Breaking: Supreme Court Upholds ‘Partial Birth’ Abortion Ban
Breaking: Supreme Court Upholds ‘Partial Birth’ Abortion Ban
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court has upheld a nationwide ban on “partial birth” abortion, “marking a shift on the high-profile issue and underscoring the impact of President George W. Bush’s two high court appointments.”
The justices “refused to invalidate the 2003 law even though it lacks an exception for cases posing a risk to the mother’s health. The court also rejected claims that the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act is so vaguely worded it would force doctors to forgo a commonly used, constitutionally protected abortion technique for fear of prosecution. ”
UPDATE: In the majority were swing vote Anthony Kennedy, along with Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Scalia, and Thomas.
UPDATE II: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg penned a scathing dissent:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, speaking out in the courtroom for the dissenters, called the ruling “an alarming decision” that refuses “to take seriously” the Court’s 1992 decisions reaffirming most of Roe v. Wade and its 2000 decision in Stenberg v. Carhart striking down a state partial-birth abortion law.
Ginsburg, in a lengthy statement, said “the Court’s opinion tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. For the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception protecting a woman’s health.”
UPDATE III: Justice Clarence Thomas authored, and Justice Antonin Scalia joined, a 137-word concurring opinion, which appears to have the sole purpose of stating: “I write separately to reiterate my view that the CourtÂ’s abortion jurisprudence, including Casey and Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973), has no basis in the Constitution.”
UPDATE IV: The nation’s leading group of professionals providing health care for women, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, opposed this law because the banned procedure is often the best option for women:
The intact variant of D&E offers significant safety advantages over the non-intact method, including a reduced risk of catastrophic hemorrhage and life-threatening infection. These safety advantages are widely recognized by experts in the field of women’s health, authoritative medical texts, peer-reviewed studies, and the nation’s leading medical schools.
UPDATE V: Steve Benen: Elections have consequences.
UPDATE VI: Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): “I am disappointed. Criminalizing doctors for performing medically necessary procedures to save a woman’s life or protect her health is wrong. The Court’s decision is a significant step backwards.”
UPDATE VII: In light of today’s ruling, Marty Lederman updates his post on the “profound effects” that Justice O’Connor’s retirement is having on the court.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Neocons have taken over the Supreme Court and are setting up their agenda. Goodbye freedom, it’s was nice to have known you.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:22 amgreat day for america
April 18th, 2007 at 10:23 amA blow to the left’s culture of death.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:23 amWe saw this coming. What with Bush getting the opportunity to propose a relatively large number of justices, and with a good little submissive rubberstamp congress to help, what were we to expect?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:24 amWhy does the media insist on using the pro-life term “Partial Birth” when referring to late term abortions? The procedure is called a dilation and extraction and no birth is involved.
Using emotionally charged words like Partial Birth plays right into the hands of the abortion foes. Personally I find abortion a very sad alternative, but it is one that could be necessary in the event of a problem or to save a mother’s life. As birth control, it is abhorrent, but I still believe it should be legal, safe and rare.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:25 amI can’t even imagine doing that to my own child, so I am glad that they upheld the law. It just seems so cruel. I am pro-choice, but I think there should be time limits. Let’s just hope this doesn’t end up taking all rights away to choose.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:25 amhere we go
April 18th, 2007 at 10:26 amMeanwhile, the Carnage continues in Iraq. None of this makes any sense.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:28 amLife, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. At least the USSC is finally coming back to the first part. We still have some work to do on the other two.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:28 amA blow to the left’s culture of death.
Comment by Patrick1
And just what do you call the “War in Iraq”?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:29 amFor the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception protecting a woman’s health.†- Ginsburg
And the court is smiling beatifically and making the sign of the cross as it goes about it’s business.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:30 amPatrick, I usually ignore you but I can’t this time. The “Left’s culture of death? That’s hilarious - how many people died in Iraq today … thinking, living, breathing human beings? 127? 130? Or doesn’t that matter to you? I guess you’re one of those “life begins at conception and ends at birth” idiots. You sicken me. Go to hell. This ban doesn’t even have a provision in it to save the life of the mother, which I guess to the Supreme Court was just hunky dorey - save the fetus and f*ck the mother. This is a national disgrace and I am disgusted with every Senator who voted to let Alito and Roberts get a free pass. These are activist judges, no matter how often that ridiculous term is used by the reichwing.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:31 amHardy Haberman:
Perhaps because the entire baby’s body except for the skull is “extracted”?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:31 amIdiots took over.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:34 amlack of gun control laws
pro death penalty
war in Iraq
tourture
global warming
and the left has a culture of death
April 18th, 2007 at 10:34 amHmmm.
