PBA Ban misconceptions
Find a Conversation
|Wed, 11-05-2003 - 2:51pm|
You can surf other bills on abortion and more as well.
Contrary to a post about PBAbortion Ban not containing a health exception there is. The bill is posted above.
<<<`(a) Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. This subsection takes effect 1 day after the enactment.>>>
<<`(d)(1) A defendant accused of an offense under this section may seek a hearing before the State Medical Board on whether the physician's conduct was necessary to save the life of the mother whose life was endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.
`(2) The findings on that issue are admissible on that issue at the trial of the defendant. Upon a motion of the defendant, the court shall delay the beginning of the trial for not more than 30 days to permit such a hearing to take place. >>>
And this clause is also included:
<<`(e) A woman upon whom a partial-birth abortion is performed may not be prosecuted under this section, for a conspiracy to violate this section, or for an offense under section 2, 3, or 4 of this title based on a violation of this section.'. >>>
I ask that other's read the bill before they start listening to the media, and right wing radical groups (who just so happen to be the biggest abortion providers in America, aka PP) and 2 others groups who have to spread lies in order to get people to listen.
I'm very busy right now with school, so as for getting out in the open and on the computer I barely have anytime. I'll make it a point to read your replies. I have about 100 more articles on file I can pull up. Believe me I have news to share.
The groups are sueing based on the law being constitutionally vague (a common PP argument) and the definition being to broad. Not on the basis it doesn't contain a health exception.
Edited 11/5/2003 3:17:27 PM ET by jlynnmoser