[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

So what would the GOP law have required, that the democrats didn't like?

And please give me an example of "very serious circumstances", which don't impact the probability of survival, but which would be a valid reason to fail to care for the baby?

The bill would have required medical care for a non-viable live birth with criminal penalties for the doctor. Full stop right there.

Wrong. Under NY law, the mom can say she's anxious and stressed. Again, the interview I posted, was with a woman who says she and her mother were healthy, and yet her mom chose a late term abortion, which she survived.

Jim, the laws have changed since 1977, he mom wouldn't have been able to have an abortion today. The idea that a doctor would approve an abortion of a viable late term baby over a little anxiety would likely get their license to practice revoked. This is just fear mongering.

What is the legitimate medical reason to have a very late term abortion? The mom gives birth anyway, it's just that she gives birth to a dead baby instead of a live one.

Maybe some women don't want to carry a dead or non viable baby to term...that's their right.

I said multiple times I was talking about viable babies. I agree, somewhat, on the non viable situation, though I still can't see why it's too much to ask that someone hold the baby at least.

Reread entire thread.

That's exactly what Cuomo said and did.

And this is why I said you don't understand much of anything in this discussion.

If the point was to show how soul-less and devoid of empathy the left is today, mission accomplished.

You don't have any empathy for the mothers obviously.