I wasn’t even aware that “late term” abortions existed. I’ll have to think about this.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:34 am#
A blow to the left’s culture of death.
Comment by Patrick1 — April 18, 2007 @ 10:23 am
#
And when the mother-to-be dies because of a foreseen problem with the delivery of the fetus- that’s ok too?
a$$hole.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:35 amAnd just what do you call the “War in Iraq�
A battle against Islamo Fascism.
The USSC has struck a blow to stop the slide of post modern liberalism, where life hs no value as we saw the example of the results of such thinking two days ago at Virginia Tech.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:35 amThank Heaven! ~ perhaps this will someday be known as the begining of the end to the brutal practice of abortion.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:36 amI’m no expert on the subject, but I find it hard to believe that this type of abortion is “medically necessary”. There are other types of abortion, and abortion is usually not a medically necessary procedure.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:38 ampatrick, who writes your $hit? Is it Rove, Cheney, Eliot Abrahms? you can be that smart to push that many buttons.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:38 amyou should ask for a raise- you are obviously a paid plant.
The Dick and his son Junior . . . should have been an abortion.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:39 amso, now the very few women, who’s health and lives depend on the little used but necessary method of terminating a pregnancy, will be the victims of another wrongheaded policy…
this will not have a good ending… but will it placate the self-righteous for a while? … there will always be abortion - the right needs it to ignite their base, even more than some women need it…
“safe, rare and legal”… what is so hard to understand?…
April 18th, 2007 at 10:39 am…
Come on, ignore this idiot.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:41 amhow cute, patrick found comfort in the reichwing buzzword islamo fascism…. exactly how does that work patrick? islam and fascism together?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:41 amThanks for nothing Justice Kennedy.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:42 amSo, I wonder how Sandra Day OConnor’s husband’s health is these days.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:42 amInteresting how they chose now, during 24/7 coverage of the virginia incident, to uphold this ban.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:43 amThis has nothing to do with being medically necessary. This is about the inconvenience people find in having children. Kill them, problem solved.
It is the left’s belief that human life is meaningless and not a gift from God. You start with babies, then to the elderly, then to the mentally ill and eventually they get around to you. I’m glad the USSC is finally starting to say enough! And taking this back where it belongs in the arena of public debate.
The left knows they are wrong on this which is why they get upset when they lose their majority among nine people.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:43 amHoly rollers need to go away. I’m so sick of them forcing their own twisted morality onto everyone else.
It’s about time we stopped tip-toeing around the issue and call religion what it is: a mental disorder.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:44 amAnyone want to venture a guess as to how long this Massacre Porn news cycle will last? This is gonna be worse than the Anna Nicole story I think.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:47 amRoe V Wade was forcing and twisted morality onto everyone else.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:47 amPatrick1 sez:
As opposed to the right, who dispenses with all the intermediate steps and goes straight to you.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:48 amThe medical language for a late term abortion is “late term abortion”, not “partial birth”. “Partial birth” is a right-wing invention (like “pro-life”, “tax and spend”, and “cut and run”). These invented terms are used to mislead and manipulate. Every time we use any of these terms to debate issues, we buy into their misleading frames.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:48 amThe Right wing talking points about how “liberalism” is a cult of death. Yet it is the Republican Party that rakes in the most from the tobacco industry—-you know, smoking is a lifestyle choice—as opposed to being gay which they call a “deathstyle choice”.
They love the gun industry and the weapons and military industrial complex, you know those lovers of life!
Bush used the death penalty more than any governor in America.
There have been 3,300 US troops killed in Bush’s compassionate world…650,000 Iraqis(more today) in Bush’s compassionate, life loving world.
