re: #100 iceweasel

“First do know harm.” Abortion itself can be seen to violate that oath. It cures nothing. Also a patient cannot force a doctor to provide treatment. You cannot go to your doctor and demand that he kills you. Nor, should someone be able to go to a doctor and demand an abortion be done.

The Christian Scientists doctor? I have not heard of the government compelling such a doctor, or a naturopath, or a homeopath to treat someone with medicines which actually work. Certainly the government has stepped in in the case of minor children to compel treatment when their parents refuse. This is proper.

You would forego allowing talented doctors to treat the sick, and save lives because their consciences prevent them from terminating life.

A women’s right to chose must not compel someone to act against his or her moral compass. Nor must the government. If the government can compel a doctor to perform an abortion, then why does it not have the right to compel a women to have one?

Being able to act according to your conscience is a very basic human right. Are you saying that the right to abortion trumps that right? Are you saying the doctors who want to only to save lives have such malformed consciences that society must be protected from them becoming doctors?

We’ve come a long way from Roe v. Wade. Going back to the original decision would significantly curtail the number done. If you are saying that most of the country is not for a complete ban on abortions, you are correct. But most of the country does not like the current situation either. I think most want to prevent it, except under special circumstances.