Houses Passes Pan on Partial Birth Abortion

No surprise. Ever notice how the left successfully gets laws changed and legislated from the Judicial Branch of Government instead of going through the Legislative Branch which is the Consitutional way to change laws?

The left is usually the first to run to court & cry foul.

In the meantime, it is one very small victory for the Constitutional Rights of the unborn. Terrorists and illegal aliens have more "rights" in this country than do the innocent unborn who are cruelly ripped from the "safety" of their mother's wombs and sold as additives for face creams and shampoo.

 

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1995/vo11no09/vo11no09_unborn.htm


http://www.primepropertyofga.com/aog/articlesofinterest/ART03.html


http://abcnews.go.com/onair/2020/2020_000308_fetalparts_feature.html

For all who wrote in to your elected Congressional officials regarding bringing this "partial birth abortion ban bill" up for a vote again, thank you from the unborn.

Sometimes our elected members of Congress do listen to our letters, emails, faxes, and telephone calls!

 

The amount of misinformation is staggering.

This bill has nothing to do with abortion in general. It has to do with PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION, which is currently not legal as an elective procedure, since it's done in the final trimester. Failure of the bill would not have made it legal. The aformentioned stats about abortion being "big business" has nothing at all to do with this issue, as there is no "business" generated by partial birth abortions at abortion clinics. Partial birth abortions, known as dilation and extraction, comprises 0.1% of abortions.

The sticking point in the bill is that the bill contains an exception when the life of the mother — but not her health — is at risk. Opponents of the bill wanted the exception to include a health exception.

Of the 30 states that have legislation similar to this bill, 20 of those states have had the legislation struck down, notably because of the absence of a health exception. This law is likely to meet the same fate. Had the health exception been included, it is likely that a court would uphold the law, rather than strike it down.

 

Links please which support your position.

The stats were posted in response to a PM, just for information for those who don't know and/or newcomers to the Board.

What do you think happens to the dead & murdered fetuses removed by the partial-birth abortion procedure? It is all regarded as tissue, regardless of the age of the fetus.

Links please, to support your statement that "there is no business generated by abortions done at abortion clinics."

 

Links please which support your position.
Huh? You don't know the difference between first/second trimester abortion and late term D & X??

The stats were posted in response to a PM, just for information for those who don't know and/or newcomers to the Board.
I don't have a problem withthe stats, just that there's an insinuation that the stats are related to late term D&X's.

What do you think happens to the dead & murdered fetuses removed by the partial-birth abortion procedure?
What do you think happens to aborted fetusus from ectopic pregnancies? I don't see the relevance. I also don't happen to consider a healthy fetus removed from a fallopian tube (which results in an ectopic pregnancy) to be murder.

Links please, to support your statement that "there is no business generated by abortions done at abortion clinics."
I didn't say that. I said there is no business "generated by partial birth abortions at abortion clinics". The D & X procedure is done at hospitals. They're not done as a matter of elective choice, they're done out of medical necessity.

 

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=002485

 

And the purpose of the link was???

 

From the doctor who invented D&X (who operated abortion clinics in Cincinnati, Ohio)

Source: Vanderbilt SFL

Link to the SILENT CRY (Requires Windows Media Player)

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/SFL/multimedia.htm

Also:


http://www.alliance4lifemin.org/debate.html

 

Help!!!!

None of this addresses the point, and that is the bill contains no exception for the mother's health, only for the mother's life.

There appears to be an attempt by some on in this thread to make it sound like partial birth abortions are done to viable and healthy fetuses of healthy mothers. That ain't the case. That is illegal, and was before the passage before the bill, and I support that. The procedure is done in cases of imminent stillbirth, and/or fetal malformation (such as anencaphaly, aka, lack of fetal brain development). The problem is, the bill that passed will require a woman to undergo seriously adverse health risks by often delivering. Yet, with or without partial birth abortion, the result is the same: a stillborn or post-delivery death of the baby.

