Blog Roundup

Ken at Ken's Opinion posts his attempt to sort out abortion ethics. He seems to want some debate and discussion, so let's go over and bounce this around with him.

John has an interesting post at The Legal Reader:

Case study one: a pregnant woman wants an abortion. Her husband doesn't. Should he have a say?
Case study two: a woman wants to become pregnant with frozen embryos. Her ex-husband opposes the decision. Should he have a say?

The answer, legally, is no in the abortion case, and in the case of frozen embryos, almost always yes.

It might seem paradoxical, but it is emblematic of the way technology is changing the landscape of human reproduction. And it is the kind of paradox that could get more attention with the nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. to the Supreme Court.

Well, John, the common thread is that we must always side with whoever wants the embryo/fetus to die. Haven't you noticed that about the supposed supporters of "choice"? The only choice they actually back is the one that means death for the unborn entity,

arkansas501 posts about medical professionals and conscience clauses. I think she/he is on the right track -- I've been advocating for years that we need to clearly differentiate between the Hipocratic and Progressive practitioners. I think this would seriously reduce lawsuits, for one thing.