Wash Post Disembles about Roe v Wade

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-25-2003
Wash Post Disembles about Roe v Wade
Fri, 01-23-2004 - 10:03am
Wash Post Disembles about Roe v Wade and reprints the same erroneous statement they had to correct last year:

"The march is a yearly protest ritual in Washington, as antiabortion demonstrators converge to protest the Supreme Court's Jan. 22, 1973, Roe v. Wade decision, which prevented states from restricting abortion in the FIRST TRIMESTER of pregnancy."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40074-2004Jan22.html

Roe is not limited to first trimester abortions:

"In Roe, and in many subsequent decisions, the Court made it clear that abortion had to be allowed for any reason through 'viability.' 'Viability' refers to the baby having lungs sufficiently developed to survive independently of the mother with technological assistance, which is a point currently reached in the late weeks of the second trimester (often by 23 weeks, and usually by 24 weeks — or about five-and-one-half months in layman's language).

http://www.nationalreview.com/lopez/lopez200310021341.asp

As the media seldom notes, public support for abortions in the first trimester is not identical to public support for Roe. "They're excluding the fact that Roe led to abortion on demand, and that a repeal of Roe would lead to 50 state regimes of abortion regulation, which would in many states leave abortion legal in the first trimester (and in the "blue states," long after that)."

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-graham020403.asp

------------------------------------------------------------------

Wesley Clark appears as confused about what Roe says as the media is:

http://www.lifenews.com/nat296.html

Renee