Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Obstetrics
The beginning of our obstetric pathology unit at school just happened to coincide with the Roe v Wade discussion here. Since I find this topic fascinating and somewhat relevant, I thought a spinoff post about the science of conception might be fun. I'll post things I think are interesting for a non-medical audience as I learn them, including carry-overs from our Roe v Wade thread.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Well, to carry over from what my husband posted last night, here's an update on what's happening in South Dakota. Check out the NYT for the article, in case this link doesn't work.
I think I really do agree with Monkey Lung. I hate the idea of abortion--and just for the record, I really hate the medical practice of referring to a miscarriage as a spontaneous abortion--but there is something in me that understands why women revolt against being told what they can and can't do to their bodies. I know the government gives us all kinds of directives in all kinds of areas, and I know that abortion kills babies and that it's horrible, but I think there's a part of me that wouldn't like it if Roe was overturned. I know it seems odd to juxtapose those things, but there it is.
http://www.mirrorofjustice.com/mirrorofjustice/2006/02/elizabeth_brown.html has stuff about the "plan B" pill I found interesting.
grrr for non-automatic html tags...
plan B commentary
Huh. Apparently the Pope has something to say on when conception happens.
Isn't that pretty much the standard line from that quarter?
Well, yeah. Pretty much.
To digress slightly from the conception angle, I came across a Christian website that takes a very graphic stand against abortion. I suggest starting with the background page... http://www.abort73.com/HTML/VII-A-believe.html
Post a Comment