A Woman’s Right To Choose
by Big Dog on Jan 27, 2010 at 05:10 Political
Stay out of my uterus is one of the slogans the pro murder crowd likes to use. A woman’s body is her own and she can do with it what she wants. She has a right to privacy. Teen aged girls should be allowed to get abortions without their parents knowing about it. It is a woman’s right to choose.
Should she choose life like Sarah Palin did then she is excoriated.
But there are conflicting messages coming from the groups that advocate the right to choose and the status of a fetus. To the pro death crowd a fetus is not a life so aborting it is not murder and is no one’s business. Unless of course a pregnant woman is murdered. In that case, the court will go after the criminal for two counts of murder. How can you murder something that is not a life? If killing a pregnant woman is murdering her and her baby then how is abortion not murder of the baby?
A Florida woman had her right to choose taken away from her by a judge and her doctor. Samantha Burton, a cigarette smoker, was admitted to the hospital in what was thought to be premature labor. It turned out to be a false alarm. She wanted to leave but her doctor had other ideas. He told her that her smoking was placing her baby at risk and that she needed to be on bed rest or she risked a miscarriage.
Burton wanted to leave but her doctor went to court to keep her in the hospital where she could not smoke and would get her bed rest. A judge agreed and ordered her kept in the hospital because of the risk to her unborn child. Three days later she gave birth to a still born child.
Burton is appealing the judge’s order so that precedent is not set where judges can decide what is in the best interest of the woman or her baby. Before anyone brings up Terry Schiavo (not about a pregnant woman but about a judge deciding her fate), that was a dispute between family members where a judge had to decide between what each side presented as the patient’s wishes. This issue was very clear because Ms. Burton was able to take her own decisions.
Imagine if a judge ordered a woman not to have an abortion because it is a danger to the child. How many in the pro murder crowd would agree with that decision?
As far as Ms. Burton goes, she is free to take her own medical decisions. All patients have the right to refuse any and all treatment. If Ms. Burton wanted to not be on bed rest (she said she could be on bed rest at home, which is true) and wanted to continue smoking, no matter how distasteful or stupid that is, she is free to do just that.
How is it that no judge would consider taking away a woman’s right to choose an abortion but this judge felt it was OK to take away this woman’s right to choose not to follow the doctor’s advice?
It is important to reemphasize, patients have the right to refuse any and all treatment and the courts have no authority to override any such decision. As long as you are capable of making your own decisions then you have the last word. The ACLU, an agency I hardly ever agree with, is on the right side of this issue and Dr. Michael Grodin, a physician and professor of health law, bioethics and human rights at Boston University, had this to say:
…doctors should never resort to court orders.
“People have the absolute right to refuse treatment …,” Grodin said. “It’s unconscionable. … It’s an affront to women.”
Where are the pro choice people on this issue?
Source:
Breitbart
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: abortion, court order, doctors, judges, refused treatment
“Should she choose life like Sarah Palin did then she is excoriated.”
Oh lord. You mean Sarah “Watch me parade my children around for the media and then cry foul when they talk about them” Palin? Palin is a victim in her own mind.
“In that case, the court will go after the criminal for two counts of murder.”
Not always. It’s not clear cut.
This case you’re talking about is one of many you can find with weird rulings. I see a case where a judge ordered a woman not to have children while on probation. What about the mess with Terri Schiavo and the courts?
I’m not sure it’s fair to take one case and indict the court system as you do as if there is a conspiracy by judges and activists to promote abortion but deny some other rights.
Would you not cry foul if someone ridiculed and lied about your children, should you be in that situation?
If you say no, you are ignorant of the love a parent has for their children- that much would be plain- or else you are just being deceitful.
Which is it, Adam?
And as for the other “weird” rulings, they almost ALWAYS come from activist judges, liberals mostly, who feel that this is their chance to take their own unremarkable life, and perhaps “make history”, when all they really do is open themselves up to ridicule from any logical person.
“Would you not cry foul if someone ridiculed and lied about your children, should you be in that situation?”
I would have the common sense (your favorite) not to shove my family into the spotlight for my own political gain and then play the victim when the media lashes out at them in their typical useless fashion.
Bigd: “Should she choose life like Sarah Palin did then she is excoriated.”>>
DAR
Let’s call this bluff:
1) give an example of Palin being excoriated for choosing to have her child
2) admit you are wrong.
Since you cannot do number one, do you have the courage to do number two? We’ll see.
Bigd: “The ACLU,… is on the right side of this issue…
Where are the pro choice people on this issue?>>
DAR
With you and the ACLU:
“…she is free to take her own medical decisions.”
And this includes her right to control her body and reproductive system (within the constraints of Roe v Wade). A very pro-choice position.
