2
   

Partial Birth Abortion

 
 
Thu 16 Aug, 2007 05:42 am
OK, I know liberals do not like that term, so for your sake, let's say "Late Term Extraction and Dilation". Anyway....I know this is old news, but I have never heard an answer to my big question. So here goes.

If the only problem the Democrats had with the ban on partial birth abortion was that it did not include an exception when a case could be made for the health of the mother, why didn't they introduce a bill that included the exception? I think they could have gotten this version passed and supported by the courts.

Do you think special interest groups played into this? Or are these lawmakers really so uncaring about these vital human lives that they actual want this gruesome procedure to continue without restrictions? This completely baffles me.

I'm a conservative who understands the good intentions behind banning this procedure, but really.....I cannot wrap my mind around any mindset that wants this procedure to continue without restrictions.

I'm not talking about first trimester abortions (which I oppose but it's at least a little easier to understand the opposing point of view)....so please keep the responses on the topic of partial birth/late term.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 2,304 • Replies: 27
Topic Closed
No top replies

 
westernmom
 
  1  
Thu 16 Aug, 2007 11:04 am
@crackface mcgee,
I can't see anyone justifying this inhuman procedure on an innocent baby. Like it or not, it is a human being! I had a baby that was a premie and is a beautiful woman today. So don't tell me that life doesn't begin early on!
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Thu 16 Aug, 2007 01:25 pm
@crackface mcgee,
From what i have observed, most people that are Pro-choice are also in opposition to late term abortions. As an average. They feel that the process this late is unjustifiable but even so they wish not to interject there opinion and leave it up to the mother and her physician. I would bet if we have a poll about this question you would find it fairly correct with the ones who choose pro-choice?
IMO this puts these particulars in the pro-life camp personally and hold true to Pro-choice when public opinion counts?
The reason Libs don't like the term you used it because it puts a human connotation on the problem. So long as they can justify it not being human they can allow it to happen. This late in utero in most reasonable persons minds, one cannot convince oneself it is not human at the third trimester, as to there argument for justification of abortions being ok because it was not a human yet.
Quote:
If the only problem the Democrats had with the ban on partial birth abortion was that it did not include an exception when a case could be made for the health of the mother, why didn't they introduce a bill that included the exception?
I think the answer is they want it unrestricted totally so why try and amend anything.
Quote:
I think they could have gotten this version passed and supported by the courts.
They know that, that's why they didn't.
Quote:
Do you think special interest groups played into this?
I would say it is more ideology then special interest.
Quote:
Or are these lawmakers really so uncaring about these vital human lives that they actual want this gruesome procedure to continue without restrictions?
To them it's not a human yet.
0 Replies
 
missdixy
 
  1  
Thu 16 Aug, 2007 03:05 pm
@crackface mcgee,
I have no answer to your question about why democrats didn't introduce a bill that included health exceptions, but, while I do support first trimester abortions, I am against partial birth abortions (excluding health exceptions). I guess I just have to draw the line somewhere, eh? Also, I was reading up on this a bit and in a emedicine article read that,

"Doctors have been successfully sued for failure to refer patients for late-term abortions in cases of fetal abnormalities" which left me in shock over here...
Dmizer
 
  1  
Thu 16 Aug, 2007 03:44 pm
@crackface mcgee,
I dont pretend to understand how the law can be so hypocritical on this issue.

It's legal to abort a human being in the womb, it's a woman's right after all to do as she pleases with her body right? regardless of the fetus's rights as a human being.

After all, the arguement is that the fetus is not a human being yet, therefore has no right to life. But if a mother and a fetus are slain by a drunk driver, slain by a murderous husband or other person, then the Murderer is charged with two homocides. One for the mother, one for the fetus. How can this be?
It is legal to abort, but illegal to kill the fetus?

So which is it? is the fetus a human being or not? The law says it is in one circumstance, but not in the other?

How assinine is it that the determining factor over whether it is a human life is the manner of it's death? Well if it die's this way it is a life, but if it is inconvienent for the mom then it's not a life.

Abortion is murder in all circumstances. You cannot have it both ways.
crackface mcgee
 
  1  
Thu 16 Aug, 2007 06:05 pm
@missdixy,
missdixy;31403 wrote:
....while I do support first trimester abortions, I am against partial birth abortions (excluding health exceptions)


Miss Dixy, I believe that most pro-choicers feel the same way you do, which is why it is bothersome that Edwards and Hillary thought the Supreme Court's upholding of the ban on partial birth abortion was such a "step backwards". Again, if you think the procedure should be banned but with an exception of the mother's health, then introduce legislation that includes the exception. This is why I believe they are driven by their desire to be endorsed by special interest groups who want no restrictions on abortion, regardless of how far into the pregnancy the woman may be.
bizkit
 
  1  
Fri 17 Aug, 2007 10:14 pm
@crackface mcgee,
crackface_mcgee;31476 wrote:
Miss Dixy, I believe that most pro-choicers feel the same way you do, which is why it is bothersome that Edwards and Hillary thought the Supreme Court's upholding of the ban on partial birth abortion was such a "step backwards". Again, if you think the procedure should be banned but with an exception of the mother's health, then introduce legislation that includes the exception. This is why I believe they are driven by their desire to be endorsed by special interest groups who want no restrictions on abortion, regardless of how far into the pregnancy the woman may be.

