• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Your thoughts on Cuomo's reproductive health act?

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Yet you believed the exaggerated statement: "Obama Lies : Grandma Dies".
You believed the ACA had Death Panels.
I never said I did. Again, you are exaggerating. I simply quoted what the Dems have said and said this "Please take the log out of your eyes before you take out the splinter in someone else's eye". (summary)

In that I quoted what Jesus said, it intimates that both "grandma" is wrong and what Pelosi said was more wrong.

Would you like to try again? And would you quote where I said ACA had Death Panels?

:)
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member



Omar L. Hamada

I want to clear something up so that there is absolutely no doubt.

I’m a Board Certified OB/GYN who has delivered over 2,500 babies.

There’s not a single fetal or maternal condition that requires third trimester abortion. Not one. Delivery, yes. Abortion, no.

There is absolutely no medical reason to kill a near term or term infant. For any reason.
Wrong.

The agony of ending a wanted late-term pregnancy: three women speak out
33, Married, & Ready For A Baby: I Am The Face Of Late-Term Abortion
My Later Abortion Of One Twin Saved Our Daughter's Life. This Is Our Story.
115,000 People Have Shared This Story of a Late-Term Abortion
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member

Your quoted "of one Twin Saved"
"We opted for an amniocentesis, but while we waited for those results, we visited another specialist in Houston. He confirmed previous findings, labeled her small head size “microcephaly,” had trouble even finding her cerebellum, and noted that the midline of her brain was shifted, indicating “severe disorganization,” a phrase that will stick with me forever. The cleft was the width of an adult pinkie finger. The encephalocele was open and brain matter was being leached out."

This is hardly what we are talking about.

We are talking about a full term baby!
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Your quoted "of one Twin Saved"
"We opted for an amniocentesis, but while we waited for those results, we visited another specialist in Houston. He confirmed previous findings, labeled her small head size “microcephaly,” had trouble even finding her cerebellum, and noted that the midline of her brain was shifted, indicating “severe disorganization,” a phrase that will stick with me forever. The cleft was the width of an adult pinkie finger. The encephalocele was open and brain matter was being leached out."

This is hardly what we are talking about.

We are talking about a full term baby!
That is one example of the many things we are talking about.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
That is one example of the many things we are talking about.

And when there is a baby in the fallopian tube, I have no problem with trying to save the mom by removing the baby.

My point is simply--try to save both and the mother but there is absolutely no reason for the current law of a 9 month baby inside the womb being allowed to simply snuff out the life.

I really know of no one who has a problem, within the context of saving at least one life, has a problem with removing the baby.

"At birth, Rumasia weighed just 260 grams, or 8.6 ounces—about the size of a small cell phone."\

Shouldn't "try to save a baby and the mom" be our main concern? Whenever possible?
 
Last edited:

ecco

Veteran Member
Oh, I've responded all right. The question is "Are you hearing?"
No, actually you didn't. Because your original post was unclear I asked...
  1. Are you saying you are a Board Certified OB/GYN who has delivered over 2,500 babies or are you saying someone in a facebook link is a Board Certified OB/GYN who has delivered over 2,500 babies.


I also said I went to that facebook page and searched for the word "abortion" and nothing came up. So I asked...
  1. Are you putting words in Mr. Hamada's mouth?
You've addressed neither question.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Yes... I didn't believe it.

When you say you never believed the ACA "Death Panels" Obama Lies - Grandma Dies, I believe you. However, since this was a widely held belief on the part of Christian Conservatives, you must have had some really interesting conversations with your circle of friends and relatives.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
When you say you never believed the ACA "Death Panels" Obama Lies - Grandma Dies, I believe you. However, since this was a widely held belief on the part of Christian Conservatives, you must have had some really interesting conversations with your circle of friends and relatives.

You didn't acknowledge how many times the Democrats used the tactics of "people are going to die".

I decided to google your statement and i found this opinion piece:

Obamacare death panels should be ended
Buried deep within Obamacare is a provision that takes away health care from you and your doctors, by taking away payment for critical health care that may be needed to save your life. It is called The Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).

The
board will be independent of you, your doctors, your hospitals, Medicare, Congress, the judiciary, the democratic process, ultimately even the Constitution itself. As the Cato Institute tried to warn us five years ago, IPAB is “independent in the worst sense of the word: independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.”
https://dynamic-cdn.spot.im/yad/optout.html
IPAB is to be composed of 15 unelected bureaucrats appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. But the board and its powers are so dangerous that even President Obama never made any appointments.


Is there a part of this that is wrong? (I'm sure there is some exaggerations) but where and why?
 

ecco

Veteran Member
You didn't acknowledge how many times the Democrats used the tactics of "people are going to die".

I decided to google your statement and i found this opinion piece:

Obamacare death panels should be ended
Buried deep within Obamacare is a provision that takes away health care from you and your doctors, by taking away payment for critical health care that may be needed to save your life. It is called The Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).

The
board will be independent of you, your doctors, your hospitals, Medicare, Congress, the judiciary, the democratic process, ultimately even the Constitution itself. As the Cato Institute tried to warn us five years ago, IPAB is “independent in the worst sense of the word: independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.”
IPAB is to be composed of 15 unelected bureaucrats appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. But the board and its powers are so dangerous that even President Obama never made any appointments.


Is there a part of this that is wrong? (I'm sure there is some exaggerations) but where and why?


What is wrong with it? You could have seen for yourself if you had bothered to Google "The Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB)" instead of just relying on the Washington Times. The Times article, as quoted by you, opened with the phrase "Obamacare death panels". It went on with the scary scenario that it was independent of the Democratic Process and the Constitution.

Here, with my emphases is the not so scary real version.

FAQs: What’s the Latest on IPAB?
IPAB was authorized to help constrain the growth in Medicare spending over time. The Board was conceived as an independent body of experts with authority to make Medicare savings recommendations if spending exceeded growth targets, according to a process specified in the ACA (described below). The goal was to create an evidence-based process that removes the political influence of stakeholders from Medicare payment policy decisions. Unlike the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), which provides analysis and policy advice on Medicare to Congress, IPAB has statutory authority to recommend certain changes to Medicare that are required to be implemented to achieve savings (or equivalent savings proposals made by Congress).

Does that sound like a Death Panel to you? In February 2018 the Republican Congress killed IPAB. I guess the Repubs didn't want any advice on how to control Medicare costs. On the other hand, they killed it so they could tell the sheeples "WE GOT RID OF OBAMA'S DEATH PANELS"

Another of Obamacare’s Unloved Provisions Is Gone
Feb 9, 2018
This week, Congress did away with another unpopular provision: the law’s Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB, which has been unfairly labeled a rationing board or “death panel,” was designed to help tame runaway Medicare costs, should they ever arise. (The legislation explicitly precluded rationing, and the board would have had no authority about any individual’s health care choices. But after Democrats removed the health law’s end-of-life planning provision originally tagged the “death panel,” Republicans affixed the label to this one instead.)
I would have thought that all Fiscal Conservatives would have thought this was a good idea.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
What is wrong with it? You could have seen for yourself if you had bothered to Google "The Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB)" instead of just relying on the Washington Times. The Times article, as quoted by you, opened with the phrase "Obamacare death panels". It went on with the scary scenario that it was independent of the Democratic Process and the Constitution.
Wow... you sure got testy there after a real honest "please let me know" to learn.

How would I know what to google? I googled the title you gave me and said there was probably exaggerations to boot. Is it you want to be contentious?

I also noted you still didn't want to acknowledge what the Democrats did. why?

Here, with my emphases is the not so scary real version.

FAQs: What’s the Latest on IPAB?
IPAB was authorized to help constrain the growth in Medicare spending over time. The Board was conceived as an independent body of experts with authority to make Medicare savings recommendations if spending exceeded growth targets, according to a process specified in the ACA (described below). The goal was to create an evidence-based process that removes the political influence of stakeholders from Medicare payment policy decisions. Unlike the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), which provides analysis and policy advice on Medicare to Congress, IPAB has statutory authority to recommend certain changes to Medicare that are required to be implemented to achieve savings (or equivalent savings proposals made by Congress).

Does that sound like a Death Panel to you? In February 2018 the Republican Congress killed IPAB. I guess the Repubs didn't want any advice on how to control Medicare costs. On the other hand, they killed it so they could tell the sheeples "WE GOT RID OF OBAMA'S DEATH PANELS"

Ok... that's good... but where does "It may cost more but the parents or the family who has the authority over the patient think it needs to continue" portion?

If it is all about just the cost because it exceeds costs, where is the help for the one outside that boundary?


Another of Obamacare’s Unloved Provisions Is Gone
Feb 9, 2018
This week, Congress did away with another unpopular provision: the law’s Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB, which has been unfairly labeled a rationing board or “death panel,” was designed to help tame runaway Medicare costs, should they ever arise. (The legislation explicitly precluded rationing, and the board would have had no authority about any individual’s health care choices. But after Democrats removed the health law’s end-of-life planning provision originally tagged the “death panel,” Republicans affixed the label to this one instead.)
I would have thought that all Fiscal Conservatives would have thought this was a good idea.

OK... wait a minute. You are going to take me to task because of Washington Times and you are going to take the NY Times as gospel?

Do you see anything wrong with that?
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
The only restriction is there are no real restrictions.
The Reproductive Health Act of Horror: The Lies Behind Abortion Without Limits

"New York has legalized abortion up to birth, and beyond. It is now legal to neglect, choke, or smother a baby that somehow survived the lethal injection and knife cuts designed to kill during the abortion procedure."

Tragic
I think it is "tragic" that people will manipulate reality in order to intrude on a person's privacy. If women are having late term abortions for the hell of it, and doctors are signing off on such as if the mother was a 21 year old applying for weed card and mentioning that she sometimes has back pain, then we need to address the healthcare providers more than push anti-abortion propaganda.

