Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
GOP VP Candidate Wishes To Ban IVF Treatment?  
User currently offlinebestwestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7131 posts, RR: 57
Posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3606 times:

Is it true that Paul Ryan wishes to ban IVF treatment in the US?

The Sanctity of Human Life Act, which Ryan co-sponsored, would have enshrined the notion that life begins at fertilization in federal law, thus criminalizing in vitro fertilization—the process of creating an embryo outside of a woman's womb.

http://www.medbroadcast.com/channel_...id=2048&relation_id=0#.UDSMZ6AkyVk

Things like this not picked up in the screening for suitability for becoming a Vice President.


The world is really getting smaller these days
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2722 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3537 times:

Quoting bestwestern (Thread starter):
Is it true that Paul Ryan wishes to ban IVF treatment in the US?

No

Quoting bestwestern (Thread starter):
would have enshrined the notion that life begins at fertilization in federal law, thus criminalizing in vitro fertilization—the process of creating an embryo outside of a woman's womb.

Have you read the law? It is a short three page bill.

Quote:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the 'Sanctity of Human Life Act'.

SEC. 2. DECLARATION.

In the exercise of the powers of the Congress, including Congress' power under article I,section 8 of the Constitution, to make necessary and proper laws, and Congress' powerunder section 5 of the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States--(1) the Congress declares that--(A) the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each humanbeing, and is the paramount and most fundamental right of a person; and(B) the life of each human being begins with fertilization, cloning, or itsfunctional equivalent, irrespective of sex, health, function or disability, defect,stage of biological development, or condition of dependency, at which timeevery human being shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes andprivileges of personhood; and(2) the Congress affirms that the Congress, each State, the District of Columbia, andall United States territories have the authority to protect the lives of all human beings residing in its respective jurisdictions.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Act 1) FERTILIZATION- The term 'fertilization' means the process of a humanspermatozoan penetrating the cell membrane of a human oocyte to create a humanzygote, a one-celled human embryo, which is a new unique human being.(2) CLONING- The term 'cloning' means the process called somatic cell nucleartransfer, that combines an enucleated egg and the nucleus of a somatic cell to makea human embryo.(3) HUMAN; HUMAN BEING- The terms 'human' and 'human being' include each andevery member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, beginning with theearliest stage of development, created by the process of fertilization, cloning, or itsfunctional equivalent.

Please show where it makes IVF illegal.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3534 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 1):
Please show where it makes IVF illegal.

Let me clarify it for you.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 1):
the life of each human being begins with fertilization, cloning, or itsfunctional equivalent, irrespective of sex, health, function or disability, defect,stage of biological development, or condition of dependency, at which timeevery human being shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes andprivileges of personhood; and(2) the Congress affirms that the Congress, each State, the District of Columbia, andall United States territories have the authority to protect the lives of all human beings residing in its respective jurisdictions.


[Edited 2012-08-22 06:16:39]


Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2062 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3502 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 2):
Let me clarify it for you.
begins with fertilization, cloning, or itsfunctional equivalent

IVF is a functional equivalent of cloning and fertilisation in that a human ovum is fertilised, creating a zygote.

What this would likely effect however is IVF doctors implanting/fertilising a large number of embryos whereby the health of a fetus (and mother) depends on the other fetus' terminating. It would also in effect ban long term embryo storage and embryonic stem cell research. I'd imagine potential criminal proceedings for IVF doctors would force many to leave practice though, imagine bumping an embryo and getting charged with assault occasioning bodily harm. However to claim that the law bans IVF is factually incorrect.

This clearly is bad act though with many far reaching consequences that I can imagine would end up before the SCOTUS quite clearly. Don't worry it has failed four times before and it will not pass.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19611 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3450 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 3):

What this would likely effect however is IVF doctors implanting/fertilising a large number of embryos whereby the health of a fetus (and mother) depends on the other fetus' terminating. It would also in effect ban long term embryo storage and embryonic stem cell research.

At present, there is an issue with "spare" embryos. There are a lot of them in storage. An awful lot. Although the refrigeration systems are multiply redundant, it's only a matter of time until one such system fails and a whole freezer of embryos is lost.

I wonder if that would be considered negligent homicide under such an act.

While I disagree that this act would ban IVF outright, it would make IVF into an extremely risky business.

But I have a broader philosophical question: Why is a party that is championing the cause of "smaller government" and "states rights" pushing such an act? Even homicide laws are state, not federal laws. Why does this need to trump the sacred GOP concept of "States Rights" and at the same time pass yet another government regulation?


User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2722 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3442 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 2):
Let me clarify it for you.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 1):the life of each human being begins with fertilization, cloning, or itsfunctional equivalent, irrespective of sex, health, function or disability, defect,stage of biological development, or condition of dependency

It simply states that life begins at this point. No where does it say IVF is illegal or anything else is illegal in this bill.

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 3):
It would also in effect ban long term embryo storage and embryonic stem cell research. I'd imagine potential criminal proceedings for IVF doctors would force many to leave practice though,

It does no such thing. You are adding your own thoughts to what it say. It simply states that that the lives created should be protected and that the sates have the right to protect those lives.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3426 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 5):
It simply states that life begins at this point. No where does it say IVF is illegal or anything else is illegal in this bill

IVF involves multiple embryo's in the hopes that one is viable. It would make abortion illegal and IVF illegal , or next to it due to the issues and costs associated.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 5):
It simply states that that the lives created should be protected and that the sates have the right to protect those lives.

IVF would be next to impossible, as it is a process that Fertilizes eggs outside the womb.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21571 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3404 times:

Quoting bestwestern (Thread starter):
Is it true that Paul Ryan wishes to ban IVF treatment in the US?

I don't believe he set out to do that with that bill, but the text, if passed, will definitely make IVF a tricky proposition legally, and I think he would view that as an acceptable side-effect.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3400 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 7):
I don't believe he set out to do that with that bill, but the text, if passed, will definitely make IVF a tricky proposition legally, and I think he would view that as an acceptable side-effect.

If he adheres to the Catholic teachings, IVF is wrong. So I think even if he didn't intend it, he would be morally ok wiith it according to Catholic teachings.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19611 posts, RR: 58
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3387 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 5):
You are adding your own thoughts to what it say. It simply states that that the lives created should be protected and that the sates have the right to protect those lives.

No, actually it says that Congress (meaning the Federal one) has the right to protect those lives. There's that vaunted 10th Amendment being ignored and the "pick-and-choose" Constitutional fundamentalism rearing its ugly head again. I wonder if they will try to defend it under the "Commerce Clause" if it goes to court.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 8):
If he adheres to the Catholic teachings,

He doesn't. Simply being anti-abortion doesn't adhere to Catholic doctrine. There's that whole "help the poor" thing. Even the Vatican has blasted his budget.

Again, it's a very convenient use of religion... and an abandonment of it when it ceases to be conveinent. Nothing new to see here.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3376 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
He doesn't. Simply being anti-abortion doesn't adhere to Catholic doctrine. There's that whole "help the poor" thing. Even the Vatican has blasted his budget.

Again, it's a very convenient use of religion... and an abandonment of it when it ceases to be conveinent. Nothing new to see here.

I am not disagreeing with you here Doc. I was only putting forth his logic for this one issue of IVF.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19611 posts, RR: 58
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3347 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 10):


I am not disagreeing with you here Doc. I was only putting forth his logic for this one issue of IVF.

The trouble with logic is that it needs to be consistent or it isn't logic.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3328 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11):
The trouble with logic is that it needs to be consistent or it isn't logic.

But logic and religion are two different thing Doc.  



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5525 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3321 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11):
The trouble with logic is that it needs to be consistent or it isn't logic.

The weird logic also would have to allow either that freezing "humans" indefinitely is OK, or that the disposal of them is OK (I suspect the limit would be that it is OK as long as they are just a jumble of cells still figuring out what they are... which obviates their argument in the first place).

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7496 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3275 times:

Quoting bestwestern (Thread starter):
Is it true that Paul Ryan wishes to ban IVF treatment in the US?

Does he? Who cares. Will he? Probably not. I doubt Ryan at this point would seek to change anything that's not involving the economy.


REMEMBER:

HE IS THE VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATE, NOT THE PRESIDENT. Any power he has is little, if any. Mostly just Senate-influence.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21571 posts, RR: 55
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3265 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 14):
REMEMBER:

HE IS THE VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATE, NOT THE PRESIDENT. Any power he has is little, if any. Mostly just Senate-influence.

That all depends on the president's leadership style.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5525 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3256 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 14):
Does he? Who cares. Will he? Probably not. I doubt Ryan at this point would seek to change anything that's not involving the economy.

But he will have influence, as you follow on to say:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 14):
REMEMBER:

HE IS THE VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATE, NOT THE PRESIDENT. Any power he has is little, if any. Mostly just Senate-influence.

Yet people make a big stink about another VP saying "in chains"? Remember the purpose of the VP: to replace the President if something happens to him. And don't forget: Johnson, Ford, G.H.W. Bush were also "just Vice Presidents".

So it does matter in an important way.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19611 posts, RR: 58
Reply 17, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3247 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 14):
HE IS THE VICE PRESIDENT CANDIDATE, NOT THE PRESIDENT. Any power he has is little, if any. Mostly just Senate-influence.

And if Romney wins and dies, guess who the President will be?


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7496 posts, RR: 18
Reply 18, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3219 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 16):
Yet people make a big stink about another VP saying "in chains"? Remember the purpose of the VP: to replace the President if something happens to him. And don't forget: Johnson, Ford, G.H.W. Bush were also "just Vice Presidents".

God I wish people would just SHUT UP about this whole VP thing. Vice Presidents have very little to say. Biden is a jackass and IMHO Ryan should be Prez, not Romney.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17):
And if Romney wins and dies, guess who the President will be?

