NY Judge Finds Partial-Birth Abortion Act Unconstitutional

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
cKGunslinger

cKGunslinger

Lifer
Nov 29, 1999
16,408
57
91
I dunno. Despite my Right-Wingedness and Christianity, I've always leaned toward Pro-Choice. But PBAs just seem *wrong* to me. They take place during second trimester. Could a baby born during this time actually live?
 
Todd33

Todd33

Diamond Member
Oct 16, 2003
7,842
2
81
U.S. District Judge Richard C. Casey (search) in Manhattan said the Supreme Court (search) has made it clear that a law that prohibits the performance of a particular abortion procedure must include an exception to preserve a woman's life and health.
Click to expand...

I would have to side with the ruling. If my wife or daughter was going to die, I'd be all for the abortion.
 
I

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
I dunno. Despite my Right-Wingedness and Christianity, I've always leaned toward Pro-Choice. But PBAs just seem *wrong* to me. They take place during second trimester. Could a baby born during this time actually live?
Click to expand...

They don't perform these abortions unless the woman is going to die. If the abortion doesn't take place the framers might as well be shoving that knife into the woman instead.
 
T

thuper

Member
Jun 6, 2004
157
0
0
Originally posted by: Todd33
U.S. District Judge Richard C. Casey (search) in Manhattan said the Supreme Court (search) has made it clear that a law that prohibits the performance of a particular abortion procedure must include an exception to preserve a woman's life and health.
Click to expand...

I would have to side with the ruling. If my wife or daughter was going to die, I'd be all for the abortion.
Click to expand...


That's exactly the point more people need to be making. People argue that you can't ask the baby whether or not it wants to live instead of its mother.

But do you know anyone who would put their own life before their mother's? Would you really let your mother die so you could live?
 
M

MonkeyK

Golden Member
May 27, 2001
1,396
8
81
:thumbsup:

Finally some sense brought to this fiasco of a bill!

The whole "Partial Brith Abortion" thing is a marketing gimmick by the pro-lifers. The bill has little to do with preserving life and everything to do with making abortions look gruesome.
 
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Have you ever actually seen an abortion?

It isnt a picnic for either the mother or child.
 
glenn1

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
As misguided as I feel laws restricting abortion are, I feel the court overstepped its bounds in declaring it unconstitutional (as did the USSC in deciding Roe v. Wade). Same thing happened in the Lawrence v. Texas decision striking down sodomy laws, even though the statutes were odious and completely idiotic, there was absolutely no Constitutional basis for striking down such laws other than imagined "implied" rights. The courts aren't supposed to be some sort of "Super Legislature" that exists to correct stupid decisions of Congress. If judges continue to usurp the power of the legislative branch by making law via judicial fiat I will actively support revoking the principle of judicial review.
 
M

MonkeyK

Golden Member
May 27, 2001
1,396
8
81
Originally posted by: Genx87
Have you ever actually seen an abortion?

It isnt a picnic for either the mother or child.
Click to expand...

Do not confuse "Partial Birth Abortion" with abortion. That is the marketing gimmick that the Pro-Life crowd has created.
Abortions are gruesome, many medical procedures are gruesome. That does not make them something one decides to do casually. "Partial Birth Abortion" is a medical procedure used when a fetus cannot survive birth, the birth will kill the mother or the fetus is already dead. In all of the cases I just said, it still looks gruesome and is not a picnic. However the alternative procedure is a hysterectomy which is also gruesome and not a picnic.
 
I

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: glenn1
As misguided as I feel laws restricting abortion are, I feel the court overstepped its bounds in declaring it unconstitutional (as did the USSC in deciding Roe v. Wade). Same thing happened in the Lawrence v. Texas decision striking down sodomy laws, even though the statutes were odious and completely idiotic, there was absolutely no Constitutional basis for striking down such laws other than imagined "implied" rights. The courts aren't supposed to be some sort of "Super Legislature" that exists to correct stupid decisions of Congress. If judges continue to usurp the power of the legislative branch by making law via judicial fiat I will actively support revoking the principle of judicial review.
Click to expand...

This is clearly a different case from Roe V Wade. At the heart of this matter is a womans right to a life saving procedure. I do believe you can make a case based on current law that it is illegal to deny a woman the right to live.
 
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Do not confuse "Partial Birth Abortion" with abortion. That is the marketing gimmick that the Pro-Life crowd has created.
Abortions are gruesome, many medical procedures are gruesome. That does not make them something one decides to do casually. "Partial Birth Abortion" is a medical procedure used when a fetus cannot survive birth, the birth will kill the mother or the fetus is already dead. In all of the cases I just said, it still looks gruesome and is not a picnic. However the alternative procedure is a hysterectomy which is also gruesome and not a picnic.
Click to expand...

I am not confusing the two. Both are gruesome imo. And as for casually I am not sure where you live. But I knew several girls in highschool who had 6 or more abortions in 4 years. If that isnt casual then I dont know what is. It became a form of birth control for them.

btw most stillborn children are natually aborted. If the fetus is dead then there is little reason to cut the back of the head open and suck its brains out.
 
I

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
Do not confuse "Partial Birth Abortion" with abortion. That is the marketing gimmick that the Pro-Life crowd has created.
Abortions are gruesome, many medical procedures are gruesome. That does not make them something one decides to do casually. "Partial Birth Abortion" is a medical procedure used when a fetus cannot survive birth, the birth will kill the mother or the fetus is already dead. In all of the cases I just said, it still looks gruesome and is not a picnic. However the alternative procedure is a hysterectomy which is also gruesome and not a picnic.
Click to expand...

