Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Abortion Ruling
#1
I'm surprised at this,but glad. How anyone can be for voluntary abortions when the freaking child's HEAD is in the birth canal is beyond me. If it's to save the mom's life,alright. Otherwise,girl, think about 8.5 months earlier about not having a kid.

http//www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266724,00.html
Reply
#2
Palladin Wrote:I'm surprised at this,but glad. How anyone can be for voluntary abortions when the freaking child's HEAD is in the birth canal is beyond me. If it's to save the mom's life,alright. Otherwise,girl, think about 8.5 months earlier about not having a kid.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266724,00.html
I'm with you, Palladin.

I posted this same article on IAP, with 2 responses all day. Seems the war, massacre at VT, and Anna Nicole Smith are the prime interests these days.

I"m saying, "Hoooorraaaaay" for the babies.
Solo~

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. --Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#3
Unless the mother is bleeding to death and continuing the birth would possibly kill her.

Are you sure you have a degree in anything but your imagination?
Reply
#4
Bushed Wrote:Unless the mother is bleeding to death and continuing the birth would possibly kill her.

Are you sure you have a degree in anything but your imagination?
Palladin, me thinks some people didn't read your link before commenting, and don't quite catch what's being discussed. :?
Solo~

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. --Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#5
Solo,

I'm forgiving in this case because I make the same mistake oftentimes,but yea,I noticed it,too.
Reply
#6
No, I read it. it says basically a woman still has the right to an abortion.

The act itself is full of emotional jibber jabber about partial birth abortion, and how it's never justified or to be used even to save the life of the mother. In essence it takes the doctor out of the equation as well as the mother and instead makes politicans the deciding factor in a womans well being and health.

When politicians are getting between a doctor and a patient, that's when questions arise and in this case it has everything to do with the decision.

So you can all pretend the kid (me) did not read the post. The act itself goes beyond Palladin's comments about voluntary use of the procedure. I suggest you read the act itself and how it is applied.
Reply
#7
Patrick, this latest Supreme Court decision goes even further about when abortions should not be a first choice.

Quote:Did The Supreme Court Just End Roe v. Wade?

A lot of people are saying that Roe v. Wade is “finished” now that the Supreme Court has refused to block a new Texas abortion law from going into effect.  This new law bans abortions once the heartbeat of the baby can be detected, and that usually happens somewhere around six weeks into a pregnancy.  Courts have struck down similar heartbeat laws in other states, and so Texas did something to try to get around that.  Under this new Texas law, state officials will not actually be enforcing the restrictions.  Instead, private citizens have been granted the right to bring civil lawsuits against those that provide illegal abortions.


A group of “abortion rights advocates” filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court in an attempt to block the law, but in a 5 to 4 decision the Supreme Court denied that request.

You can read the Supreme Court ruling for yourself right here.  This does not mean that the Supreme Court has decided to uphold the new Texas law.  All that it means is that the request for the law to be suspended while litigation moves forward has been denied.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.
H. L. Mencken
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)