[AP] Supreme court upholds ban on partial birth abortion

Perfectly legal to remove a loved one from life support; illegal to walk into their hospital room and shoot them in the head.

 

I've just read through the post and what it sounds like is that the USSC chose to ignore the findings of the lower court and follow Congress' standards.

Further they did this not because those findings were erroneous but had deferred to Congress' findings.

Without going going through all of the evidence presented to Congress and the courts I don't know whether the findings of the lower courts were questionable or limited but there were findings of fact showing that there are some that believe that this procedure has a use and may be preferable to other procedures.

To me that makes the case that while perhaps this procedure should be curtailed but that there may potentially be a situation where a doctor may decide that it is needed for safety reasons.

What the court and Congress has done though is to determine that in every case it should be banned. Again I'm not comfortable with the idea that Congress rather than doctors should be determining that.

 

Probably so but this is debate and discuss.

 

As I understand it, the supreme court's deliberations on euthanasia have focussed on whether it is OK to terminate someone’s life, and whether declining or stopping treatment (or nourishment) constitutes terminating the life.

Very tough issues. One's that should be in front of the court.

This law doesn't address rights of the child (or child to be) at all, except to acknowledge that less icky methods to abort are available and thus concludes that this method isn't needed. If anything, it affirms that later term abortions are OK.

It places a much higher standard on the method of abortion (life of the mother) then on the abortion decision itself (health of the mother). It can't be said to be protecting the child, since it doesn't bestow any additional rights on the child, or any additional restrictions on when an abortion is allowable. Its preamble justifies the banning of this method specifically because, it claims, other methods are available.

It's crazy, really.

Plays to its base without really giving them anything tangible. Those "babies being killed just seconds before being born" can still be aborted. On the same timeline.

At the same time, they budge abortion legislation, and establish 'life of the mom' terminology to statute.

Too timid to address abortion law, they instead restrict the methods through which it can be done. Which can impact access.

Politics.

 

Stop murdering babies- before they are born and after they are born.

I hope my opinion is clear on this.

 

and you and i had gotten to a point where we were merely repeating the same arguments over and over.

 

I'm not sure we've ever debated partial birth abortion. Anyway its been interesting, informative and respectful as always.

 

Great analysis and I agree with many of your points. My own concern has been that this procedure has been used before and apparently there are some doctors who consider it to be a safer method for late term abortions. I have a hard time believing that Congress or the courts can determine then that there are absolutely no situations where it might not be called for.

To your point if late term abortions are still legal why not leave open the option for the use of a procedure even if it isn't favored.

 

i don't recall debating this with you before, either. i meant in this thread...we seemed to be saying the same thing over and over again.

and it has been respectful. thanks for that!

 

^ You're still a poopoo head...

 

oh, there's no question about that.