[SIZE="3"]another reason why thinking about Hillary as our President....Scares me to death!!!![/SIZE]
0 Replies
 
Volunteer
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2007 07:42 am
@crackface mcgee,
The choice to abort a child is evil. Men and women who engage in sexual activity make the choice about having a child before they engage in sexual activity, activity that can result in the conception of a child. Abortion is the choice to murder the child who was conceived as the result of their sexual activity. The purpose of this choice is to relieve the father and mother from responsibility for their child and from responsibility for their original choice.
0 Replies
 
Red cv
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2007 04:43 pm
@crackface mcgee,
I'm pro-choice up to eight weeks and then no abortion should be allowed unless the fetus is dead in utro. My baby sister gave birth at 26 weeks and he's a thriving little fella now. We need guidelines to ensure late stage abortions aren't performed on demand because of cultural practices also. Here in Canada the Indo Hindus and Chinese hold female fetuses as inferior and they use ultrasounds and if it's female they can aborted it. Selecting a child based on a cultural practices and it's sex is beyond backward. We've had numerous cases of the husbands killing their wives because they refused to abort the female baby. My government doesn't consider the issue serious enough to even consider drafting legislation.
missdixy
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2007 05:52 pm
@Red cv,
Red;31801 wrote:
We've had numerous cases of the husbands killing their wives because they refused to abort the female baby. My government doesn't consider the issue serious enough to even consider drafting legislation.


Red, the town my grandma lives in, this small, off the map town in Mexico, has the same problem with males forcing their wives to abort female babies. Most of the time the sex of the baby is only an issue during the first pregnancy, having a male first born is such a big deal to many of these people.
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2007 08:14 pm
@Red cv,
Red;31801 wrote:
I'm pro-choice up to eight weeks and then no abortion should be allowed unless the fetus is dead in utro. My baby sister gave birth at 26 weeks and he's a thriving little fella now. We need guidelines to ensure late stage abortions aren't performed on demand because of cultural practices also. Here in Canada the Indo Hindus and Chinese hold female fetuses as inferior and they use ultrasounds and if it's female they can aborted it. Selecting a child based on a cultural practices and it's sex is beyond backward. We've had numerous cases of the husbands killing their wives because they refused to abort the female baby. My government doesn't consider the issue serious enough to even consider drafting legislation.


Red, I love your courage. You don't mind being politically incorrect. You dat dag gum BOMB, like I be say'n 'fore, aaeeeet?Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Sat 18 Aug, 2007 08:17 pm
@crackface mcgee,
I AM CATHOLIC.....but.........I am pro-choice along the lines sketchd out by Red. I'm gonna get slammed now. I know. But I gotta be honest about this.
missdixy
 
  1  
Sun 19 Aug, 2007 03:47 pm
@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;31836 wrote:
I AM CATHOLIC.....but.........I am pro-choice along the lines sketchd out by Red. I'm gonna get slammed now. I know. But I gotta be honest about this.


Pino all I've got to say to you is: hooray!
and
you be the man :cool:
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Sun 19 Aug, 2007 04:58 pm
@missdixy,
missdixy;31930 wrote:
Pino all I've got to say to you is: hooray!
and
you be the man :cool:


Thanks.....but don't tell anybody. I'll get slammed, hard. Very Happy :p Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Sun 19 Aug, 2007 05:00 pm
@crackface mcgee,
I don't think Red knows my slang, dag gum it.
0 Replies
 
Red cv
 
  1  
Sun 19 Aug, 2007 06:20 pm
@missdixy,
missdixy;31819 wrote:
Red, the town my grandma lives in, this small, off the map town in Mexico, has the same problem with males forcing their wives to abort female babies. Most of the time the sex of the baby is only an issue during the first pregnancy, having a male first born is such a big deal to many of these people.


You know what makes me really angry MissD is the male sperm decides the SEX of the baby. Educated men forcing women to abort because their sperm can't produce a male heir. Gurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, there are days I'd like to hit those SOB's over the head with my never used frying pan. Your Mexican hertigage shows in your gorgeous eyes.

LOL Pino my nickname is Sassy, really.
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Sun 19 Aug, 2007 08:13 pm
@Red cv,
Red;31959 wrote:
You know what makes me really angry MissD is the male sperm decides the SEX of the baby. Educated men forcing women to abort because their sperm can't produce a male heir. Gurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, there are days I'd like to hit those SOB's over the head with my never used frying pan. Your Mexican hertigage shows in your gorgeous eyes.

LOL Pino my nickname is Sassy, really.


Red..... I mean 'Sassy'.....interpret this, as best you can:

"Mama, you be all tight'n sit, up da house."Very Happy

It looks nasty, but it's not. Seriously.
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Sun 19 Aug, 2007 08:16 pm
@crackface mcgee,
Dixie!!!!!!

My visitors are still here, but moved to a hotel. Something tells me I'm not so popular with the in-laws right now. Oh, well.........
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Mon 20 Aug, 2007 09:58 am
@crackface mcgee,
crackface_mcgee;31476 wrote:
Miss Dixy, I believe that most pro-choicers feel the same way you do, which is why it is bothersome that Edwards and Hillary thought the Supreme Court's upholding of the ban on partial birth abortion was such a "step backwards". Again, if you think the procedure should be banned but with an exception of the mother's health, then introduce legislation that includes the exception. This is why I believe they are driven by their desire to be endorsed by special interest groups who want no restrictions on abortion, regardless of how far into the pregnancy the woman may be.
IMO her opinion follows my observation. I think if you get to the root of this behavior you will find it is ideoligy fueling the special interests to include it's politicians.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Mon 20 Aug, 2007 10:02 am
@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;31836 wrote:
I AM CATHOLIC.....but.........I am pro-choice along the lines sketchd out by Red. I'm gonna get slammed now. I know. But I gotta be honest about this.

You'll get no slam from me. I don't belive in abortion at all but i didn't aways think like this.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Partial Birth Abortion
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 06:37:41