Catholic Hospital Says Fetus Isn't Human Life

This post does not exist.

Only if the procedure is in a dire emergency and there no way of obtaining consent from the spouse/parents/guardian without the patient dying, then can they do the procedure without consent. Consent is a rather big thing in medical profession... And the pregnancy causing an embolism? Right......

Urrgh my language is going out of the window.

Hadriel

I find the discussion about who has more legal expertise rather ridiculous.
The line of defense I posted is not my idea. It's what the hospital's defense attorney came up with. TYT quoted it directly.
One would assume that the defense attorney in the case would know more, both about the law in his state and about the details of the case, than anyone here. Unless, of course, the hospital skimps on its legal expenses, and hired an idiot who's going to be laughed out of court.

I find the discussion about who has more legal expertise rather ridiculous.
The line of defense I posted is not my idea. It's what the hospital's defense attorney came up with. TYT quoted it directly.
One would assume that the defense attorney in the case would know more, both about the law in his state and about the details of the case, than anyone here. Unless, of course, the hospital skimps on its legal expenses, and hired an idiot who's going to be laughed out of court.

Who even questioned this?

If you followed the conversation I questioned his competency considering the information he was spouting was dead on wrong. He erroneously questioned "legal" experience, which I don't have a problem clarifying, though irrelevant. Note I will question the credibility when such details and straight up lying is in his retorts.

[MENTION=5956]hadriel[/MENTION];

Exactly, consent is everything in that proffesion, which is why it's to me, ridiculous they would deny it, there was no negative consequence for attempting to do so.

Who even questioned this?

You did:

The reason I ignored sapta's point is because it's just incorrect.

You did:

I can see the misunderstanding, re-reading I was challenging your point about abortion law's, not the slaughter charge, as that is what I was discussing with him, essentially. Although I will concede his point was directed towards your manslaughter point. Lost my train of thought in that post

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/04/us/colorad...?hpt=ju_c2

It promised that attorneys for the hospital would not cite the Wrongful Death Act in any future hearings.

[SIZE=2]Just going to go quietly in the corner and eat my shorts now.
[/SIZE]