Democracy, draining the swamp and forced birth?

How do these things relate?

Check out this story about Drs, and patients complaining about how a patient had to undergo an experience no one probably wanted her to endure.

I know this is fodder for the pro-life/pro choice fight, but at the same time, knowing all too well how badly things go when legislators, under the guise of doing the will of their constituents, pass laws that make things worse rather than better.

I know it would be costly and empower unelected educated professionals and bureaucrats, but I think physicians need to be consulted in drafting legislation when they have the expertise and when it's their business being affected.

https://jezebel.com/louisiana-woman-is-forced-carry-headless-fetus-to-term-1849418243

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

soar2newhighs

Legislators…must come down from their high horse of “ I know what is best…” and factor in a quality most are ignorant of, don’t understand or don’t possess; and that is EMPATHY!

MistyCee

@soar2newhighs Empathy would really be great, no doubt, but I'm guessing when they put in exceptions, they were relatively empathetic.

I'd blame them more in this case for lack of diligence, passing the buck to the courts, and thinking more about the political benefits of passing legislation, whether it was "good" or effective legislation, or not.

It's not all that different, imo, than that crap with the Texas legislature micro-managing school curricula instead of getting input from and giving discretion to professionals.

We need professionals to draft legislation, in addition to elected legislators, and when a law affects a profession or an industry, folks in that profession or industry should have input into how the legislation is written.

I know, that makes more a more cumbersome and expensive government, but, it can yield a better government, which I think should be the goal.

Kwek00 · 41-45, M

@soar2newhighs Maybe legeslators should just be in favor that people are free to have an abortion. Can organise their private lifes as they wish. And then this subjective notion called "empathy", shouldn't be confusing anyone in the future when it comes to this partcilair toppic. Because "empathy", is no objective tool to measure what the law should permit and what not and judges also are going to have hard time using the tool of empathy to every case of a person that they are being send when they are interpretating the law. Even though the interpretation of the law can be a subjective business, so is the "empathy" of judges. And thus there will always be rulings where other people will say that the judge need to come from his high tower and have a bit more "empathy", and pretend that everything would be just be solved if this was the case. Just saying "empathy", makes you feel good but doesn't solve anything.