 

Help!!!!

There appears to be an attempt by some in this thread to make it sound like partial birth abortions are NEVER done to viable & healthy fetuses of healthy mothers!

It is not illegal in all states, only some. Otherwise those important links proving that it is already illegal nationwide would have been posted by now.

 

Your failure to address the topic is noted.

There appears to be an attempt by some in this thread to make it sound like partial birth abortions are NEVER done to viable & healthy fetuses of healthy mothers!

Where did I say that?

It is not illegal in all states, only some.
Elective abortion after the second trimester is illegal nationwide. This includes D&X procedures.

I'm discussing the health clause exclusion, and you have yet to address that point. Had the bill included the health clause, it would still make elective partial birth abortions illegal.

I have no problem with partial birth abortions being illegal. You're preaching to the choir. It's the lack of a health exception clause that I have a problem with.

Oh, btw, in your previous post, you incorrectly confused "Partial-birth" abortion (Dilation and Extraction, or D&X) with "Intact" abortion(Dilation and Evacuation, or D&E).

[ June 05, 2003, 06:41 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

Just to clarify:

The Supreme Court in 1973, in the case of Roe v. Wade, declared unconstitutional any legislative interference in the first trimester of pregnancy only. While it put limits on what restrictions could be passed on abortions in later stages of pregnancy, it did not legalize elective third trimester abortions.

Forty states and the District of Columbia have laws banning most post-viability abortions (AL, AZ, AR, CA, CT, DE, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY).

Three states have laws declaring that if Roe v. Wade is overturned, abortion is to be prohibited (IL, KY, LA).

Five states have laws declaring their intent to ban abortion to the fullest extent permitted by the Constitution (AR, MO, NE, ND, PA), and three other states have declarations stating their policy to protect the unborn as persons under state law (LA, UT).

Four states have laws affirming a right to abortion before viability, and at any time thereafter if necessary to preserve her life or health of the mother (CT, ME, MD, WA). Another state (NV) has a law that provides a right to abortion during the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.

At least two states have laws restricting non-surgical or chemical abortion (RI, TN). A Rhode Island regulation prohibits chemical abortions to licensed hospitals with an approved research protocol, while a Tennessee law provides that no nurse practitioner or physician's assistant may prescribe or distribute drugs or medication intended to cause abortion.

Four states have laws requiring physicians to perform tests to determine viability in certain circumstances (AL, LA, MO, OH). The Louisiana law has been ruled unconstitutional. A court has issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the enforcement of the Ohio law.

Ten states have unenforceable laws requiring spousal consent or notice (CO, FL, IL, KY, LA, ND, PA, RI, SC, UT). The Supreme Court struck down Pennsylvania's mandatory husband notice law in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

Thirty-eight states have laws that prevent a minor from obtaining an abortion without parental consent or notice (AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, DE, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NM, NC, ND, OH, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, WV, WI, WY). Nine more states have parental consent or notice laws on the books that are not enforced (AK, AZ, CA, CO, IL, MT, NV, NM, SD). California's Supreme Court has found that state's law in violation of the California Constitution. Twenty-eight laws are actually enforced (AL, AR, DE, GA, ID, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, NE, NC, ND, OH, PA, RI, SC, UT, WV, WI, WY). Two states provide for a physician waiver of the notice requirement (MD, WV). One state (CT) requires counselors to discuss of the possibility of parental involvement. Maine allows a minor to receive counseling in lieu of parental or judicial consent.

