[Abortion Thread] (YET ANOTHER POLL!) Taking measure.

[Telconi]

Why not?

Suspicious ones.

Because its none of your business.

And how would you know it if was suspicious without investigating first.

Says you.

Doctors and medical examiners exist.

[San Lumen]

Because its none of your business.

And how would you know it if was suspicious without investigating first.

Says you.

Doctors and medical examiners exist.

Why is it your business?

And they would investigate all miscarriages if abortion is illegal otherwise how would you know if it was intentional.

[Godular]

Says you.

Doctors and medical examiners exist.

Why is it your business?

And they would investigate all miscarriages if abortion is illegal otherwise how would you know if it was intentional.

And there'd go doctor-patient privilege...

[San Lumen]

Why is it your business?

And they would investigate all miscarriages if abortion is illegal otherwise how would you know if it was intentional.

And there'd go doctor-patient privilege...

A convenient thing conservatives forget about.

[Telconi]

Says you.

Doctors and medical examiners exist.

Why is it your business?

And they would investigate all miscarriages if abortion is illegal otherwise how would you know if it was intentional.

Because I can make it so, and have decided to do so. Same reason literally any other behavior becomes someone else's business.

Like how they investigate all deaths?

Why is it your business?

And they would investigate all miscarriages if abortion is illegal otherwise how would you know if it was intentional.

And there'd go doctor-patient privilege...

Oh, you mean that thing that doesn't exist during investigatory procedures anyhow? Shame.

[San Lumen]

Why is it your business?

And they would investigate all miscarriages if abortion is illegal otherwise how would you know if it was intentional.

Because I can make it so, and have decided to do so. Same reason literally any other behavior becomes someone else's business.

Like how they investigate all deaths?

And there'd go doctor-patient privilege...

Oh, you mean that thing that doesn't exist during investigatory procedures anyhow? Shame.

Just because you can make it so doesnt mean you should.

And doctor patient privilege is a absolutely a thing. Why should a woman whose been through the horrible trauma of a miscarriage have that violated because it could have been intentional?

[The New California Republic]

And they would investigate all miscarriages if abortion is illegal otherwise how would you know if it was intentional.

Like how they investigate all deaths?

Not all deaths are investigated. Deaths get reported to the coroner, sure, but not every single death is investigated. Except for unusual circumstances the most that is done is signing a few pieces of paper, stamping it, then mailing one copy somewhere and filing the other.

[Telconi]

Because I can make it so, and have decided to do so. Same reason literally any other behavior becomes someone else's business.

Like how they investigate all deaths?



Oh, you mean that thing that doesn't exist during investigatory procedures anyhow? Shame.

Just because you can make it so doesnt mean you should.

And doctor patient privilege is a absolutely a thing. Why should a woman whose been through the horrible trauma of a miscarriage have that violated because it could have been intentional?

Okay, and I feel I should.

Why should a woman who's husband died have her privacy violated because it could have been intentional?

[Telconi]

Like how they investigate all deaths?

Not all deaths are investigated. Deaths get reported to the coroner, sure, but not every single death is investigated. Except for unusual circumstances the most that is done is signing a few pieces of paper, stamping it, then mailing one copy somewhere and filing the other.

Indeed.

[San Lumen]

Just because you can make it so doesnt mean you should.

And doctor patient privilege is a absolutely a thing. Why should a woman whose been through the horrible trauma of a miscarriage have that violated because it could have been intentional?

Okay, and I feel I should.

Why should a woman who's husband died have her privacy violated because it could have been intentional?

That is not the same thing and you know it.

[Telconi]

Okay, and I feel I should.

Why should a woman who's husband died have her privacy violated because it could have been intentional?

That is not the same thing and you know it.

Uh, yeah, someone dying is the same as someone dying...

[The New California Republic]

Not all deaths are investigated. Deaths get reported to the coroner, sure, but not every single death is investigated. Except for unusual circumstances the most that is done is signing a few pieces of paper, stamping it, then mailing one copy somewhere and filing the other.

Indeed.

So...they don't investigate all deaths, contrary to your assertion...?

[San Lumen]

That is not the same thing and you know it.

