Re: Any anti-abortion atheists?

On 2 Dec 2003 15:35:19 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Snubis) wrote:

>Bob Moss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>> Osprey wrote:
>>
>> >> Not if the fetus is not viable. Yes, I am doing a little hyperbole.
>> >> However, if the fetus has a hyperdeveloped skull, the fetus not
>> >> only is not viable, but the skull can not fit through the women's
>> >> pelvic bone.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > And just how often does this situation happen?
>> 
>> Not often.. but then again, late term abortions happen very rarely too.
>> But, just because it is a rare condition, does that mean that the 
>> federal government should arbitrarily remove a medical procedure,
>> forcing the doctor to go with a procedure that is more invasive, and
>> more dangerous to the woman's health?
>
>Why not? We don't get rid of traffic laws because of that rare
>occasion when one might have to break them.

  Medical procedures are not the same as driving a car. Traffic laws are for
generating revenue, so they have to be broken to serve their purpose.
Legislatures responding to pressure from a small group of bigots, have no
business controlling medicine.