In article <1178941850.966777.200...@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,





Spartakus <sparta...@my-deja.com> wrote:

How much of a dumb ***** is Oopsrey anyway? He is SO DUMB, that when
he actually bothers to post links to articles to support whatever he
is claiming, the text is either irrelevant or in direct contradiction
to his claim. Here is the link he provided:

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/11/0080278

I'll get to the contradiction later. In the mean time, let's have
some fun with the text that Oopsrey excerpted.

"Osprey"

The fetus's location is what matters, he said: if it's all the
way out of the woman's body and it's alive, it's been born, no
matter how developed it is, and regardless of the woman's
intentions when the procedure began.

Who's the "he" in "he said", here? Answer: Douglas Johnson,
legislative director of the National Right-to-Life Committee. He is
offering his *opinion*. A very slanted opinion to be sure, but also
an irrelevant and even misogynistic opinion. For more information,
Google the talk.abortion archives for a flame war over the proposition
that a woman is a "location".

Two years ago, George W. Bush signed into law a short piece of
legislation called the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. That
law, now part of the U.S. Code, defines as a legal person "every
infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive,"

So in the event that an anencephalic 16-week fetus finds itself
completely outside its mother, we rush it to an ICU, right?

and goes on to define "born alive" as the "complete expulsion or
extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of
development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or
has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite
movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical
cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or
extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor,
cesarean section, or induced abortion."

And if this happens in Texas, I presume that state's "Futile Care" law
(signed by then-governor George W. Bush) would kick in.

Now, for the contradiction. Oopsrey and others had tried to claim
that the term "partial-birth abortion" was a medical term. Yet look
what the cited article says:

"The term 'partial-birth abortion' was invented for
purposes of writing legislation. There is no textbook
reference to any operative procedure or medical state
called 'partial birth.' There are a few published
medical references to 'dilation and extraction,' or
'intact dilation and evacuation,' both of which are
terms certain physicians have given to the forceps-
aided extraction of an aborted fetus all in one piece."

Which is what I have been saying all along - it's not a medical term;
it's a term invented by anti-choicers to advance a *political* agenda.

Oopsrey is not the first anti-choicer to cite a reference that doesn't
support his claim, so I sincerely hope he doesn't think I'm singling
him out for abuse or picking on him.

this is a great post.

i decided to follow-up because i know when osprey posts his follow
up, he'll delete what you posted because it humiliates him so deeply.

but he's afraid to follow up my posts, so your content will remain
here.