D.
Look at the comment taken from the DU here
Or here
or here
Or here
I am pro life, Roe is a pro murder ruling.
Yes, by all means roll out the quotes by the complete whackjobs on the left. I’ll best any quote you can find from the left using the wit and wisdom of the right wing’s finest in places like Free Republic…
Well excuse me Adam, Darrel said he was calling a bluff and wanted me to back up my claim. I backed it up and now you dismiss the people as whackjobs?
I proved what I said and now the question is will Darrel comply with his #2?
And not all of those quotes come from the fringe.
Funny though, you point to a few whackjobs with nasty signs at a tea party as proof that it reflects the entire movement but dismiss your folks as whakjobs.
Spin, spin, spin.
A few whack job morons talk bad about Sarah Palin and that means she was “excoriated” for something? Try again.
Sorry, but the whack jobs with nasty signs are tea party founders so hurry up and find a new excuse for their racism. But then again the movement is nearly 100% whack job, so there’s your problem…
Bigd: “Look at the comment taken from…”>>
DAR
Oh spare me. Some anonymous crap posted in a comment thread by no one knows who? Really?
Let’s look at the second one. It’s called “Stop the ACLU” but actually it’s referring to a comment on a far RIGHT site called: “Center for the Advancement of Capitalism.” That is, some of your right wing Ayn Rand nuts. Your kind of people. Had you read your link you would have known this but you went with the headline posted by some rightwing buffoon but didn’t read the article did you? This isn’t even worth roasting.
Let me make it real easy for you. It is your side that wants the government to limit a woman’s choice. It’s called pro-choice for a reason. A person who is pro-choice is very much for a person’s right to choose to deliver, or not. Someone who would “excoriate Palin” for choosing to have her child is, by definition, not pro-choice. They’re instead some twisted variation of your group.
Palin was excoriated in the press, not because she chose to have her baby, but rather because she is an idiot.
Bigd: “I am pro life”>>
DAR
I think you’re just confused. You said:
“As far as Ms. Burton goes, she is free to take her own medical decisions.”
Abortion is a medical decision.
You said: “All patients have the right to refuse any and all treatment.”>>
DAR
What if it is a treatment to save a fetus? This is consistent with pro-choice.
“If Ms. Burton wanted to not be on bed rest… and wanted to continue smoking, no matter how distasteful or stupid that is, she is free to do just that.”
DAR
What if it causes abortion? Oh wait, it DOES.
D.
————-
Abortion Solution
“When my research showed that tobacco induces up to 141,000 spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) among American women each year (“Sin of Omission,” May/June), I thought the religious organizations concerned about the unborn would turn their wrath on the tobacco companies and the politicians who perfect them.
I mailed a summary of my research to more than 50 right-to-life organizations. I was bewildered that I did not receive a single reply. Nor, to my knowledge, did the leaders of these groups pass this information on to their members.
I now understand their silence. These groups feel that the fetus’ right to life is more important than the mother’s right to choose, but the unborn’s rights are not as important as the right of these groups to accept huge sums of money from tobacco companies in exchange for their silence. Perhaps the whole abortion debate could be settled with one large cash payment.”
–Dr. Joseph R. Difranza, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worchester, Mass. Mother Jones, 8/96, pg. 10.
I am not confused. Any patient has the right to choose medical treatment or decline it. Abortions are legal and a woman has the right to choose one. My position is that abortion is a state’s rights issue and does not belong at the federal level. Abortion is murder of the unborn. The post points out how portions of society want it both ways. Choose to have the kid and the courts will ensure you do what it thinks is best, choose to abort and there is no intervention.
As long as smoking is a legal practice then no one has the right to tell you that you cannot do it. Almost all abortions end in death. There are plenty of children born to smokers who are fine. There is no comparison.
Though for the record I don’t think it is smart to smoke especially if one is pregnant.
Do you even read these Adam?
Before anyone brings up Terry Schiavo (not about a pregnant woman but about a judge deciding her fate), that was a dispute between family members where a judge had to decide between what each side presented as the patient’s wishes.
Right. I’m not saying the case is going to overlap completely, just that this is not the first or the last insane or strange ruling by the courts in our country. And it’s not just liberal judges as Blake seems to pretend. I just don’t see the need to hint at a pro-abortion conspiracy in the courts like you’re doing simply because you see a case that isn’t going the way you think it should…
I did not hint at a pro abortion court. I simply pointed out the differences in opinions about choice and the hypocrisy of one point of view in one case and a different one in the other.
If they’re two different cases in different courts by different judges then the only way to paint hypocrisy is to say there’s a conspiracy. I don’t think you can have it both ways…