saying?

Do you think that a woman has never been guilted into having anal sex by her boyfriend or husband making her feel bad like she doesn't love him or something if she won't do it?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Not Me
There are other procedures that will kill the baby just as dead and which aren't as horrifying.

Have any of the doctors identified as performing these procedures been asked to explain why they didn't use a less horrifying alternative? And what were the responses?

[Not Me]

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAM6ZLDLQD.html

Looks like Martha sold her stock a bit prematurely.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Not Me
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAM6ZLDLQD.html

Looks like Martha sold her stock a bit prematurely.

Not really

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Not Me
Then what are you saying?

Do you think that a woman has never been guilted into having anal sex by her boyfriend or husband making her feel bad like she doesn't love him or something if she won't do it?

I think "guilted" is often times an excuse for something the woman wanted to try, but was to ashamed to admit it. Much like the "no means no" excuse.*

This is by no means an endorsement of rape. Rather, it is a recognition that some women have cried rape when they were ashamed of what they had done.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Have any of the doctors identified as performing these procedures been asked to explain why they didn't use a less horrifying alternative? And what were the responses?

Yes, the DOJ is trying to ask just that and needs the medical charts of those patients to prepare for the upcoming depositions.

But until the depositions are done, you can read this statement by the AMA on late-term pregnancy termination techniques:

http://www.ama-assn.org/apps/pf_new/...&st_p=0&nth=2&

(1) The term 'partial birth abortion' is not a medical term. The AMA will use the term "intact dilatation and extraction"(or intact D&X) to refer to a specific procedure comprised of the following elements: deliberate dilatation of the cervix, usually over a sequence of days; instrumental or manual conversion of the fetus to a footling breech; breech extraction of the body excepting the head; and partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of the fetus to effect vaginal delivery of a dead but otherwise intact fetus. This procedure is distinct from dilatation and evacuation (D&E) procedures more commonly used to induce abortion after the first trimester. Because 'partial birth abortion' is not a medical term it will not be used by the AMA.

(2) According to the scientific literature, there does not appear to be any identified situation in which intact D&X is the only appropriate procedure to induce abortion, and ethical concerns have been raised about intact D&X. The AMA recommends that the procedure not be used unless alternative procedures pose materially greater risk to the woman. The physician must, however, retain the discretion to make that judgment, acting within standards of good medical practice and in the best interest of the patient.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Not Me
The AMA recommends that the procedure not be used unless alternative procedures pose materially greater risk to the woman.

Why is that standard not enough? Any evidence doctors aren't taking that approach?

ETA: And why is DOJ able to make this assessment more readily than the doctors? Did they hire the folks who do this for the insurance cos. to review the files?

[Not Me]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I think "guilted" is often times an excuse for something the woman wanted to try, but was to ashamed to admit it.

I don't think this is "often" the case. Lots of women experiment sexually and don't have to be guilted into doing things. Lots of women also get pressued into doing things that they don't want to do.

Originally posted by sgtclub
Much like the "no means no" excuse.*

This is by no means an endorsement of rape. Rather, it is a recognition that some women have cried rape when they were ashamed of what they had done.

Undoubtedly, some women have. Some men have falsely accused other men of rape, too. Both are rare, though.

I don't understand the no means no "excuse" comment. No means no is just a recognition of the fact that two people may be interpreting the situation differently therefore it is best to err on the side of caution and interpret "no" literally. If she really meant yes when she said no, she can tell you that if you stop the sexual activity. But if you continue the sexual activity when she is saying no because you are mistakenly believing that she really means yes but is just saying no as part of a rape fantasy she is having and she actually means no, then she is being forced into sexual activity she doesn't want.

I don't see "no means no" as any sort of excuse. It is just a way of saying, err on the side of caution and take it literally when a woman indicates that the sexual activity is unwanted.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Apparently Clark himself isn't too worried about them.

CNN: Sen. John Kerry will pick up the endorsement of former Democratic rival Wesley Clark, a Democratic source told CNN, . . . .

Unless Clark himself is a Rove plant.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Why is that standard not enough? Any evidence doctors aren't taking that approach?

Burger - the AMA backed the partial-birth abortion ban passed by the feds except the criminal penalties.

http://www.ama-assn.org/apps/pf_new/...&st_p=0&nth=1&

The AMA maintains its support for HR 1122 (Partial Birth Abortion Act of 1997) as amended while continuing to work with sponsors, and with state legislators on state bills, to improve the language further, particularly to delete the provision dealing with criminal penalties. (Res. 234, A-97)

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
ETA: And why is DOJ able to make this assessment more readily than the doctors?

The doctors are the ones who sued the government on behalf of patients as I recall. This is not the DOJ prosecuting the doctors for a crime. The DOJ needs to address the doctor's contentions regarding intact D&X that the doctors are raising in their quest to overturn the law.

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Did they hire the folks who do this for the insurance cos. to review the files?

They can hire OB/Gyns to review the files. There are many doctors who agree with the ban on partial birth abortion because a D&E can be done safely instead. This is by no means a settled issue in the medical community. Not all doctors agree with these doctors who are suing and very few OB/GYNs will do a partial birth abortion. Many qualified OB/Gyns refuse to do them because they believe a D&E will be just as effective and just as safe. There is not universal agreement on this issue in the medical community by any measure.