Page 1 of 13 12345611 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 255
  1.    #1  
    Great news for those who do not support this horrendous act! The Supreme Court's conservative majority upheld a nationwide ban today partial birth abortions - that is the killing of a partially birthed baby. The news states it sets the stage for additional restrictions on a woman's "right" to choose. It actually means that the killing of a viable human being is not allowed and frankly, how can this procedure, the killing of a baby, be an excuse for a mother's health? Put the baby up for adoption if the baby is not needed.

    Thank God the Court has made a sensible decision and does not consider the Constitution to be a "living document," one that encourages a "feel good" society. God Bless our children, the future of the world.

    Ben
    Last edited by bclinger; 04/18/2007 at 04:36 PM.
  2. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #2  


    Well, pass the plate and Praise Jebuz! About time a lawyer got between a Woman and her Physician/The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists! And no provision whatsoever for the woman's health, too! Take that, Missy!
  3. #3  
    I'm sure the constitution has a lot to say about abortions...

    Surur
  4. #4  
    You're right. I'm sure there is no mention of any specific form of killing.
  5.    #5  
    What are you babbling about? There is a provision in it for women's health. However, it now makes the practice of killing a baby in this manner illegal. No one has ever come up with any evidence that killing a baby during its birth effects a woman's health! The unwanted child can be placed for adoption instead of being killed. How can anyone in our society be against the death sentence, believe that no one can do wrong and yet support this form of abortion.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post


    Well, pass the plate and Praise Jebuz! About time a lawyer got between a Woman and her Physician/The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists! And no provision whatsoever for the woman's health, too! Take that, Missy!
  6.    #6  
    What are you babbling about? There is a provision in it for women's health. However, it now makes the practice of killing a baby in this manner illegal. No one has ever come up with any evidence that killing a baby during its birth effects a woman's health! The unwanted child can be placed for adoption instead of being killed. How can our portions of our society be against the death sentence, believe that no one can do wrong and yet support this form of abortion or rather murder.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post


    Well, pass the plate and Praise Jebuz! About time a lawyer got between a Woman and her Physician/The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists! And no provision whatsoever for the woman's health, too! Take that, Missy!
  7.    #7  
    I am sure you have said this in jest - the Constitution does not in any form address the issue of abortions. The act or any reference to the act is just not there and because it is not there, it needs to be addressed legislatively by the people and their elected representatives - not a group of unelected judges.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    I'm sure the constitution has a lot to say about abortions...

    Surur
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    I am sure you have said this in jest - the Constitution does not in any form address the issue of abortions. The act or any reference to the act is just not there and because it is not there, it needs to be addressed legislatively by the people and their elected representatives - not a group of unelected judges.

    Ben
    You were the one who referenced the constitution. Why I have no idea.

    Surur
  9. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    What are you babbling about? There is a provision in it for women's health.

    Ben
    No such provision exists, bunky. Praise Jebuz!

    
    550 U. S. ____ (2007) 39
    Opinion of the Court

    Respondents have not demonstrated that the Act, as a facial matter, is void for vagueness, or that it imposes an undue burden on a woman’s right to abortion based on its overbreadth or lack of a health exception. For these reasons the judgments of the Courts of Appeals for the Eighth and Ninth Circuits are reversed.

    It is so ordered.
  10.    #10  
    I need to re-read it then. Ben
  11. #11  
    Oh sorry, I thought this was a thread about the 700p update.
  12. #12  
    Yes!!! Hooray for a slide backwards towards more fundamentalist times. The US will really be a Xian nation in no time.

    Get ready for a mainstream backlash you bush lovin' fundies.
    Visor-->Visor Phone-->Treo 180-->Treo 270-->Treo 600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700P-->Treo 755P-->Centro-->Pre+-->Pre 2
  13. #13  
    I kind of think that this is a waste of resources. There arent that many women who choose to have such a late term abortion (why would a woman want to endure such a procedure? If she was going to have an abortion, she would do it much earlier given a choice). The amount of partial birth abortions are very small (approx. 2200 a year out of almost a million) and there does seem to be an exception if the women's health is at risk (Dr. can have a hearing).

    http://www.kxly.com/news/?sect_rank=...story_id=10267
    Statistics for all abortions show that roughly a million abortions are performed each year and this procedure is rarely used. For example, a recent study suggests that in 2000 doctors performed only 2,200 partial birth abortions.

    With the ban on partial birth abortions in place, if a doctor is found to have performed this procedure he or she could face two years in prison, though the new law does allow for a special hearing, if the doctor feared the woman's life was at risk.
    Im more concerned about what this will do for parents who discover that they have an anencephlic baby (or some other severe birth defect) and the associated costs of bringing those babies to term.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  14. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho View Post
    The amount of partial birth abortions are very small (approx. 2200 a year out of almost a million)
    I'd like to know what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has to say about the the clinical complications which result in requiring intact D&E. It's simply an unqualified assumption that women are choosing an intact D&E, without direct health implications.

    ... and there does seem to be an exception if the women's health is at risk (Dr. can have a hearing).
    There is both a clinical as well as a legal distinction between the woman's health and the woman's life. A hearing is the only recourse a physician has when the woman's life is deemed to be at risk (the likelihood of death is imminent).

    They'd better start putting hearing rooms in OR's.
  15.    #15  
    That is only rhetoric. Killing a child at the time of its birth has nothing to do with the health of the mother. It just goes hand-in-hand with our "feel good" society where everything goes and social values are up to the individual.

    Xian nation - are we not being over emotional here?

    As far as babies to term, they are at that stage capable of existing outside of the womb.

    Ben
  16. #16  
    BB, there's a way you can find this info. Google, for one. I think you've even mentioned it before. Can't find it? Does that mean it doesn't exist?
  17. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    ... and social values are up to the individual.

    Ben
    Just as your Deist Founding Fathers planned.

  18.    #18  
    “We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”

    Thomas Jefferson quote
  19. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #19  
    ^ The Deist expression of 'Creator' or 'Providence' shouldn't give the rightwing the warm-n-fuzzies about their Spirit in the Sky. Totally different animal.
  20.    #20  
    And your point is? We can quote different people all we want - what are we trying to prove? Feel good is exactly what you point to. Ben
Page 1 of 13 12345611 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions