| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2007/4/18-21 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:46356 Activity:nil |
4/18 USSC upholds Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Law:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6569007.stm
\_ Yeah, and with a horrific procedure like this, the decision was 5-4
\_ I guess it's a victory for the pro-hurt Women side. This
procedure, "horrific as it may be" is used to protect the
mother's life and health. Outlawing saves not a single fetus
but endangers the life of the women who have it.
\_ That's a ridiculous argument. How can this procedure help
protect a mother's life? Or her health?
\_ Your comment is stupid enough to not deserve an answer,
but I'll feed the troll. If a pregnancy is endangering
a womans life or health, and medical induction (read RU486,
etc) is counter-indicated, intact d&e is the best way to
avoid abdominal surgery (always dangerous), the risks of
sepsis and hemmorhage from nonintact d&e.
\_ The partial birth process induces labor, then before the
head leaves the birth canal, the brain is sucked out of
the baby. How does giving birth protect the woman's
health from...giving birth?
\_ You are clearly too short for this discussion.
\_ Read Ginsburg's dissent. Removing the fetus intact,
instead of in pieces, protects the life of the mother
by a) reducing the number of times surgical
instruments are inserted and b) reduces the amount
of fetal tissue left behind in the womb which can
cause complications. Medical science doesn't rate
procedures on how "icky" they are, but in how
effective they are.
\_ Since when has this administration ever paid
any attention to science?
\_ Think this'll have a role in the 2008 election"? --psb
\_ Think this'll have a role in the 2008 election"?
I dont imagine OCONNOR will make a another statement
from the sidelines, but it would be awesome if she said
more. This isnt quite right, but ALTIO like ALBERTO is
probably going to be a hack. |
| 5/24 |
|
| news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6569007.stm Printable version US top court backs abortion ban US Supreme Court The Supreme Court upheld the ban by five to four The US' top court has upheld a ban on the controversial late-term partial birth abortion procedure. The Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling upholding the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act does not violate a woman's constitutional right to an abortion. The act was passed by Congress in 2003 and signed by President George W Bush. Abortion opponents condemn the operation, in which the foetus is partially removed alive from the woman's uterus and then aborted. This is the first time the nation's highest court has banned a specific procedure in a case of how, not whether, to perform an abortion, says correspondent Vanessa Heaney in Washington. It is one of the most significant decisions since the landmark Roe-versus-Wade ruling in 1973 that gave women the basic constitutional right to abortion, our correspondent adds. Dissent The upheld law makes it a crime for a doctor to carry out an abortion when an "entire foetal head" or "any part of the foetal trunk past the navel" is outside a woman's uterus, Reuters news agency reports. The Partial Birth Abortion Act and the court's defence of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Justice Anthony Kennedy said opponents "had not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases". Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who called the decision alarming, took the rare step of reading parts of her dissent. "In candour, the Partial Birth Abortion Act and the court's defence of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court - and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women's lives," she said. Observers say the decision reflects the recent addition to the court of two conservative justices appointed by President Bush. Pro-choice blow The Bush administration has defended the law as drawing a line between abortion and what they say is infanticide. But abortion rights groups say the decision is a blow that could threaten most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy. They say the procedure is sometimes the safest for a woman. "This ruling flies in the face of 30 years of Supreme Court precedent and the best interest of women's health and safety," said Eve Gartner of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. However, government lawyers and others who favour the ban, have said there are alternative and more widely used procedures that are still legal - which involves dismembering the foetus in the uterus. |