Eighteen states have mandatory waiting periods (DE, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MI, MS, MT, NE, ND, OH, PA, SC, SD, TN, UT, WI). Eleven of these states currently enforce their waiting period laws (ID, KS, LA, MS, NE, ND, OH, PA, SC, SD, UT). Thirty states have an informed consent law for abortion (AL, AK, CA, CT, DE, FL, ID, IN, KS, KY, LA, ME, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, ND, OH, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, VA, WI). Such laws were held unconstitutional under Thornburg v. American Col. of Ob. & Gyn., but are generally upheld since the court reversed itself in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

In 43 states the law provides that only a physician may perform an abortion (AL, AK, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY). Oklahoma has a law that provides that no woman may induce an abortion upon herself except under the supervision of a licensed physician. The Minnesota law provides that only a physician or a physician-in-training may perform an abortion. Kentucky law requires that first trimester abortions be performed by a physician or by the woman herself with the advice of a physician, and that later abortions be performed only by a physician. A District of Columbia law requires that all abortions be performed under the supervision of a licensed physician.

Some twelve states and the District of Columbia have laws specifically prohibiting clinic blockades and harassment (CA, CO, DC, KS, ME, MD, MA, MN, NV, NC, OR, WA, WI). Four states have passed resolutions condemning clinic violence (CA, MI, NM, PA).

Forty-six states have laws that permit certain medical personnel, health facilities, to refuse to participate in abortion on the basis of conscience or religious conviction (AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY). In at least three of these states, the laws have been held unconstitutional as applied to public facilities (AK, MN, NJ).

Five states have so called "gag rules" that prevent state funded personnel from counseling abortion or giving abortion referrals (LA, MI, MO, ND, PA). A court has ruled the North Dakota law unconstitutional.

A single state (MO) has a law prohibiting public employees from participating in abortions.

Five states have laws prohibiting the use of public facilities for abortion (KY, LA, MO, ND, PA).

Three states prohibit the use of state funds for abortion except when the woman's life is endangered (AL, MS, SD). These states refuse to comply with a federal law requiring states to provide Medicaid funding for abortion in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest. Twenty-seven states fund abortion in cases of threat to life, rape or incest (AZ, AR, CO, DE, FL, GA, IN, KS, KY, LA, ME, MI, MO, NE, NV, NH, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, UT, WY). Four states fund abortion in cases of a threat to the woman's life, rape, incest as well as certain other health reasons (IA, NM, VA, WI). Sixteen states and the District of Columbia fund in most or all circumstances (AK, CA, CT, DC, HI, ID, IL, MD, MA, MN, MT, NJ, NY, OR, VT, WA, WV).

Five states have laws that prohibit insurance coverage for abortion unless a special premium is paid (ID, KY, MO, ND, RI). The Rhode Island law was ruled unconstitutional. Another state (PA) has a law that requires insurers to provide policy alternatives excluding abortion. Seven states have laws that prohibit insurance coverage for abortion in certain circumstances when public funds are used or public employees are insured (CO, IL, MA, NE, PA, RI, VA). The Rhode Island law has also been held to be partially unconstitutional. At least two states exclude abortion coverage from state health care programs (IL, MN).

 

Source please (if you are using copyright material). Thanks.

 

Public statute is not under copyright. These are according to the statutes of each state/territory. To list all the sites would be too numerous to list here. You're welcome to check out each individual state's site if you wish, however.

 

The terms D&E and D&X are interchangeable & used to describe the same procedure.

 

There appears to be an attempt by some on in this thread to make it sound like partial birth abortions are done to viable and healthy fetuses of healthy mothers. That ain't the case.

John apparently you forget your quote above so I thought I would post it for you.

Murph

 

I didn't say that they're NEVER done. I'm sure there are abuses. But it's not legal for them to be done electively, and that was true both before and after the passage of this bill.

SheEagle implies that elective partial birth abortions are commonplace and legal, and neither of those are the case.

 

John, you still did not post information to back up your claim that partial birth abortions are illegal. You posted this:

"Forty states and the District of Columbia have laws banning most post-viability abortions (AL, AZ, AR, CA, CT, DE, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY). "

That means those states ban abortions where the fetus would be determined viable enough to survive outside the womb (post meaning after). The above does not support your claim.

True, some states have passed a partial birth abortion ban, but not all. So, it is not illegal in all 50 states.

