Supreme Court upholds the partial birth abortion law

[ladiesbballcoach]

This law will go a long way to saving a lot of children's lives.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-18-partial-birth-ruling_N.htm

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long-awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.

The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman's constitutional right to an abortion.

The administration defended the law as drawing a bright line between abortion and infanticide.

 

The decision pitted the court's conservatives against its liberals, with President Bush's two appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, siding with the majority.

 

Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia also were in the majority.

 

More than 1 million abortions are performed in the United States each year, according to recent statistics. Nearly 90% of those occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, and are not affected by Wednesday's ruling.

[ladiesbballcoach]

As a voter who has been honest and open that I vote on the abortion issue when choosing a President, this is about the best I could hope for right now in my vote having been cast for GW both in 2000 and 2004. Don't believe this bill would have ever been put in place with Gore or Kerry let alone the Supreme Court to uphold it with 2 Democrat appointed justices.

 

From the article.........

In 2000, the court with key differences in its membership struck down a state ban on partial-birth abortions. Writing for a 5-4 majority at that time, Justice Breyer said the law imposed an undue burden on a woman's right to make an abortion decision.

 

The Republican-controlled Congress responded in 2003 by passing a federal law that asserted the procedure is gruesome, inhumane and never medically necessary to preserve a woman's health. That statement was designed to overcome the health exception to restrictions that the court has demanded in abortion cases.

 

But federal judges in California, Nebraska and New York said the law was unconstitutional, and three appellate courts agreed. The Supreme Court accepted appeals from California and Nebraska, setting up Wednesday's ruling.

[Habib]

A bit surprised it was a 5-4 decision...

[Hearsay]

A bit surprised it was a 5-4 decision...

 

Nope. Falls right down predictable lines. Key: Roberts convinced Kennedy (the clear swing-voter) to write the opinion. Anybody who doesn't think Roberts' appointment as Chief won't have monumental implications for the future is deluding themselves.

 

Remember his hearings, when he was so much smarter than everyone else in the room and made them look like idiots? And how he responded to Schumer that "he would follow established precedent" when deciding issues of abortion? And I told everyone on here that the "precedent" he referred to was Casey and not Roe, and that Schumer wasn't smart enough to figure that out? You might note the precedent cited by Kennedy in his opinion.

[Habib]

Nope. Falls right down predictable lines. Key: Roberts convinced Kennedy (the clear swing-voter) to write the opinion. Anybody who doesn't think Roberts' appointment as Chief won't have monumental implications for the future is deluding themselves.

 

Remember his hearings, when he was so much smarter than everyone else in the room and made them look like idiots? And how he responded to Schumer that "he would follow established precedent" when deciding issues of abortion? And I told everyone on here that the "precedent" he referred to was Casey and not Roe, and that Schumer wasn't smart enough to figure that out? You might note the precedent cited by Kennedy in his opinion.

 

I realize it followed the ideological lines of the Court, but Partial-Birth Abortion really serves no cause and is a considerably egregious practice. Even Roe allowed the government to restrict abortions in the latter stages of pregnancy. I presumed it would have a bit garnered a few more votes.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I realize it followed the ideological lines of the Court, but Partial-Birth Abortion really serves no cause and is a considerably egregious practice. Even Roe allowed the government to restrict abortions in the latter stages of pregnancy. I presumed it would have a bit garnered a few more votes.

And thus the importance of not voting for a President who supports abortion rights when casting your vote for President. The votes pretty much went along party lines.

 

I have been lamblasted on here for "what did I expect the President to do" in casting my vote based on the abortion issue. This is an example. Hopefully, the vote in 2008 will help the cause and not hurt it.

 

This is not gloating because I think the BEST way to stop this horrible practice is to change the hearts of those choosing to have abortions. But a two-prong approach stops some abortions while the long-term approach of trying to change the mindset and hearts of society is taking it's time.

