Palin, an avowed ight to lifeer, did agree to the possibility of aborting the fetus?
What you say is true but is entirely unrelated to the matter at hand: The point of my comment was that amniocentesis is not without very serious possible risks! Indeed, the mother and/or the baby can die from this invasive procedure! Therefore, ethical rules and indeed hospital rules forbid it being done out of mere curiosity! The mom-to-be MUST agree to consider aborting a fetus if the procedure reveals an unacceptable or dangerous condition. Amniocentesis cannot/must not be done without balancing risks against benefits. This is undoubtedly why the procedure was offered to Ms. Palin: her age at pregnancy is associated with increased risks of fetal abnormalities. She ‘HAD’ to agree to possible abortion for the procedure to be done. “Curiosity” is not enough reason to put the life of the mom and/or fetus at risk! Therefore, logic forces us to conclude that Ms. Palin’s position on ‘Right to Life’ might be entirely bogus.
- Why are there so many well-established and convincing looking coalitions and websites which agree that the only realistic possibility for achieveing UHC is by sticking with incremental reform, if this is such a foolish idea?
- What is the ruling on aborting a pregnancy in the early months (1-3) before the soul is breathed into the fetus?
- My PSM-4900 and PSM-2100 do not agree on the Eb/No parameter with Reed-Solomon codec installed?