Great reading ability there skippy - try again.
Same for you.
Both of you - it’s far easier to make a decision on something after you’ve read someones explanation of it. Interesting how it was close to 50/50 on how to interpret “a treatment that will kill the fetus, which has just as much right to life as the girl”, and all “I knew what he was saying all along, you are an idiot” after the elaboration.
You misunderstood the OP even worse than you misunderstood me. If your brain cells function properly, you can tell that the point of the OP is the the law (in this case the constitutional amendment) is bad. It is equally bad for the rich and poor who are in the Dominican Republic. The rich have an advantage in that they have the option to leave the country. The bad law does not constrain them in other countries where the law does not apply.
Thanks for this, I enjoyed it very much!
It’s one of the very best ‘non apology’ apologies I’ve seen. A beauty. Be proud!
Actually, I think you’re stupid even when you’re taking a position with which I agree. In fact, if you weren’t so profoundly stupid, you might notice that this thread is just such an example.
Maybe you should listen to your own thoughts. Someday you may be smart enough to do so.
Just to be clear to how stupid she actually is the posts above are 9 and 18 from this very thread and are only 12 minutes apart.
Blah! I wish I didn’t know people who would have done that with all sincerity.
Well lets see. You just got done pointing out the same things about the OP that I did, abet in a much longer winded fashion. So, which part of it did I misunderstand? Or have you gasp! misunderstood something I wrote?
BTW, I cannot believe you would go look for & post in an old thread which hadn’t had a post in over a month, just because I what?, hurt your feelings by misunderstanding something you wrote? You really are pathetic.
(And the irony is, in that thread the last couple of posts were about me being an attention seeker. Yeah, right…)
Eh, you sort of have a point - I was echoing Boyo when I said idiot, I guess I should have put more thought into it. What I said to Miller still applies tho, the man is a jerk.
Geez, this thread took a weird turn! I thought Boyo Jim’s death panel remark made his position clear.
I revived your Pit thread because those two posts of your a few minutes apart were hilarious, and I thought they were worth sharing.
And you said the law only applies to the poor, which is nonsense. It apples to everyone, but rich people can go out of the country where the law doesn’t apply to anyone. If a poor Dominican woman can manage to get out of the country, she too doesn’t need to obey the law, because it’s not the law where she is. Do you understand the difference?
I also think that you calling Miller a jerk is hilarious, as Miller is the only poster in the whole thread who even slightly supported your interpretation of what I said.
But you made a point of doing it elsewhere, rather than in this thread as Drunky Smurf did. And if you think it’s hilarious that I made the mistake of using the same term than you did, oh well. Shrug.
OK, I guess I’m done with you since you are making a real effort to either pretend to misunderstand or just be a jerk. It should be obvious that when I said that the law only applies to the poor, I meant what that means in common usage today - that the rich are able to buy their way out of things they don’t want to do or laws they don’t want to follow.
Goes to show I’m honest and don’t like or dislike someone based on their beliefs or interpretations. Miller has in the past acted just as you are now, so if you have nothing better to do than try to pick a fight, I’m out.
You give too much pedigree to the anti-abortion lunacy. No one believed abortion was in any sense equivalent to murder until well into the nineteenth century.
Well, I’ll give you all credit for one thing - this wasn’t your typical anti-abortion thread. 
So what you are saying is that it wasn’t God Almighty who forbid abortion, with his own words. We have been lied to.
Curlcoat, everybody understood what Boyo Jim said. Perhaps it’s time to you take a break and go have some lemonade or something.
I’m pro-life, strongly… and I think the chemo should have been administered. Moreover, the Catholic Church’s doctrine allows for it. The intent of the chemotherapy is to save the girl’s life. The death of the baby, if it happened, would be an unintended double effect.
Goes without saying, but as long as I’m here: Boyo Jim’s point was crystal clear.
And “Cardinal Armani” agrees with you:
According to some other news source (sorry, not available online) chemo is very likely to produce a defective fetus. And carrying a pregnancy in her weakened state is dangerous for her too.
So, “que sera, sera” is really not the best answer for the situation.
I forgot to mention that chemo is not guarantee that an spontaneous abortion will occur.
Yeah. Pardon me if I think it’s profoundly screwed up that Catholic doctrine won’t let her get an abortion and then chemotherapy, but they’ll “let” her get chemo even though who knows what horrible effects it might have on the fetus. It could cause a spontaneous abortion immediately. It could lead to massive deformities and an abortion or fetal demise later in the pregnancy. Or it could lead to huge birth defects and ongoing pain and disability.
If someone is fine with the “double effect” of chemo causing a miscarriage, then they should have the courage to state that they’re ok with having an abortion in order to undergo chemo. It is the exact same result, and pretending otherwise is silly.
Not Catholic enough to avoid fornication, too Catholic for a condom, not Catholic enough to refuse a potential abortion… this girl needs to make up her mind.
She’s not going to have time to make up her mind.
It is accepted as a fact since it is in the constitution as such. What do you do when something false or unprovable is accepted as fact and legally encoded as such?
My own belief is that the cycle of life does not ‘begin’ but is continuous as the parents come together their life grows in the what we call the new life. Though with that said and my belief that the ‘baby/fetus’ is human life, I still find that a woman can decide if that life gets to develop using her body.