Group Sues Over Partial Birth Abortion Ban
• Parents of May 2001 Toddlers •• Hot Debates • • Abortion Debate • • Immunizations Debate •• Vaccination Debate • • Parents of Toddlers & Preschoolers •
Kim mom to Brad, Matt, Emma, Sarah, and Meagan
Opponents say the ban is unconstitutional because it does not provide an exception to protect the health of a pregnant woman.
Curious as to IF they would still sue and protest if there was an exception provided.
<<But the ban does protect the "health" of the woman, it's just very specific with what constitutes "health".>>
Coulod you possibly post that link again Kim?Perhaps that's the problem though- legislators have no business determining medical imperatives. Much like the insurance industry that sticks its nose where it shouldn't, IMHO. These medical decisions rightfully belong between
PBA doesn't save a life at all. I'm sorry, but if you have given birth or watched a birth in progress, we all know that delivering the head of the baby in progress of birth, will not kill a woman if she has delivered the rest of the body. This is rediculous and evil. PP is a sick twisted organization that advocates nothing more than death over life! Point blank, if a woman's life is in danger - she does have the right to terminate as part of her medical treatment. Women's Health is a joke of an excuse and I am ashamed to be a woman when a vocal group of woman advocate child death!!!
On a side note- the NBC broadcast stated that there was "no exception for LIFE of the mother" this morning. Not only is that a lie in regard to the ban, but the AMA has repeatedly stated that a PBA would NEVER be performed if a woman's LIFE was in jeopardy. I'm so tired of the media lying to further their liberal agenda... aaargh!
Here's what I posted before on the bill:
Here's a C&P of the bill (can't link off of the site)
<<Let me get this straight- you support PBA's? >>
Only in the case of the woman's health/life. Not for an elective abortion.
I don't know. I'm not going to pretend to be an obstetrician and list every medical reason. THAT I would leave to the medical experts - NOT the government. The gov't. should have NO control over a woman's health choices whne her health & life are at stake.
I agree. Too late for abortions based on those reasons, IMHO.
Hence, I will NOT support the bill, as I have seen TOO many opinions on whether there is adequate protection for a woman's health.life. And when I have any doubt, I would put that judgment in a DOCTOR'S hands, NOT the government's.
That is *exactly* my problem with it. There have been questions about the strength of the legislative fact-finding and considering there is *already* a Federal judge declaring it unconstitutional, I don't think it's been put through strong enough to win the lawsuits.
It will be interesting to see what happens.
Let me guess, is this judge is the 9th district?
There has been almost a decade of fact-finding legislative measures.
There is an exception for life-endangering. What if it's just profound injury? What if it is loss of future fertility? There is something like (and I would have to look it up) a risk of a 9-fold increase in blood loss to the mother with c-section.
Look, I'm not necessarily arguing FOR PBA's but let's be honest, the waters here have been SO muddied by fiction and politics that it's virtually impossible to tell what is really happening concerning this issue.