-GSD
April 18th, 2007 at 10:49 amlet the left have partial birth abortions…let the left have gay marriages…soon no more left of the Left..
April 18th, 2007 at 10:50 amFor example ape?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:50 amPARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION=INFANTACIDE=MURDER.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:51 amwHAT’S SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?
Patrick1 sez:
Really? I had no idea.
Please provide links detailing the incidents where a woman was forced to have an abortion as a result of this cruel and godless law.
TIA
April 18th, 2007 at 10:51 amThe Chrisitan Taleban are in control of the Sup’ Court now.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:51 amThe Chrisitan Taleban has started the US on the road to theocracy.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned the Republicans will get slaughtered at the polls.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:52 amIn the mean time, more Iraqis are killed more violently without regard to human health each day by Bush’s fiasco and approved of by the religious right.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:52 amWelcome to the age of the US Taliban. We are now on the road to the prohibition of the ability of a citizen to be able to take care of one’s issues without government interference. Is this now the age of the “neo-comintern” to quote a well-known political commentator?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:52 am“Holy rollers need to go away. I’m so sick of them forcing their own twisted morality onto everyone else.
It’s about time we stopped tip-toeing around the issue and call religion what it is: a mental disorder.”
———–
1st: you are pushing your morality just as much or more so than we are pushing ours.
- please stop pretending that you are morally neutral on this issue. because you are not. you have a morality which greatly differs with pro-life supporters
2nd: everyone has a right to contend for their beliefs in the public square, regardless of what they are.
3rd: abortion on demand is NOT supported by the majority of americans.
4th: if you want your positions to prevail in the public square, win elections, get the presidency and appoint judges.
elections have consequences folks.
I for one am very happy to see this ban upheld. the is never a need for it to “save the mother” if the baby is partially out of the mother “partial birth” then another few inches out and its born, those few inches dont determine the health of the mother, they determine the health of the child.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:52 amI dont know about all the details, but I do know alot of people (non-republicans) that dont like the idea of abortion after the first few months. I would think the concentration should be on how to save the baby AND the mother in late term situations… aka better science to solve that problem rather than late term abortions.
Personally I just dont feel right backing a no limits abortion system.
Its too bad the right has to be stupid and go too far and so does the left. It should be pretty simple to say no way after so many months and in all other circumstances it is the business ONLY of the mother and her doctor.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:53 amThis was the real “Mission Accomplished”. Damn.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:54 amRoe V Wade was forcing and twisted morality onto everyone else.
Comment by Patrick1
Nothing was forced on anyone. Your mentality is twisted.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:55 amHey you knew this was coming. How about a list of the vichy dems who voted for for scalito and roberts. We’re going to be stuck with those bastards for a long long time. Thanks LIEberman
April 18th, 2007 at 10:55 am#32 How exactly was Roe V Wade “forcing and (sic) twisted morality onto everyone else?” No one was being forced to have abortions; however, now women who may have needed to have an abortion to save their own lives will be forced to carry a baby to term.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:56 amSince we’ll probably still be in Iraq in 18 years, this is just a way of making sure that there is enough cannon fodder to be sent there…
April 18th, 2007 at 10:57 amCommon sense dictates that a Doctor will determine if a birth of a child will endanger a mother. The deliberate turning of a pre-born child to become a Breach Born is crazy to begin with. That’s the only way you could legally perform a late term abortion before this monumentous decision.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:57 amBefore you Anti-Choicers begin your high-5s, please take note in Section 111 you will see that ONLY 2 Justices Scalia and Thomas signed on to overturn Roe. This vote will only ban a certain procedure and will ban no abortions.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:58 amWhat is the process for impeachment of supreme court justices?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:58 amPat Robertson for Christian Mullah in 2008! No more gays! No more minorities! More executions! More domestic spying! More secret prisons! More torture and sexual humiliation!
-GSD
April 18th, 2007 at 10:58 ami Comment by chester — April 18, 2007 @ 10:52 am
Sadly, it appears you are not properly informed on that which you are happy to see banned.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:01 amNo one was being forced to have abortions; however, now women who may have needed to have an abortion to save their own lives will be forced to carry a baby to term.
can you give an example where partial birth abortion would be necessary for the health of the mother.
because docs have testified to the fact that partial birth abortion is never necessary for the health of the mother.
if the child can be partially delivered and then killed, and have it be safe for the mother, then it is reasonable to believe that it can be fully delivered without harming the mother.
also , please note that i use the word child not fetus, if you insist on referring to the prego as a mother, then she must be with child.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:01 am#36 Ok, if you reichwingers won’t benefit from stem cell research and other health care and public health advances.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:02 amThis is indeed a great injustice and a removal of one of our most critical freedoms. The right of a mother to abort should be expanded not restricted. In fact, I believe a woman should have the right to abort even after delivery as long as the cord is still attached. After all, nothing has changed as far as the baby being part of the mother except for the baby’s venue. I also think there should be a 10 second rule. You know, like with a potato chip that falls on the ground. The mother should have the right to abort within 10 seconds of the cord being cut. This is an outrageous restriction on our freedoms. I think it’s time to move to Cuba.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:03 amLet’s not get hysterical, my fellow lefties.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:03 amNote what the Supreme Court did here. It refused to invalidate a law of congress. Good for them. The less role unelected judges have in policy making the better.
Us lefties are supposed to be pro-democratic debate, no? Good, then let’s stop relying on unlected judges to win our arguments and let’s persuade congress to change the law.
#32 “How exactly was roe v wade forcing twisted morality onto everyone else?”
DUH! The innocent are being SUCKED INTO A SINK!!!! all in the sanitized name of “choice.”
You people who believe in abortion HAVE NO SOUL.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:03 amI for one am very happy to see this ban upheld. the is never a need for it to “save the mother†if the baby is partially out of the mother “partial birth†then another few inches out and its born, those few inches dont determine the health of the mother, they determine the health of the child.
Comment by chester
I assume we may address you as Doctor Chester?
No? Didn’t think so.
Mind your own business.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:04 am>>”And when the mother-to-be dies because of a foreseen problem with the delivery of the fetus- that’s ok too?
>>a$$hole.”
Not being an MD like Seth, I guess I’d have to ask him under what circumstances that would occur. The AMA’s official stance is that the procedure is never medically required–but what do they know?
And, of course, delivery of a healthy baby via C-section is always an option, but that would leave the mother with an abdominal scar. Sure, she’d be alive and healthy as would her baby, but she might not be able to wear a thong to the beach for a year or so. Horrendous.
Guess my priorities are all screwed up. I don’t want to vacuum a baby’s brains out of his or her head for the sake of convenience.
Boy, am I an a$$hole.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:04 amYou people who believe in abortion HAVE NO SOUL.
Comment by pam
Here’s pam — she’s god.
How many abortions have you had?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:05 amliberalism, where life hs no value as we saw the example of the results of such thinking two days ago at Virginia Tech.
Comment by Patrick1 — April 18, 2007 @ 10:35 am
Your life has NO VALUE to anybody. I’m sure your mother wishes she’d aborted you every day of her life.
Interesting you blame VT on liberals since a wackjob foreign national had no problem getting weapons thanks to the rights gun laws. And he was a christian fundamentalist which is definitely not a liberal thing.
Not to mention liberals are not the pro war pro death penalty party. So take your pro death self and wait your turn to go “RIGHT” to hell.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:05 amDUH! The innocent are being SUCKED INTO A SINK!!!! all in the sanitized name of “choice.â€
Comment by pam
Hey, freak, I just put millions of innocents into a sock. I have no soul, but I would have a better day, thats for sure. ;)
April 18th, 2007 at 11:07 amThe Left considers the decapitation of unborn children a sacrament. Why not simply do what the Romans and Greeks did? Leave unwanted children to the vultures? It’s morally the same thing.
You folks are a bunch of totalitarian Communists.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:08 amfrom the UPDATE IV link:
Bush has had the Department of Justice defend the law all the way to the Supreme Court. A decision is expected from the Court by this June.
well, that’s fortuitously ahead of schedule… hmm?…
April 18th, 2007 at 11:08 amWhat a great day!
April 18th, 2007 at 11:10 amThe US has liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban, only to become like the Taliban itself :(
April 18th, 2007 at 11:10 amWhat is funny about the left wing comments on sites such as this is that they reveal character ~ or lack thereof. I’m not sure you really want your depravity exposed so very much, do you?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:10 amIf picture of these partial birth and other abortions could be published in the media, the public would be outraged that humans could treat humans so inhumanely.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:11 amIf abortionists were honest about their trade they would be put out of business.
We have more laws against animal abuse.
Do you “infanticide” screamers have any idea what a late term abortion is? It’s usually done because the baby has deformities and will probably not survive to delivery. An intact dilation allows parents to have a body to hold and mourn.
Abortions done in the last trimester are of children who were WANTED, by usually married parents, who were put in the horrible position of having a non-viable fetus.
These decisions should be left to the parents and their doctors. Banning this procedure (and using the vaguely defined term “partial-birth” can mean several different procedures) can mean injury and death for the mother. It could ruin her fertility–and remember, for those of you haters who want to punish “sluts”, most 3rd term abortions are of wanted children and with married parents. Should a family lose any chance of having children b/c the first was non-viable and her doctor was prevented from using a method that could have preserved her fertility?
If all of you who are applauding this decision actually knew someone who had to have the procedure, you would be singing a different tune.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:12 am#63: No, I am not God, but I have a good idea which side of the fence He comes down on.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:13 amThe anti-choice movement is about punishing people for having sex. It is religion being forced onto non-religious people.
It’s not a “baby”, it’s a fetus, a collection of cells. If you don’t want to have an abortion, don’t have one.
If you want to prevent an abortion, ADOPT THE FETUS OR STFU.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:14 amIf picture of these partial birth and other abortions could be published in the media, the public would be outraged that humans could treat humans so inhumanely.
If abortionists were honest about their trade they would be put out of business.
We have more laws against animal abuse.
Comment by Jeff
Ya I would say the same thing about all the Iraqi women and children… I have seen alot of their photos…. It really sucks looking at the picture of a young child with massive damage to their bodies and see the screaming in pain …and then know that was done in the name of America…
April 18th, 2007 at 11:15 amCan somebody please tell me how birthing a baby 3/4’s of the way and not all the way helps the health of the mother?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:16 amSelective indiginity. A victory cry for the unborn. Nary a shrug of the shoulder for another bomb killing 100’s in Iraq. Outraged at the senseless murders at VT. Couldn’t locate Darfur on a map.
Arguments lose their fire when it’s shown to be coming from a hypocrite.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:16 am#63: No, I am not God, but I have a good idea which side of the fence He comes down on.
Comment by pam
The side of unicorns and faires and dragons?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:16 amHillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and Jimmy Carter all had partial birth abortions so this ruling proves how bad people they are.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:16 amI’m not sure you really want your depravity exposed so very much, do you?
Comment by pam
Listen, Magdalena, why dont you go supporting pedophiles priests and spare me the moral lessons?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:16 amHey, freak, I just put millions of innocents into a sock. I have no soul, but I would have a better day, thats for sure. ;)
Comment by Juan C
Oh lordy….
April 18th, 2007 at 11:17 amChristianists think that women’s lives don’t matter. Only innocents, and any woman who happens to be pregnant is by their definition not “innocent.”
April 18th, 2007 at 11:17 am#70…Pam…one of the most depraved people in the world calling other people depraved…project much?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:18 am#63: No, I am not God, but I have a good idea which side of the fence He comes down on.
Comment by pam
I just talked to god, and she said ya’ll are sitting closest to the fire when we get to hell.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:18 amYou folks are a bunch of totalitarian Communists.
Comment by John R.
Your god didnt make the nuclear bomb… we humans did. Your fantasies about right and wrong has been proven irrelevant. Science is the marker not “faith”…
April 18th, 2007 at 11:18 amRantingTommy:
Many couples have to adopt out of the country because there is a shortage of babies up for adoption here. You are fine with laws than punish killers for the murder of born babies, right?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:19 amThe left’s view of life is so sick that they cry over the loss of a procedure whose single purpose is to kill a child days before it is born. Not to save the mother’s life but out of the inconvenience of that life. This cheap view of life leads to the mass murder of Monday at Virginia Tech.
Like the cheerleaders for abortion the sick boy at VT believed that life had no value; that because he felt like dying there was no point in others living.
Most modern liberalism is reaping what it sews, when you believe that there is no such thing as right or wrong only how I feel. When you believe that there is no absolute truth then you have to believe there is no absolute wrong. Sick narcissism is the main characteristic of the modern American left, where life is cheap and getting cheaper.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:19 amBushCo has the SCOTUS that he and the NeoCons have always wanted.
BushCo has destroyed the justice system in this country.
BushCo and his NeoCon enablers have destroyed the meaning of what America means to the rest of the civilized world with this reprehensible & illegal war.
BushCo tortures. Bushco renditions and kills.
Now do you understand why it is time to impeach?
We should be marching in the streets. Impeach!!
April 18th, 2007 at 11:19 ampam,
You didn’t answer my question about how many abortions you’ve had.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:20 amYou people who believe in abortion HAVE NO SOUL.
Comment by pam
Souls are no more real than your god.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:20 amAgain, there is no procedure called “partial birth abortion”, but one reason for a late term abortion would be pre-eclampsia or eclampsia/toxemia–extremely high blood pressure that can develop during a pregnancy that can lead to stroke, heart attack, and death for the mother before the baby is viable. The only cure is to deliver the baby.
Pregnancy is not safer than abortion. There are many possible complications, and many of those can lead to death or serious injury to the mother as well as the baby.
A woman can also suffer partial or full placental abruption. That is when the placenta detaches from the uterus. It can cause the mother to bleed to death.
Please note with these conditions, it’s not a case of a mother not wanting a child or not wanting to be inconvenienced. It’s a case of a pregnancy going wrong and endangering her life. Even if the baby is wanted, a late term abortion/D&E may be necessary to save the life or health of the mother.
Anyone who claims pregnancy is always safe and never endangers the life of the mother is a liar.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:20 amathena:
Some Christians want BOTH mother and child to live.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:21 amHow many murders have you committed Zooey?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:22 amZooey:
How many abortions have you had? I’ve had none. Does that mean I’m unqualified to debate the issue?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:22 amActually some of you need to have a vacuum inserted in the back of your skulls, except in this case they may not find any brains to be sucked out.
As of September 28, 2006, there have been 47,282,923 total abortions in America since 1973. This represents 3,542 innocent victims per day.
Yes, that is right, more babies are killed on average every day than have died in the entire Iraq conflict. Wake up. Morons.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:23 am#74 ggibson ~ Iraqi women and children WANT freedom ~ just like you. Freedom from terrorists who want to hijack their country, not from American soldiers who are giving their all ~ including their precious blood so that the Iraqi people can have a chance at LIFE.
the lack of morality on the left is simply stunning.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:23 amCaren:
Pregnancy IS safer than abortion for the child.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:24 amPam = Patrick1…both names start with “P”, both are dumb as rocks, both claim moral superiority, both hate America and our freedom.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:24 amIn the usual second-trimester procedure, “dilation
and evacuation (D&E), the doctor dilates the cervix and then inserts
surgical instruments into the uterus and maneuvers them to grab the
fetus and pull it back through the cervix and vagina. The fetus is
usually ripped apart as it is removed, and the doctor may take 10 to
15 passes to remove it in its entirety. The procedure that prompted
the federal Act and various state statutes, including Nebraskas, is a
variation of the standard D&E, and is herein referred to as intact
D&E. The main difference between the two procedures is that in intact
D&E a doctor extracts the fetus intact or largely intact with only
a few passes, pulling out its entire body instead of ripping it apart.
In order to allow the head to pass through the cervix, the doctor typically
pierces or crushes the skull.
Wow!! That’s cold.
Anthony
April 18th, 2007 at 11:25 amMany couples have to adopt out of the country because there is a shortage of babies up for adoption here. You are fine with laws than punish killers for the murder of born babies, right?
Comment by Elizabeth
Your straw man is burning. There are thousands of children waiting to be adopted in this country. But who cares about them? They’re BORN.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:25 am#12 Comment by CarolSoprano — April 18, 2007 @ 10:31 am
You are correct; Patrick and his ilk want these fetuses protected only to send them off to die in preemptive wars that are based on lies and deceit.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:25 amMany couples have to adopt out of the country because there is a shortage of babies up for adoption here.
Comment by Elizabeth
What a lie. There are many many many children in America that wished they lived in a real home with parents…
April 18th, 2007 at 11:25 amIn reality I think this action is just throwing a bone to the fundie wackos.
First very few of these procedures are done and when they are it’s usually because there is a problem with the fetus because very few women would stay pregnant that long if their plan was to terminate all along.
That being said, neither the Supreme Court or the neocons will be able to stop a woman from terminating a pregnancy. Women had abortions before Roe v. Wade and if a women feels the need to terminate a late term pregnancy there are medical procedures and conditions that will allow it to happen.
I love when the right is so stupid that they think they’ve accomplished something. What they’ve gotten today is lip service when what they really need is a bl*w j*b.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:26 amThe freedom to kill a baby?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:26 am“Many couples have to adopt out of the country because there is a shortage of babies up for adoption here. You are fine with laws than punish killers for the murder of born babies, right?
Comment by Elizabeth — April 18, 2007 @ 11:19 am”
WRONG!!!
They go out of country because it takes only MONTHS vs. YEARS to get a baby.
This is the reason….. There are PLENTY of children that can be adopted here, but it takes so long and costs much more than traveling overseas and doing it.
Please do some research!
April 18th, 2007 at 11:26 amto #88 Zoey,
Perish the thought. I have 5 children, one of whom has down syndrome. She is the light of my life and I thank my lucky stars every day for her. Actually, I thank God.
I don’t suppose you on the left could even begin to understand it.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:27 am#74 ggibson ~ Iraqi women and children WANT freedom ~ just like you. Freedom from terrorists who want to hijack their country, not from American soldiers who are giving their all ~ including their precious blood so that the Iraqi people can have a chance at LIFE.
the lack of morality on the left is simply stunning.
Comment by pam
Excellent post!
April 18th, 2007 at 11:28 amAs of September 28, 2006, there have been 47,282,923 total abortions in America since 1973.
Comment by slntnsnty
And this is any of your business how?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:28 amALL babies are “BORN babies”. If they aren’t born, they aren’t a baby yet. And, yes, murder of babies is, and always should be, illegal. But the topic is abortion of a fetus, not babies. Please try to keep up.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:30 amWhat a lie. There are many many many children in America that wished they lived in a real home with parents…
It is hard to find a baby to adopt in the U.S., which is why it is difficult. There are many older kids that can be adopted. There are also age restrictions for adopting an American baby.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:30 amHow many murders have you committed Zooey?
Comment by Patrick1
Last count….about 18. You?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:30 am#74 ggibson ~ Iraqi women and children WANT freedom ~ just like you. Freedom from terrorists who want to hijack their country, not from American soldiers who are giving their all ~ including their precious blood so that the Iraqi people can have a chance at LIFE.
the lack of morality on the left is simply stunning.
Comment by pam
Immoral liar. Americans killing Iraqis that never attacked us and long after saddam is out of power is not “freedom” … but hey many great criminals throughout history have covered their asses by saying they were killing the people for their own good….
April 18th, 2007 at 11:30 am“Yes, that is right, more babies are killed on average every day than have died in the entire Iraq conflict. Wake up. Morons.
Comment by slntnsnty — April 18, 2007 @ 11:23 am”
I love how the RIGHT cries for a unborn baby, but throws them to the side once they are born…..
You people are the MOST DISPICABLE on earth…… You have no concern about life after it exits that vagina!!!! It then becomes a person that needs to defend it’s self and take care of its self….
After all…. If anyone helps it then they are of the “socialist” mindset! So if the baby can’t take care of its self…. TOUGH!!!
Gotta love those repubs….
April 18th, 2007 at 11:31 amWow!! That’s cold.