I want to keep the government from interfering with medical decisions of patients. I am certainly okay with government intervention when there is a problem. I just want that intervention to be narrowly tailored.

So what exactly is your complaint? Is there a way we can address that complaint that closes the loopholes, which you think are going to manifest into reality, that does not also limit a patients ability to make medical decisions concerning her body?
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
I think it is "tragic" that people will manipulate reality in order to intrude on a person's privacy. If women are having late term abortions for the hell of it, and doctors are signing off on such as if the mother was a 21 year old applying for weed card and mentioning that she sometimes has back pain, then we need to address the healthcare providers more than push anti-abortion propaganda.

I want to keep the government from interfering with medical decisions of patients. I am certainly okay with government intervention when there is a problem. I just want that intervention to be narrowly tailored.

So what exactly is your complaint? Is there a way we can address that complaint that closes the loopholes, which you think are going to manifest into reality, that does not also limit a patients ability to make medical decisions concerning her body?

Ironically part of the bill is to make it easier to have abortion in non medical facilities. Which is odd if it's a medical issue.
Seems Planned Parenthood often closes its doors rather than raise it's quality and safety to the levels expected for other 'medical procedures' Why is that?

http://thefederalist.com/2018/09/18...tually-object-meeting-basic-health-standards/
"....Rather than bring their standards up to match those of health facilities, Planned Parenthood facilities often close instead — that is, if they can’t get themselves out of having to follow the same rules everyone else does. This seems to indicate Planned Parenthood is not really the health champion women need, despite their advertising to the contrary...."
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
The only restriction is there are no real restrictions.
The Reproductive Health Act of Horror: The Lies Behind Abortion Without Limits

"New York has legalized abortion up to birth, and beyond. It is now legal to neglect, choke, or smother a baby that somehow survived the lethal injection and knife cuts designed to kill during the abortion procedure."

Tragic
Why do you do that to yourself? Abortion beyond birth? Lethal injection? Neglect, choke, and smother?
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
Ironically part of the bill is to make it easier to have abortion in non medical facilities. Which is odd if it's a medical issue.
Seems Planned Parenthood often closes its doors rather than raise it's quality and safety to the levels expected for other 'medical procedures' Why is that?

http://thefederalist.com/2018/09/18...tually-object-meeting-basic-health-standards/
"....Rather than bring their standards up to match those of health facilities, Planned Parenthood facilities often close instead — that is, if they can’t get themselves out of having to follow the same rules everyone else does. This seems to indicate Planned Parenthood is not really the health champion women need, despite their advertising to the contrary...."
And I absolutely agree that the planned parenthood should not be able to avoid regulations that are relevant to the medical procedures which it conducts. However, I do not think that it needs to be classified as a hospital anymore than your dentists office needs to be classified as a hospital.

You have an interesting take on these issues. It is almost like you have no real concern about the issues except for the fact that you oppose anything that might benefit or an abortion provider.

Is there a particular concern you have with the classification as proposed? What are your concerns?
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Ah, the old “to protect the life of the mother” argument. There an assumption that a woman is more likely to die due to giving birth than as a result of having an abortion. But is that assumption correct? The answer is, we can’t know. And why can’t we know? Because abortion advocates have fought hard to pass legislation to specifically prevent keeping track of abortion related deaths of mothers.
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
And I absolutely agree that the planned parenthood should not be able to avoid regulations that are relevant to the medical procedures which it conducts. However, I do not think that it needs to be classified as a hospital anymore than your dentists office needs to be classified as a hospital.

You have an interesting take on these issues. It is almost like you have no real concern about the issues except for the fact that you oppose anything that might benefit or an abortion provider.

Is there a particular concern you have with the classification as proposed? What are your concerns?


many

see Cuomo's Proposal for "Moment of Birth Abortions" Is Back in the News - www.independentsentinel.com

quote
The Reproductive Health Act seeks to have abortion declared a ‘fundamental right’ in New York State which would result in the following:

  • It would prohibit even basic and widely supported protections, such as parental consent and limits on government funding of abortion
  • The law would allow any “health care practitioner” to perform an abortion
  • It enshrines late-term abortion in New York State law
  • Jeopardizes any agency that does not refer for abortion and
  • Seriously threatens conscience protections for hospitals and medical professionals
quote
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Ah, the old “to protect the life of the mother” argument. There an assumption that a woman is more likely to die due to giving birth than as a result of having an abortion. But is that assumption correct? The answer is, we can’t know. And why can’t we know? Because abortion advocates have fought hard to pass legislation to specifically prevent keeping track of abortion related deaths of mothers.
The medical necessity of abortion tends to include way more than preventing death from giving birth. Medical emergencies, for example, can make an abortion necessity as a pregnancy is too much to handle as her body attempts to also recover from the trauma.
 
Top