Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion ban

BURLINGTON, VT -Governor Howard Dean today sharply criticized the latest congressional vote on the so-called partial-birth abortion ban:

"As a physician, I am outraged that the Senate has decided it is qualified to practice medicine. There is no such thing as 'partial birth abortion' in medical literature. But there are times when a doctor is called upon to perform a late term abortion to save a woman's life or protect her from serious injury. Today the Senate took a step toward making it a crime for a doctor to perform such medically necessary procedures.

"This bill will chill the practice of medicine and endanger the lives of countless women. This kind of legislation serves the sole purpose of chipping away women's constitutionally protected reproductive rights and overturning Roe v. Wade."

thank g_d the senate is starting to chip away!

>thank g_d the senate is starting to chip away!

Chip away? You mean in the same way as John Ashcroft has been chipping away at the Constitution through his Orwellian Patriot Act?

no. i'm not a proponent of the aforementioned act.

i happen to think that mostly delivering a baby, then murdering it by crushing its skull is wrong. you're welcome to think it is right.

If it were only used when actually necessary to save the mother's life, no one would oppose the procedure. Unfortunatlely, it has been used often when the mother decides that it would be inconvenient to have the baby. Surely we can all agree that it is wrong to kill a healthy, viable baby during birth, where its birth will not endanger the mother. If that is not wrong, then it would not be more wrong to wait until after it is born. Or a week or month later. Most doctors seem to agree that it is never necessary for the mothers health. And the real problem is that a doctor who is willing to kill a healthy, viable--but inconvenient--baby, will also be willing to lie to justify it. Probably the law should prohibit it unless it is necessary to save the mother's life, and a doctor who kills for a lesser reason is guilty of murder.

Is this really a good issue for Dean? The ardently pro-abortion voters are not going to vote for a Republican anyway. But many who favor ordinary abortion rights can see that killing a healthy, viable--but inconvenient--baby at the moment of birth is wrong. My guess is that a very large majority would be against partial-birth abortions if that issue were put to a vote.

>i happen to think that mostly delivering a baby, then

>murdering it by crushing its skull is wrong. you're welcome to

>think it is right.

One of the saddest thigns to watch is that Democrats are forced not only to defend the "right" of women to slaughter their half-born babies by smaashing their skulls in, but that this "right" is somehow the central right upon which all meaningful liberty hinges.

I suppose the one thing you can say for Dean is that he is willing to take clear, unequivocal positions even when those positions are opposed by a large percentage of the voting populace - as was the case with the war on Iraq, and as is certainly the case with his advocacy of this sick, barbaric, murderous "medical" procedure.

In reality, though, the sickness of the way these primaries are structued is that they give so much influence to the most fringe elements of the Democratic Party that candidates are forced to pander to them by taking totally extreme positions which the mainstream finds repulsive.

I do not think it would be pretty to watch Geroge Bush in a debate describe in graphic detail what happens to babies during this killing, and then ask Howard Dean how he could possibly think that it is a central "right" for women to slaughter their babies in this manner.

Can you cite any sources? I'd generally take an MD's word for it myself, and Dean is certainly not the only one that feels this way.

It certainly doesn't seem to be a common procedure at all, and even less so for 'healthy, viable' babies. Whether it's right to kill a deeply affected baby, which I am pretty sure is far more common, is another issue, and would be interesting to discuss.

There's never been a case where this was necessary for the health of the mother? Never?

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>If it were only used when actually necessary to save the

>mother's life, no one would oppose the procedure.

>Unfortunatlely, it has been used often when the mother decides

>that it would be inconvenient to have the baby. ... Most doctors

>seem to agree that it is never necessary for the mothers

>health.

Where are you getting your facts from? To my knowledge, there has never been one of these late-term abortions done on a woman who "simply changed her mind." Every single documented operation of this type in the US, from what I've read, has been a case of health risk to the mother (possible death) or low-to-zero percent chance of the baby's survival. Do you really think any woman would carry a child that long and then suddenly, out of the blue, decide it's "inconvenient"? It doesn't happen.

I thought the Roe v. Wade decision already took care of this. It allows almost unrestricted abortion in the first trimester and very little restriction in the second. Third trimester abortion is quite limited. What the Congress just did was to ban a medically safe procedure that is only used when a woman's life or health is in danger, and the bill contains no health exception.

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>I suppose the one thing you can say for Dean is that he is

>willing to take clear, unequivocal positions

That isn't the only thing you can say about him, but it is true that he isn't afraid to stand up for what he believes, and it's the reason so many people are behind him. And from what I'm reading on his site, there are many people who disagree with him on this issue but they don't use one issue as the litmus test for a candidate. They still back him 100% and respect his decisions.

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>>I suppose the one thing you can say for Dean is that he is

>>willing to take clear, unequivocal positions

>

>That isn't the only thing you can say about him, . . . .

I meant that it's the one thing I can say in his favor with regard to what I believe to be his horrendous position on this particular issue - not the only thing that one can say in his favor, period.

but it is

>true that he isn't afraid to stand up for what he believes,

>and it's the reason so many people are behind him.