Do you really believe both Houses would look at this bill & vote on this bill time and time again if it was already Illegal? Surely you can't believe that. Do you think there would be hours upon hours of testimony in congressional hearings over something that was already illegal? Or that this bill would come before them time and time again if it were already illegal in all 50 states?

You have implied that I have attempted to misrepresent some facts. No, I have not. I have nothing to gain from misrepresenting facts on this board.

Aborted babies are sold for their tissue, plain & simple. Abortion is taking (murder) of an innocent life. I have not attempted to misrepresent any facts nor have I attempted to insinuate anything at all as you proport. I have posted some links that pertain to abortion in general, though, for informative purposes. Not everyone knows the difference between this procedure of partial birth abortion or any other method of abortion. The links I provided were to provide information, not to misrepresent facts as pertain to this bill. Perhaps you forget that you & I are not the only two people in the world that view this thread.

I applaud the House & Senate for passing this bill once again. They have done it in the past, only to have it vetoed by then President Bill Clinton.

Your concern regarding health of the mother has been and can be stretched to include such things as "depression." I am happy with the bill as it is, even if you are not.

The reason I am happy with the bill is because it is a fact that the majority of American hospitals try to save lives, not destroy even the unborn. Generally speaking, most American hospitals do not provide for "elective" abortions by any method - those are done at abortion mills (abortion clinics). A case of ectopic pregnancy (tubal) would be a case of medical necessity - not elective (one risk being tubal rupture). Usually a salpingectomy is the procedure to correct the problem and only after many tests such as labs & sonograms are done to determine viability of the fetus. Any responsible FACOG will perform those tests before whisking a patient off to the operative suite.

To address the issue of a genuine medical necessity in late term - to save the life of the mother - in nearly all US hospitals, the child would be removed by an open procedure, not by partial birth abortion, and the baby would be placed in a NICU (neonatal intensive care unit), given a chance to survive. That is standard medical practice at any JCAHO hospital in America (which they almost all are).

It looks to me like you have been reading too much information from Planned Parenthood.

I don't really want to argue with you or belabor any points. I really don't. If you are unhappy with the bill that was passed by both the Senate and House, please take that up with your elected officials, not argue & nitpick with me.

The whole thing may be struck down by our liberal US Supreme Court anyway so the whole big argument here may end up being a moot point. At any rate, please lets stick to ALL the facts, shall we?

 

Do you really believe both Houses would look at this bill & vote on this bill time and time again if it was already Illegal? Surely you can't believe that.

There's nothing to "believe". All elective late term abortions are illegal, including, but not limited to, PBA's. As I've already stated in a previous post, the issue lawmakers had with the bill is the absence of the health exception. All this law does is remove PBA's from the list of non-elective abortion procedures that can be performed.

Of the 30 states that have legislation similar to this bill, 20 of those states have had the legislation struck down, notably because of the absence of a health exception.

The law which just passed is likely to meet the same fate. Had the health exception been included, it is likely that a court would uphold the law, rather than strike it down.

Aborted babies are sold for their tissue, plain & simple. Abortion is taking (murder) of an innocent life.
Sale of fetal tissue is a different issue entirely than that of this bill. Further, the topic of elective first and second trimester abortion is a completely different issue, which this bill does not cover.

Abortion is taking (murder) of an innocent life.
Even in cases of ectopic pregnancies? Even in cases of anencephalic fetuses? Even in cases of a dead fetus?

I applaud the House & Senate for passing this bill once again. They have done it in the past, only to have it vetoed by then President Bill Clinton.
Bill Clinton wanted the health exception. He made that clear. He said if the bill had included the health exception, he would have signed it (even to the dismay of staunch proabortion folks at the time). If there was enough support, congress still could have passed it after the veto, but the support simply wasn't there.

Your concern regarding health of the mother has been and can be stretched to include such things as "depression." I am happy with the bill as it is, even if you are not.
Then have a mental health exclusion, rather than exclude physical health.

[ June 06, 2003, 05:43 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]