A paternalistic law would be one that shielded women from accurate information about what it was they were about to do. If women are capable of making decision to terminate the life of their child, they should be capable of receiving information. And the doctor doesn't have any "free speech" rights. They are a professional performing a service in which they are obliged to provide complete information to their patients. If we saw more pictures of war, we would be pacifists. If we saw more pictures of slaughterhouses we would be vegetarians. If we saw more pictures of poverty we would be more generous. If we saw more pictures of the unborn (not even abortions) we would be prolife. It's long past due that those of us committed to social justice become completely committed to a just society in which all of its members are protected.

No one can argue with the idea of informed consent. But remember, abortion is a legal, constitutionally protected medical procedure. Why should the informed consent be greater than that for other, even riskier, medical procedures. When we have a root canal, or a colonoscopy, or a kidney stone taken out, we (if we're lucky) get a description of the procedure, its risks and benefits, and have to sign some consent forms. Believe me, all this and more happens when a woman goes into any American abortion clinic.(I worked for over ten years at a Planned Parenthood clinic in a major urban area).

If we're not FORCED to look at images of our bladders, mouths, colons, or other organs during those other procedures, why should we be FORCED to look at the images of our pregnant uterus? That's a cruel double standard.

OK. Let's let them see pictures. However, in order to end hypocrisy, let's see all the pictures of dead American soliders, dead Iraqi children, and live photos of executions. Then I will be happy to have a discussion with you about the sanctity of life.

i agree with you up to a point. what i disagree with is "all members." until a fetus is outside the womb and breathing and thinking (as much as a baby may think when it's first born), the fetus is not a member of anything. lots of things can happen while the fetus is in the womb--things over which no one has any control.

to never be in this situation makes it so easy to say this is wrong or that is right. but life, much of the time, is neither easy or uncomplicated. that's why the decision must always be the woman's.

First you need to rephrase your statement about constitutionally protectected medical procedure so that you are truthful....it should read In the opinion of some it is a constitutionally protectected medical procedure, I have looked and looked and have not found anywhere in the Constitution the word abortion, medical procedure, etc.....

Anduril23:

A paternalistic law would be one that shielded women from accurate information about what it was they were about to do. If women are capable of making decision to terminate the life of their child, they should be capable of receiving information. And the doctor doesn't have any "free speech" rights. They are a professional performing a service in which they are obliged to provide complete information to their patients. If we saw more pictures of war, we would be pacifists. If we saw more pictures of slaughterhouses we would be vegetarians. If we saw more pictures of poverty we would be more generous. If we saw more pictures of the unborn (not even abortions) we would be prolife. It's long past due that those of us committed to social justice become completely committed to a just society in which all of its members are protected.

Bullshit. Do you really think pregnant women don't know what's in their womb by now? Or for that matter that poverty can be horrible, war is violent, and slaughterhouses are rather foul? What's paternalistic is the idea that women need to be educated on a topic they pretty clearly already have a surplus of information about.

TruettCollins:

First you need to rephrase your statement about constitutionally protectected medical procedure so that you are truthful....it should read In the opinion of some it is a constitutionally protectected medical procedure, I have looked and looked and have not found anywhere in the Constitution the word abortion, medical procedure, etc.....

The "some" to which you refer are the Supreme Court, whose opinions are the only ones which matter on the topic, and have the force of Constitutional law.

It is their OPINION and only that......if you want to follow the Constitution their opinon carries no more weight than a drunk on the street.......

TruettCollins:

It is their OPINION and only that......if you want to follow the Constitution their opinon carries no more weight than a drunk on the street.......

\

If you actually believed in the constitution we wouldn't be having this debate. A woman could choose to do whatever with her body at any stage of pregnancy without interference from the state per the right to privacy and to be safe and secure in our bodies and homes clauses.

Sod off. If you don't want an abortion, don't get one. And in your particular case you should swallow more.

Well I'm certainly a pacifist but not because of pictures of war. Then again people who have been to war aren't usually against it, so it probably wouldn't do a thing.

I've seen slaughterhouses. I eat natural farm raised animals, which are better for you and the reason I decided to eat farm raised animals. I believe big commercial "farms" should be outlawed.

There's no reason to become a vegetarian, we naturally eat meat as humans, although we probably don't need to eat as much as we do. Are we to expect lions to stop killing its meals because it would be devastated by how it looks on tv?

Humans are just animals, most of us seem to think for some reason we are better than all other animals. I think that thinking just goes to show we're not.

So those who are grossed out by heart surgery, should they decide not to get it in the future? What does how gross it is matter? A persons description of it is meaningless to me. if a doctor sticks a sharp instrument into the neck(?) i would think the fetus would flinch because of the force not necessarily because it felt it.