Someone who would probably fix the economy better than Romney OR Obama.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5525 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3213 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 18):
God I wish people would just SHUT UP about this whole VP thing.

I'm sorry if this is bothering you, however you are also commenting and not "shutting up" either. So please don't imply that this is something that everyone else is doing.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 18):
and IMHO Ryan should be Prez, not Romney.

Well that is why it is important. why who is VP is important, because quite often they go on to be President.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 18):
Someone who would probably fix the economy better than Romney OR Obama.

We definitely need that but who would that be? Because if you think it is Rep. Ryan due to his "plan", then you need to really look at the plan and review what it encompasses. His own party did not support it (not that that is actually saying much or even meaning it is a bad plan, quite the opposite probably). It may very well be a good starting point (read it, it is not complete) but for it to be implemented compromise will be required. And I doubt that can happen right now.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinebestwestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7131 posts, RR: 57
Reply 20, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3208 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 14):
I doubt Ryan at this point would seek to change anything that's not involving the economy.

So, why did he co-sponsor a bill that could outlaw IVF treatment?

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 18):
God I wish people would just SHUT UP about this whole VP thing.

My question was a valid one, and ALL CAPS, doesn't change the question. An American VP candidate sponsored a bill to outlaw IVF treatment. IVF is even available in Afghanistan, but potentially illegal in the USA if the number two in America gets himself elected.

I consider myself centre-right in politics. Boy these guys are far off the Right wing scale. Even in Ireland with very strict abortion laws, there is no issue with IVF.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2722 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3175 times:

Quoting bestwestern (Reply 20):
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 14): I doubt Ryan at this point would seek to change anything that's not involving the economy.
So, why did he co-sponsor a bill that could outlaw IVF treatment?

Please show in the bill where it outlaws anything...

Quoting bestwestern (Reply 20):
An American VP candidate sponsored a bill to outlaw IVF treatment.

An American Presidential candidate supports late term abortions...Which is worse? The person who is worried about the creation of life or the person who will toss that created life into the garbage can?



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlinebestwestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7131 posts, RR: 57
Reply 22, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3160 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 21):
or the person who will toss that created life into the garbage can?

Thanks for dragging an honest question into the gutter.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3154 times:

Quoting windy95 (Reply 21):
Please show in the bill where it outlaws anything...

You still don't get the concept of unintended consequences do you? It's funny how his bill would make abortions illegal,bringing babies into a world where the patents didn't want them, and at the same time making it highly difficult if not illegal for parents who have bioligical issue bring children into a loving environment



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinekrisyyz From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3128 times:

No disrespect to our neighbours to the south, but I’m often surprised at the level of influence organized religion has on public policy in the US. It’s almost like the separation of church and state is something some conservatives in the US would rather ignore. Biden is a Catholic, so is Obama, so are a lot of Democrats/progressives, yet they don’t seem to have this need to enforce their religious beliefs on the general population. I understand and respect the historical significance of social conservatism in the US and I know the country is pretty much split on the abortion issue, but I just find it hard to believe how regressive some of these GOP polices are.

KrisYYZ


25 SmittyOne : I encourage you to work on understanding the complexity of things rather than consistently trying to reduce their complexity for no other purpose tha
26 SmittyOne : The text of this bill does NOT directly outlaw IVF; instead it provides the legal rationale to outlaw a number of things including IVF, and substanti
27 DocLightning : By doing nothing? By raising taxes on most Americans and lowering them on the wealthiest? By plunging the government even deeper into death by increa
28 Post contains links bestwestern : Polifact has weighed in on this topic... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-paul-ryan-would-outlaw-vitro-fer/ UltraViolet has a point that the bi
29 flyguy89 : Well at least you fact-checked yourself lol. So obviously he neither voted to ban IVF nor was it probably his intention. Of course, as has been discu
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Senators To Ban Speculators From Cap 'n Trade posted Fri Aug 14 2009 10:52:02 by MaverickM11
UK To Ban Happy Hour? posted Sat Nov 22 2008 23:34:28 by Flynavy
Some UK Councils To Ban Latin Words posted Mon Nov 3 2008 11:32:33 by David L
Mercosur To Ban All Beef Products From USA posted Mon Feb 18 2008 12:07:50 by Derico
Prince Charles Wants To Ban McDonald's posted Tue Feb 27 2007 18:57:47 by 9V
Congress Sends Bush Bill To Ban Contact With Hamas posted Fri Dec 8 2006 18:42:31 by RJpieces
Dutch Present Legislation To Ban Burqas posted Fri Nov 17 2006 23:38:11 by SaturnVRocket
Time To Ban Trick Or Treat? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 15:28:08 by Cosec59
Nancy Reagan Ask Senate Candidate Not To Run An Ad posted Sat Sep 9 2006 16:56:45 by Falcon84
Schools Looking To Ban Playing Tag. posted Tue Jul 11 2006 03:25:58 by Mdsh00