Uh, yeah, someone dying is the same as someone dying...

Your example is a bogus one. It would be obvious if someone killed their husband in a hospital. They would find toxic substances or stab wounds.

The amount of miscarriages that are intentional is so minuscule it does not warrant violating the privacy of any woman who has one.

[Telconi]

Indeed.

So...they don't investigate all deaths, contrary to your assertion...?

Sarcasm is hard I see.

[Telconi]

Uh, yeah, someone dying is the same as someone dying...

Your example is a bogus one. It would be obvious if someone killed their husband in a hospital. They would find toxic substances or stab wounds.

The amount of miscarriages that are intentional is so minuscule it does not warrant violating the privacy of any woman who has one.

>Every murder is obviously a murder.
Well fuck man, then why do my taxes pay medical examiners?

You could say that the number of deaths which are intentional doesn't warrant violating the privacy of potential murder suspects too.

[The New California Republic]

So...they don't investigate all deaths, contrary to your assertion...?

Sarcasm is hard I see.

Well, do they investigate all deaths or not? Yes, or no?

[Telconi]

Sarcasm is hard I see.

Well, do they investigate all deaths or not? Yes, or no?

You can read back and figure that out yourself, or maybe you can't, Iunno.

[The New California Republic]

Well, do they investigate all deaths or not? Yes, or no?

You can read back and figure that out yourself, or maybe you can't, Iunno.

I'm asking you here, now. It is a simple yes or no.

And don't imply that I can't read. Just don't.

[San Lumen]

Your example is a bogus one. It would be obvious if someone killed their husband in a hospital. They would find toxic substances or stab wounds.

The amount of miscarriages that are intentional is so minuscule it does not warrant violating the privacy of any woman who has one.

>Every murder is obviously a murder.
Well fuck man, then why do my taxes pay medical examiners?

You could say that the number of deaths which are intentional doesn't warrant violating the privacy of potential murder suspects too.

The medical examiner investigates suspicious or unusual deaths therefore should all miscarriages be automatically investigated as suspicious?

[Telconi]

>Every murder is obviously a murder.
Well fuck man, then why do my taxes pay medical examiners?

You could say that the number of deaths which are intentional doesn't warrant violating the privacy of potential murder suspects too.

The medical examiner investigates suspicious or unusual deaths therefore should all miscarriages be automatically investigated as suspicious?

nope.

[San Lumen]

The medical examiner investigates suspicious or unusual deaths therefore should all miscarriages be automatically investigated as suspicious?

nope.

You said earlier they should

[Telconi]

nope.

You said earlier they should

I didn't.

[San Lumen]

You said earlier they should

I didn't.

How would they know if it was suspicious without brining in the medical examiner?

[Estanglia]

So why won't you punish murder with malicious forethought to the fullest extent of the law? If it's to be considered first degree murder why all this handwringing and hesitation over pursuing the maximum penalty?
You who are against legal abortion wants it considered murder yet do not want it to be punished like murder. Where the hell do you even stand?

They are acting in bad faith. Same arguments that SocCons use about "state rights" which is really just code word for wanting to take away rights from gay and brown people. They know that their policies are extreme against public Opinon. So they do everything to hide and deceive people from their cruel and wicked intentions. Thus, while they declare that abortion is murder, they do everything they can to hide the logical conclusions of their arguments under the rug with dishonesty.

Another one of your unsubstantiated, hyperbolic rants again. How many is it now? 3? 4?

lol no they don't.

Like hell they do and to deny otherwise is to be blind to all the arguments and tactics they have used for decades. It makes you blind to the factual and objective reality.

4.5?

Your wanton abuse of hyperbole obscures and obfuscates everything, and is entirely irrelevant to the issue of abortion.

Nothing I say is hyperbole. What I say is honest to God literal and not an exaggeration.

Then you should be able to substantiate your hyperbole with evidence then?

[The New California Republic]

Nothing I say is hyperbole. What I say is honest to God literal and not an exaggeration.

Then you should be able to substantiate your hyperbole with evidence then?

I have yet to see them provide sources for their claims. Take from that what you will.