• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Partial Birth Abortion Ban Upheld By Supreme Court

LawnOven

robot
LawnOven
Joined
Sep 5, 2001
Messages
1,308
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070418/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_abortion;_ylt=Al_bKadpGeCCG_MgXUIIbFPMWM0F?

The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long-awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.
The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman's constitutional right to an abortion.
Click to expand...

Whatever your opinion, it is clear elections have consequences.

edit: Haha, my very own abortion thread.
 
I knew the Roe vs Wade ruling confirmed a constitutional right to privacy and included abortion under it, I was surprised that they would take it further and declare a specific right to abortions.
 
I think it is by proxy. Right to privacy is the key issue in making abortion legal; on a federal level.

Or in other words, a woman has a constitutional right to privacy, therefore she has a consitutional right to abortions.
 
That's funny! A Constitutional right to abortion??!! Please cite it then by all means!

I find it hysterical that the same folks who so easily see a right to abortion can never seem to apprehend the second amendment! Oh well, there are nuts on both ends of these issues!

Personally I support a woman's right to choose, but within sane boundaries. Abortion should be safe and legal so long as it is not late term. Even then I support the woman's right to abortion if her health is at risk....but the partial birth procedure is grotesque and could arguably even be construed a homicide.

Upholding the ban on this barbarism is hardly a sign of the Evil Conservative SCOTUS we've been taught to fear since Bush was elected...twice....

-z
 
It's so cool that my legal education better qualifies me to determine the practice of obstretics & gynecology than actual obstetricians and gynecologists. :)
 
rikzilla said:
That's funny! A Constitutional right to abortion??!! Please cite it then by all means!

I find it hysterical that the same folks who so easily see a right to abortion can never seem to apprehend the second amendment! Oh well, there are nuts on both ends of these issues!

Personally I support a woman's right to choose, but within sane boundaries. Abortion should be safe and legal so long as it is not late term. Even then I support the woman's right to abortion if her health is at risk....but the partial birth procedure is grotesque and could arguably even be construed a homicide.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of late term abortions are for medical reasons. What this does is force the doctors to use more risky procedures in these cases.
 
rikzilla said:
That's funny! A Constitutional right to abortion??!! Please cite it then by all means!

I find it hysterical that the same folks who so easily see a right to abortion can never seem to apprehend the second amendment! Oh well, there are nuts on both ends of these issues!

Personally I support a woman's right to choose, but within sane boundaries. Abortion should be safe and legal so long as it is not late term. Even then I support the woman's right to abortion if her health is at risk....but the partial birth procedure is grotesque and could arguably even be construed a homicide.

Upholding the ban on this barbarism is hardly a sign of the Evil Conservative SCOTUS we've been taught to fear since Bush was elected...twice....

-z
Click to expand...


Who the hell are you talking to?
 
ponderingturtle said:
Is that the one that bans medicialy preferable abortions with unviable fetus's?

Good to see none of them will be forced into higher risk procedures I guess.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure it's that big of a deal in regards to actual abortions going on now. But it's sort of a 'foot in the door' thing, I think most people are worried about. I think only .17% of abortions are 'partial birth'.
 
LawnOven said:
I'm not sure it's that big of a deal in regards to actual abortions going on now. But it's sort of a 'foot in the door' thing, I think most people are worried about. I think only .17% of abortions are 'partial birth'.
Click to expand...

And the law does not except medical nessecity. And most late term abortions are for medical reasons not birth control reasons.

It will be interesting to see an estimate what the death toll of this law is.
 
Dave1001 said:
It's so cool that my legal education better qualifies me to determine the practice of obstretics & gynecology than actual obstetricians and gynecologists. :)
Click to expand...

The Legislature passes the laws. SCOTUS just said that the law is Constitutional.

Your comment should be aimed at Congress and Bush not the Supreme Court.
 
LawnOven said:
I'm not sure it's that big of a deal in regards to actual abortions going on now. But it's sort of a 'foot in the door' thing, I think most people are worried about. I think only .17% of abortions are 'partial birth'.
Click to expand...

I have read estimates that they represent somewhere between your figure, LawnOven, and 1% of all abortions in this country.

What is disturbing about the ruling is more in what it will lead to.
 
ponderingturtle said:
The vast majority of late term abortions are for medical reasons. What this does is force the doctors to use more risky procedures in these cases.
Click to expand...

Then they'd better develop better less risky procedures that exclude partially delivering a baby and crushing it's head. Gee, don't you think science is up to this task? Personally I have more faith in science than that. A line must be drawn somewhere. Abortion without limit is not a medical necessity.

-z
 
rikzilla said:
Is this not a public forum? I was of course addressing the public. You have some kind of problem with that?

-z
Click to expand...

No of course not. However yor post implied that your comments were directed at someone specifically.
 
ponderingturtle said:
And the law does not except medical nessecity. And most late term abortions are for medical reasons not birth control reasons.

It will be interesting to see an estimate what the death toll of this law is.
Click to expand...


While I agree with the importance of making exceptions for medical necessity, I'm curious to know why you think that the type mentioned in the ruling is the less risky of abortion procedures.

Where are you getting your information on this?
 
Without getting into the Constitutional technicalities of the issue (at least not just yet), I suspect this ruling probably reflects the general will of most people. Most of us - myself included - have very little trouble with abortion in the earliest stages of pregnancy. But I think most people also regard killing a healthy, nine-month term fetus as morally indistinguishable from murder, acceptable only when it's the baby's life or the mother's.

Of course, all the news coverage will have extensive sound bites from everyone at the extreme ends of the spectrum on the issue: the religious zealot pro-lifers opposed to abortion at any time, for any reason, and the pro-choicers untroubled by the killing of a baby in the womb while premature babies at earlier stages of development are being saved in the same hospital.

Because screaming and shouting idealogues make for the best TV, don't you know?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom