Supreme Court upholds the partial birth abortion law

[acemona]

55% of the American People believe that abortion should be legal in most cases. 16% (included in the 55) believe that it should be legal in all cases.

 

43% believe is should be illegal in most cases, and only 12% (included in the 43%) believe it should be illegal in ALL cases.

 

Which means, 86% of the public can see a case where an abortion should be legal.

 

Which part of the democratic party encompasses 86, or even 55 percent of the American people?

 

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

[ladiesbballcoach]

I think common people who proclaim themselves to be anti-abortion are genuine, for the most part. Politicians who bill themselves as such, on the other hand, I'm skeptical. Were those pols to lose access to their wedge issue through a repeal of R v. W, many of the single-issue voters out there — LBBC is a prime example — might abandon GOP voting in droves.

 

The national Republican Party does not want R v. W to be repealed for fear of losing votes.

Just to be clear, if a Democrat campaigned on a pro-life platform, they would get my full attention. For me, it is not a strict GOP only issue, it just seems that the GOP are the only ones putting forth candidates that hold my view of the matter. At least, that is what they are campaigning.

 

I understand JS's point on the abortion issue and concede that it is a way to pull in votes for them. But unfortunately, the Democrats are not only giving me no candidates to consider that mirror my view on the matter but are actually giving me candidates that stand in stark contrast to my view.

[Hearsay]

55% of the American People believe that abortion should be legal in most cases. 16% (included in the 55) believe that it should be legal in all cases.

 

43% believe is should be illegal in most cases, and only 12% (included in the 43%) believe it should be illegal in ALL cases.

 

Which means, 86% of the public can see a case where an abortion should be legal.

 

Which part of the democratic party encompasses 86, or even 55 percent of the American people?

 

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

 

Of course, using these same numbers, 84% of the people believe that there are types of abortions that we should not allow. Where do you think DNX abortions fall on that spectrum???:sssh:

[scooterbob]

The U.S. Constitution does not provide a right to privacy as we "understand" it today. A liberal court found this phantom right in Griswold v Connecticut. This case layed the foundation for Roe v Wade and many other "extended rights" decisions.

 

I have read an interesting slant on this decision. It is reported that some liberal groups believe the decision is unconstitutional because it violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. How did these "learned" groups arrive at this conclusion? They cite the fact that the five justices who made up the majority are all Catholic. Thus, their religious beliefs entered into their decision. Ridiculous? Of course. However, don't be surprised if you hear such nonsense in the liberal media.

 

Roe v Wade is a poorly written decision (by Justice Blackmun). However, it will not be overturned because it is established precedent. However, it is reasonable to assume that it, and the later decisions based upon it as a foundation, may be restricted by less activist courts. I certainly hope and pray that this is true.

[HHSDad]

55% of the American People believe that abortion should be legal in most cases. 16% (included in the 55) believe that it should be legal in all cases.

 

43% believe is should be illegal in most cases, and only 12% (included in the 43%) believe it should be illegal in ALL cases.

 

Which means, 86% of the public can see a case where an abortion should be legal.

 

Which part of the democratic party encompasses 86, or even 55 percent of the American people?

 

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

We're not talking abortion in general, we're talking about a particular procedure calle partial birth abortion. And if you look at your polling data, the most recent poll says 61% think the procedure should be banned. Only 28% disagree with that.

[acemona]

My poll was really just so show that using abortion, in general, as a wedge issue no longer really favors republican candidates.

 

BTW Hearsay did you see the recent Herald Leader article talking about what this decision really does. It simply changes where the fetus is when the action takes place, and places the woman's life in danger.

 

One of the editorials copied in there also talked about it not being an issue of privacy, but of control, and who has control of medical decisions. Many on the right don't want universal health care b/c they don't want government making medical decisions, but they do want the government making decisions here. Amazing.

[Habib]

My poll was really just so show that using abortion, in general, as a wedge issue no longer really favors republican candidates.

 

BTW Hearsay did you see the recent Herald Leader article talking about what this decision really does. It simply changes where the fetus is when the action takes place, and places the woman's life in danger.

 

 

I checked with some OB/GYN clients. Fetuses suffering from severe hydrocephalus can be safely (for the mother) removed by Caesarian section. The adavantage the DNX gives the parents is that it quite kills the baby, assuring them that they won't have to take a defective baby home. Its not a given that hydrocephalus will leave your child brain damaged. I had a friend growing up who had it and he was perfectly normal, other than having a very large head.

 

Other reasons why DNX is not as safe as it's made out to be:

-IDX requires a larger dilation of the cervix than D&E.

-Podalic version (turning the fetus into a breech position) can be dangerous to the woman.

-The incision in the fetal skull is made blind; the physician may miss and injure the woman's cervix.

 

It seems like it is not a safe procedure and there are equal methods to get around it.

 

One of the editorials copied in there also talked about it not being an issue of privacy, but of control, and who has control of medical decisions. Many on the right don't want universal health care b/c they don't want government making medical decisions, but they do want the government making decisions here. Amazing.

 

I don't see where privacy fits into this. The state has a compelling interest to protect life, and if the majority feel that life begins at the end of the second trimester, then with our form of government that's where it will be regulated. I certainly feel the Constitution entitles me to essential liberties, including privacy. Of course, I define privacy as protection from government intrusion into my home, illegal searches, and personal choices, not a facade to hide behind and do any number of illegal activities so long as they are not done in the public eye.