re: #302 Obdicut

It’s a case-by-case basis.

Their private medical history is their own private medical history. I don’t even want to know what the particulars of their case is.

You responded to comments about whether we could “judge” the Santorums. Knowing the particulars of the case, seeing as how they wrote about it and are therefore willing to let us discuss it in public, seems relevant. Otherwise you are not, in fact, in a position to “judge”.

I’m not sure what you’re referring to. The operation isn’t done immediately before birth, but quite awhile before birth. And yes, I am saying that if the baby will just suffer and die, it is better to prevent that suffering, since the baby will never achieve the intellectual capacity to deal with the pain and understand what has happened to it.

The fact that there was an operation = the baby is not expected to suffer and die upon birth. Otherwise…one does not operate. Follow?

This is not relevant to anything I’ve said.

Au contraire, copain. If a baby cannot feel pain before the 24th week, then one subjects a 20-week old to no more pain should they wish the baby to die in their arms rather than at the hands of a doctor. I mean, really…if pain is not the consideration (and it wasn’t in the example we are discussing, the one you considered yourself eligible to judge), you’d still actually say out loud that it’s better to slaughter the baby in the womb than to let it expire in its parents’ arms?? Yowza.

If the fetus died in a justifiable attempt to correct the defect, then that is tragic. However, I am loathe to trust their word on the subject.

There is no way of telling whether or not the judgement was the correct one, but Santorum’s general stance on abortion is so reactionary that I am loathe to trust his or his wife’s version of events on a matter touching on natal affairs..

I understand that they have little credibility for you on the subject of abortion-related topics. But clearly the NYT fucked up here. PUV obstruction is an operable condition. So right away, basic medical information makes the Santorums’ story understandable and makes the NYT false on its face.

If you don’t want to get into their specific situation, that’s fine, but their specific situation is what was on the table when you waded in and said that you were qualified to judge. Hopefully you can understand why at that point, i thought you were judging their particular situation.

Charles certainly was judging, and i quite beg to differ with him on the conclusion. OTOH, i’m in full agreement that Santorum’s comments about Obama are ridiculous and wholly without merit.

(not that the useful idiots on T/S or at the stalker blog will give me credit for not being a syncophant…but hey…at least i can flex in the mirror and impress myself;)

(ok, not really. 160lbs just isn’t impressive in any mirror, even with my overdeveloped sense of self-admiration)