[Tough as Nails]

:dancingpa :dancingpa :dancingpa

 

In my opinion, our country hit a new low when the law allowing partial birth abortion was signed. How can anyone in their right mind think that the procedure qualifies as abortion? The child is being born for pete's sake.

 

This is not only a win for the pro-lifers, but also for unborn children. However, I don't know if we will ever see the overturn of Roe v. Wade, but at least we now have the precedent set for this law not coming back.

[HHSDad]

I haven't read the opinion, but I would think that this is not going to be as far reaching as either side believes it will be. The DNX procedure was repulsive and inhumane. Yes, its a victory for the prolife side. But I think it may have saved the ProChoice crowd from themselves. The more extreme they became in their views, the more likely they were to lose all but the most fanatical support for their views.

[Jumper_Dad]

This was a win for my personal beliefs. I do not have a problem with early term abortions from a legal standpoint just from a moral one. I however am appalled by late term abortions. I think they are morally and legally wrong. I have never heard a well thought out argument for them. Even if I did I would not change my mind on late term abortions.

 

This is one thing that GWB can look back on and know his court picks made the difference.

[True blue (and gold)]

This was a win for my personal beliefs. I do not have a problem with early term abortions from a legal standpoint just from a moral one. I however am appalled by late term abortions. I think they are morally and legally wrong. I have never heard a well thought out argument for them. Even if I did I would not change my mind on late term abortions.

 

This is one thing that GWB can look back on and know his court picks made the difference.

 

I was getting ready to post the same thing. However, I couldn't have said it better.

[halfback20]

This was a win for my personal beliefs. I do not have a problem with early term abortions from a legal standpoint just from a moral one. I however am appalled by late term abortions. I think they are morally and legally wrong. I have never heard a well thought out argument for them. Even if I did I would not change my mind on late term abortions.

 

This is one thing that GWB can look back on and know his court picks made the difference.

 

 

:thumb: I'm 100 % against partial birth abortions, and any other abortion for that matter. Some may not believe that...but it's true. :lol:.

[Habib]

I haven't read the opinion, but I would think that this is not going to be as far reaching as either side believes it will be. The DNX procedure was repulsive and inhumane. Yes, its a victory for the prolife side. But I think it may have saved the ProChoice crowd from themselves. The more extreme they became in their views, the more likely they were to lose all but the most fanatical support for their views.

 

I hadn't thought of that, but that really makes a lot of sense.

[acemona]

The scariest part of this whole thing (outside of your moral beliefs) is that now the supreme court has decided that a medical procedure performed in the privacy of a doctor's office with the consent of the patient is illegal. What a slippery slope we follow.

 

I am opposed to transplants on moral grounds (not really) but I begin working to ban the procedure based on my moral convictions . . . I work to elect a president who is also against transplants . . . she gets elected and appoints supreme court justices that agree with her positions.

 

Transplants are now banned.

 

See how scary the possibility is . . .

[Habib]

The scariest part of this whole thing (outside of your moral beliefs) is that now the supreme court has decided that a medical procedure performed in the privacy of a doctor's office with the consent of the patient is illegal. What a slippery slope we follow.

 

I am opposed to transplants on moral grounds (not really) but I begin working to ban the procedure based on my moral convictions . . . I work to elect a president who is also against transplants . . . she gets elected and appoints supreme court justices that agree with her positions.

 

Transplants are now banned.

 

See how scary the possibility is . . .

 

I agree with that, but at the same time, from the opposite side, what if someone supported it so much they wanted to have their child put to sleep after birth if they had some sort of birth defect, and worked to have a like-minded individual put into office. I think the slope goes both ways, and I can certainly live with partial-birth abortion being on the losing end.

[acemona]

That is the whole point when you work to have YOUR/MY morals legislated.

 

If we can't all agree on when LIFE begins, and we can't, then you let the Doctor and her patient make the call, otherwise YOU (the general you) need to be ready to step in and make all of my medical decisions.

 

That worked so well with Terry Schiavo.