Vive La France!

[noseall]

And they also aren’t government explanations. Nothing in the guidelines says approve.

But you are prepared to accept the word 'authorise' in place if 'aporove'.
Why is that?
Just answer the question.

 

[Odds]

 

[noseall]

Lol.
I'm just trying to get MBK to answer a very simple question.
He seems reluctant.

 

[denso13]

I'm just trying to get MBK to answer a very simple question.

He hasn't certified, authorised, ratified, consented or sanctioned his approval yet...

 

[JonathanM]

But you are prepared to accept the word 'authorise' in place if 'aporove'.

Are you referring to this.

Make it as big as you like - You don't understand it. The doctors are required to authorise it because they have to assess if the abortion is likely to cause more harm than going term. That is not an approval to abort based on their beliefs, it is simply an assessment on the safety of the procedure.

 

[denso13]

Are you referring to this.

Yes , I think that's the post that started it.

 

[noseall]

Are you referring to this.

Not especially but it'll count, yes.
On page 30 he pasted some text and highlighted a paragraph referring to abortion 'authorisation' .
What I'm trying to establish, is that if MBK thinks its OK to use the word authorisation (which is absent from the Act also) to describe the end of the sign off process, and not 'approve', then why not?
His weak argument thus far has been to suggest that because its not in the Act wording, it can't possibly be approve, (or authorise) for the end of the sign off process.

 

[Notch7]

But you are prepared to accept the word 'authorise' in place if 'aporove'.
Why is that?
Just answer the question.

So now we have certify and authorise…which are completely different (not) to approve

 

[Notch7]

That is not an approval to abort based on their beliefs, it is simply an assessment on the safety of the procedure.

There are 2 meanings to approve: 1) official approval, 2) personal opinion approval.

You are referring to 2)

I just don’t understand why you aren’t getting it.

 

[Notch7]

Not especially but it'll count, yes.
On page 30 he pasted some text and highlighted a paragraph referring to abortion 'authorisation' .
What I'm trying to establish, is that if MBK thinks its OK to use the word authorisation (which is absent from the Act also) to describe the end of the sign off process, and not 'approve', then why not?
His weak argument thus far has been to suggest that because its not in the Act wording, it can't possibly be approve, (or authorise) for the end of the sign off process.

It’s a fair point.

 

[JonathanM]

What I'm trying to establish, is that if MBK thinks its OK to use the word authorisation (which is absent from the Act also) to describe the end of the sign off process, and not 'approve', then why not?

I did make the same point to MBK more than a week ago.

What about the word "authorise" rather than "approve".

But nobody picked up on it!

 

[noseall]

I did make the same point to MBK more than a week ago

It just makes a mockery of his weak argument. I guess it's why he's refusing to answer.

 

[JonathanM]

So now we have certify and authorise

It just makes a mockery of his weak argument. I guess it's why he's refusing to answer.

There is this from ages ago.

You see, the thing about this law malarkey, is it’s all about the legal meaning of the words. And as has been pointed out at least a dozen times. The words approval, sign off, authorisation haven’t made it in to the act.

They are however required to give an opinion in good faith. Do you understand that giving an opinion is not to authorise, sign off, approve, give it a nod, or a wink etc. ?

Apparently, following my previous question to him, it's no longer authorise, either.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

But you are prepared to accept the word 'authorise' in place if 'aporove'.
Why is that?
Just answer the question.

He won't. He cant

And some people still think he is a real law expert.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I just don’t understand why you aren’t getting it.

He is too clever