I agree that this is one of the primary sources of Dean's appeal. I also believe that he does advocate the views he genuinely believes without regard to their political popularity, a highly rare but valuable attribute among candidates.

And from

>what I'm reading on his site, there are many people who

>disagree with him on this issue but they don't use one issue

>as the litmus test for a candidate. They still back him 100%

>and respect his decisions.

If what you are describing is accurate, then you are describing a cult, not a political campaign. You make it seem as though his followers have adopted the view that Dean must not be questioned or challenged and that, even when he adopts hideous views, "they still back him 100% and respect his decisions." Do they refer to him as the Great Leader?

If one believes that this procedure constitutes the brutal murder of babies, then it's hard for me to see how someone could "respect" the decision to advocate in favor of that procedure.

Do you know if Dean believes that the procedure should be legally permissible only when necessary to save the life of the mother, or does he believe that a woman has the right to "choose" to kill her baby in this manner regardless of the reason?

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>If what you are describing is accurate, then you are

>describing a cult, not a political campaign. You make it seem

>as though his followers have adopted the view that Dean must

>not be questioned or challenged

No, I didn't make myself clear (hey, I'm just an escort). They definitely question and challenge his positions, and he welcomes it. What I meant was that they agree with most of his views, which is why he is their candidate, and that if one or two issues are out of step with how they feel, they don't use that single issue as a reason to stop supporting him.

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>One of the saddest thigns to watch is that Democrats are

>forced not only to defend the "right" of women to slaughter

>their half-born babies by smaashing their skulls in,

Have you considered changing your handle to Demagog69?

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>>One of the saddest thigns to watch is that Democrats are

>>forced not only to defend the "right" of women to slaughter

>>their half-born babies by smaashing their skulls in,

>

>Have you considered changing your handle to Demagog69?

How come defenders of "abortion" procedures always hate it when someone describes exactly what occurs during the procedure rather than using euphemisms for it?

Given that what DOES occur is that babies' skulls are smashed in after being half-born in order to slaughter them, what is demogogic about describing the procedure this way?

And, Mr. Dean Expert, I would really like to know - genuinely - if Dean believes this procedure should be legal only when necessasry for the health of the mother, or if he believes that a woman should have the right to "choose" it any time, regardless of the motive?

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>>One of the saddest thigns to watch is that Democrats are

>>forced not only to defend the "right" of women to slaughter

>>their half-born babies by smaashing their skulls in,

>

>Have you considered changing your handle to Demagog69?

How come defenders of "abortion" procedures always hate it when someone describes exactly what occurs during the procedure rather than using euphemisms for it?

Given that what DOES occur is that babies' skulls are smashed in after being half-born in order to slaughter them, what is demogogic about describing the procedure this way?

And, Mr. Dean Expert, I would really like to know - genuinely - if Dean believes this procedure should be legal only when necessasry for the health of the mother, or if he believes that a woman should have the right to "choose" it any time, regardless of the motive?

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>I would really like to know - genuinely

>- if Dean believes this procedure should be legal only when

>necessasry for the health of the mother, or if he believes

>that a woman should have the right to "choose" it any time,

>regardless of the motive?

Go to http://www.deanforamerica.com and click on the contact link.

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

COnfidential to Rick: (well, not that confidential!)

Your political opinions, which I agree with more often than not, would look a little more serious without the ass pics. Couldn't you work something out here, just for this forum? Think about it!

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>Your political opinions, which I agree with more often than

>not, would look a little more serious without the ass pics.

>Couldn't you work something out here, just for this forum?

Hmmm...I could create a new handle. "The Serious Rick Munroe"? :+

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>What the Congress just did was to

>ban a medically safe procedure

the procedure isn't so medically safe for the baby, is it? oh wait, i forgot that for you on the left, children have rights only when they turn 18 and join a labour union.

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>i forgot that for you on the left

Please don't tell me where I stand (I'm usually kneeling, anyway).

don't do it rick!

you're not going on the British Bias Corporation engaging in a debate using your ass shot as a logo... you're discussing matters on an escort website. your status as an escort is a valuable piece of information. by keeping things as they are, you're showing that an escort can and does seriously think about issues--even if you gauge yourself as just a dumb whore.

i disagree with you on this issue--and, quite likely, many issues--but i'd hate for you to sell out by denying a "whore" the right to think and express himself.

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

oh don't be silly... you're going to try & cast yourself as a right-winger?

RE: Dean sharply criticizes vote for harmful abortion b...

>you're going to try & cast yourself as a

>right-winger?

I'd rather be cast as Debra Winger in Urban Cowboy. No, wait -- I'd rather be the mechanical bull that gets mounted by Travolta. }(

>no. i'm not a proponent of the aforementioned act.

>

>i happen to think that mostly delivering a baby, then

>murdering it by crushing its skull is wrong. you're welcome to

>think it is right.

Never said i did. I find it to be a repugnant act. Women say they want the right to reproductive choice. How about the right to keep the penis out of your body? You know that is a possible consequence of sex. Isn't that where the real choice should be?

RE: don't do it rick!

>i disagree with you on this issue

No, we're on the same page. I was just humoring Lucky. :+