I am not confusing the two. Both are gruesome imo. And as for casually I am not sure where you live. But I knew several girls in highschool who had 6 or more abortions in 4 years. If that isnt casual then I dont know what is. It became a form of birth control for them.

btw most stillborn children are natually aborted. If the fetus is dead then there is little reason to cut the back of the head open and suck its brains out.
Click to expand...

They weren't having partial birth abortions, though, which is what this thread is about. These are abortions carried out for very different reasons. Certainly, not as abortions for casual sex. They're life saving procedures. Many medical procedures are just flat out disgusting.
 
I

InfectedMushroom

Golden Member
Aug 15, 2001
1,064
0
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
Do not confuse "Partial Birth Abortion" with abortion. That is the marketing gimmick that the Pro-Life crowd has created.
Abortions are gruesome, many medical procedures are gruesome. That does not make them something one decides to do casually. "Partial Birth Abortion" is a medical procedure used when a fetus cannot survive birth, the birth will kill the mother or the fetus is already dead. In all of the cases I just said, it still looks gruesome and is not a picnic. However the alternative procedure is a hysterectomy which is also gruesome and not a picnic.
Click to expand...

I am not confusing the two. Both are gruesome imo. And as for casually I am not sure where you live. But I knew several girls in highschool who had 6 or more abortions in 4 years. If that isnt casual then I dont know what is. It became a form of birth control for them.

btw most stillborn children are natually aborted. If the fetus is dead then there is little reason to cut the back of the head open and suck its brains out.
Click to expand...

Genx87 there will always be idiots like those girls in your highschool who will abuse the system. However would you trade that for the life of your wife if she could have a choice to get that abortion to save her life? I wouldn't. I want to be able to have that choice.

hey, if those girls are that dumb that they haven't figured how to buy the pill or ask a dude to wear a condom, then maybe it's a good thing they are not having kids.
 
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
What % do you think are actually for "medical" reasons?

I am looking at quotes from doctor who testified against the partial birth ban in 1995 and has estimated at least 1/3rd of the partial birth abortions he performed(2000) were for no medical reason. And he says 9% were to save the mothers life. The rest were for defects ranging from nominal to severe.

Also what happens if the baby is delivered by accident, is breathing, and crying?
What should they do at that point?
 
C

Crimson

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
3,809
0
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
What % do you think are actually for "medical" reasons?

I am looking at quotes from doctor who testified against the partial birth ban in 1995 and has estimated at least 1/3rd of the partial birth abortions he performed(2000) were for no medical reason. And he says 9% were to save the mothers life. The rest were for defects ranging from nominal to severe.

Also what happens if the baby is delivered by accident, is breathing, and crying?
What should they do at that point?
Click to expand...

I love the argument that all abortions are to save the life of the money, or that most of them are.. give me a break.. I know several people who have had abortions, not a single one of them was to 'save their life'.. it was all about them not wanting the deal with the consequences of the child.. both financial and emotional.
 
CaptnKirk

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Also what happens if the baby is delivered by accident, is breathing, and crying?
What should they do at that point?

Send it to Gitmo for interrogation.

If you had read the article you would have seen this in the very first parragraph:

Intact D&X procedures are extremely rare, carried out in roughly 0.2% (two-tenths of one percent) of all abortions in the USA

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to save the life of the money

Side to Crimson - You are hanging out with irresponsible people if that's the case.

$ $ $ $ $
 
I

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
What % do you think are actually for "medical" reasons?

I am looking at quotes from doctor who testified against the partial birth ban in 1995 and has estimated at least 1/3rd of the partial birth abortions he performed(2000) were for no medical reason. And he says 9% were to save the mothers life. The rest were for defects ranging from nominal to severe.

Also what happens if the baby is delivered by accident, is breathing, and crying?
What should they do at that point?
Click to expand...

And I'm looking right here at a study from 1996 that shows the overwhelming majorty were performed for medical reasons. I have no problem with making late term abortions illegal for non medical reasons. Then that doctor you are sighting would be locked up if he acted so unethical. But the unethical behavior of a few doesn't mean that women with a real medical need for it should be prevented the chance to live.
 
I

imported_tss4

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Crimson
Originally posted by: Genx87
What % do you think are actually for "medical" reasons?

I am looking at quotes from doctor who testified against the partial birth ban in 1995 and has estimated at least 1/3rd of the partial birth abortions he performed(2000) were for no medical reason. And he says 9% were to save the mothers life. The rest were for defects ranging from nominal to severe.

Also what happens if the baby is delivered by accident, is breathing, and crying?
What should they do at that point?
Click to expand...

I love the argument that all abortions are to save the life of the money, or that most of them are.. give me a break.. I know several people who have had abortions, not a single one of them was to 'save their life'.. it was all about them not wanting the deal with the consequences of the child.. both financial and emotional.
Click to expand...

You are dileberately steering this off topic. THIS IS NOT ABOUT GENERAL ABORTIONS. We're talking about partial birth abortions which ARE used for medical reasons. NO ONE IS MAKING THE CLAIM THAT MOST ABORTIONS ARE USED FOR MEDICAL REASONS!
 
H

Hugenstein

Senior member
Dec 30, 2000
419
0
0
The judge is right an outright ban on Partial Birth Abortions should be unconstitutional. Blame your dumbass Republican Represantives and Senators, they could have easily passed a ban with an exclusion for cases where it is medically necessary. Instead they chose to pass a law they knew was unconstitutional.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom