The American Medical Association (AMA) naturally weighed in on the end of Roe v Wade. They said the AMA itself was “deeply disturbed” by the court’s decision.
They used these odd terms: “patients’ right to critical reproductive health care”, “evidence-based reproductive health services”, and “States that end legal abortion will not end abortion—they will end safe abortion”.
Killing the lives inside would-be mothers is not “health care”, and anyway is by definition not reproductive health care, and there is no “evidence” on earth that says so. Whatever the killing is, whether or not you agree with it, it is the opposite of reproductive. That is a medical, and not a legal or moral, judgement. Meaning we are dealing with a medical organization that does not understand medicine.
Here is an equivalent to their final argument: States that end legal murder will not end murder—they will end safe murder. Which is true. But ridiculous, as is their argument about “safe abortion”.
The AMA also “noted its deep disappointment” with SCOTUS’s “harmful and disturbing decision” on gun rights. They say that “gun violence” is a “public health crisis.”
Which it is not. Murder and mayhem are crises, yes. But these have to do with the people committing the violence and not the tools they use to carry out their brutalities. You can prove this with ease. For the AMA never argues government employees should surrender their weapons, much more dangerous weapons than possessed by the public.
We earlier met the CEO of the AMA, James Madara, in his starling endorsement of slicing the healthy parts off of children—live children, not dead ones—so that people will think he, Madara, is a good person.
Madara said laws to stop the mutilations are “a dangerous government intrusion into the practice of medicine.” Yes. He really did say cutting children up is “medicine”. Which reminds us that it is scientism to say doctors know what is best for their patients. They must only be consulted for what treatment is recommended after the patient has decided what outcome is best. Doctors have no special insight into right and wrong. Especially in a culture which emphasizes wrong.
Doubtless Madara is right in his opinion, though. Experts, reporters, celebrities, academics, and rulers will think he is a good person for encouraging doctors to mutilate the healthy children under their care. Indeed, he is likely to win awards for his position.
Ordinary people, however, those still in touch with Reality, understand that Madara is a corrupt soul-blackened atrocious demonic monster who, if there was any justice in our collapsing regime, would receive the same treatment he advocates for children. But without anesthetic.
The AMA, an organization of people whose only claim to authority is that they have memorized the names of bones, also demands that sex be removed from birth certificates.
Requiring it can lead to discrimination and unnecessary burden on individuals whose current gender identity does not align with their designation at birth, namely when they register for school or sports, adopt, get married, or request personal records.
This position, as scientifically described, is insane.
Added to the cruelty and insanity is idiocy. Because the AMA has also declared “climate change” a “public health crisis.”
One glance out your weather window is sufficient to disprove “crisis,” an asinine hyperbole used only to propagandize. The idiocy comes in statements like the one made by Ilse Levin, an American Medical Association board member. She said:
The scientific evidence is clear — our patients are already facing adverse health effects associated with climate change, from heat-related injuries, vector-borne diseases and air pollution from wildfires, to worsening seasonal allergies and storm-related illness and injuries.
The scientific evidence is clear. And it is that patients are not suffering adverse health effects from “climate change”. So what Levin said was false. It is not true. It is at variance with Reality. It is not so. It is an untruth.
There are umpteen times ten demonstrations, using even the government’s own evidence, that weather is not growing worse, and that weather-related injuries and the like are growing better, and on and on (some here; here, “death toll from floods is declining“, a plethora here).
Wildfires? In my own paper on how “attribution studies” are far, far too certain, and must not be trusted or used to make any policy decisions, I say this:
Wildfires are a good example. The press often touts increases. Yet the National Interagency Fire Center, which maintains a database of wildfires says ‘people should not “put any stock” in numbers prior to 1960 and that comparing the modern fire area to earlier estimates is “not accurate or appropriate”‘.
Heat-related injuries? We have looked at paper after paper after paper—all peer reviewed!—and seen every time claims like this are untrue and based on poor statistics.
In short, the Levin the bone-memorizer knows not of which she speaks. Which allows her to say things like this:
Like the COVID-19 pandemic, the climate crisis will disproportionately impact the health of historically marginalized communities. Taking action now won’t reverse all of the harm done, but it will help prevent further damage to our planet and our patients’ health and well-being.
How many times (has anybody counted?) have we seen that same world-ends joke? It seems the only purpose women and “historically marginalized communities” is to provide ready made Victims for Experts in need of vice signaling opportunities.
Buy my new book and learn to argue against the regime: Everything You Believe Is Wrong.
Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. For Zelle, use my email: firstname.lastname@example.org, and please include yours so I know who to thank.