Anthony
Comment by Anthony
Thats life… is cold when a child gets leukemia.. its cold when a storm blows a tree over onto the bed of a young girl and kills her… its cold when a country invades another and kills its civilians… thats life… your fantasies about a warm cudly god (except when he is killing people) is just that a fantasy.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:32 amRemoveBush:
Therefore, there are not enough babies up for adoption. I’m just responding to that point. Care to answer my other question though: You are fine with laws than punish killers for the murder of born babies, right?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:33 amTry to stay on topic, noone is talking about killing babies. A fetus is NOT a baby.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:33 amThis Supreme Court decision just brings the US to a III World Country.
And this is any of your business how?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:34 amComment by ggibson
Ha ha ha.
The left’s view of life is so sick that they cry over the loss of a procedure whose single purpose is to kill a child days before it is born
Comment by Patrick1inch — April 18, 2007 @ 11:19 am
I was not goint to post on this thread, because the hyprocrisy is just overwhelming (also, my view on this subject is quite moderate. I’m not a firm supporter for abortions, but I’m not a zealous protestor, either. I believe in education for the confused mothers, as well as adoption choices), but then this post by Patrick1inch is totally false, so I will try to clear it up
April 18th, 2007 at 11:34 amA partial birth abortion is a political term, not a medical term (I think the medical term is D&X) It is done in 0.2% of all abortions, and is usually done in the 20th week of pregnancy, not the 40th week as Patrick1inch suggests. The actual procedure, though, is quite horrific, and has been performed on healthy moth rs, to which I totally disagree.
Now, that being said, feel free to flame away (I’s a big boy, I’s can take it), but understand that ultimately, I feel the choice is the woman’s, not our male majority congress’
The freedom to kill a baby?
Comment by Patrick1
Word games dont change reality.
Its not a baby… and its not mission accomplished…
April 18th, 2007 at 11:34 amPerish the thought. I have 5 children, one of whom has down syndrome. She is the light of my life and I thank my lucky stars every day for her. Actually, I thank God.
I don’t suppose you on the left could even begin to understand it.
Comment by pam
I guess we on the left are not human, is that it? We have no chiildren, no families, nothing.
I too have a child with a disability. What’s your point?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:35 am“Caren:
Pregnancy IS safer than abortion for the child.
Comment by Elizabeth — April 18, 2007 ”
you forgot to add: “and if it weren’t for those pesky doctors and their hippocratic oath, the mother’s health could be ignored completely!”
April 18th, 2007 at 11:35 amThe trolls are paid to come here and be a speed bump or spider’s web. Their job is to tie you up in endless arguement and waste your time and energy. Don’t play their game. Use your precious skills, time and energy to write editorials for newspapers and call your representatives. Its easy to fall into troll quicksand. Be smarter and avoid the trap.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:35 am“It is hard to find a baby to adopt in the U.S., which is why it is difficult. There are many older kids that can be adopted. There are also age restrictions for adopting an American baby.
Comment by rabidbunny — April 18, 2007 @ 11:30 am”
My case in point!!!!!
ONCE it’s born…. To hell with them!!!!!
If your so concerned about children, notice I said children because a baby is a child also, then go and adopt!!! Otherwise, YOU are a postering HYPOCRITE!!!!
Save the baby, kill the child!
April 18th, 2007 at 11:35 amZooey, ggibson, RantingTommy:
Are you claiming there is NOT a shortage of babies available for adoption in the U.S.?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:36 amPregnancy IS safer than abortion for the child.
Comment by Elizabeth
That’s a lie.
Prove your statement is correct. Only links from reputable medical sites, please.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:37 amThe only good thing about liberal moonbats such as you is that your inability to reproduce restricts your potential for seizing power. So in one sense, perhaps you should keep killing your offspring.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:37 amAre you claiming there is NOT a shortage of babies available for adoption in the U.S.?
Comment by Elizabeth
There is no difference. Baby == cute ..child == not so cute??? Is that how you judge these children? They were babies before they grew up as orphans because people wouldnt adopt them.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:40 amLast count….about 18. You?
Comment by Zooey
Its not a baby… and its not mission accomplished…
Comment by ggibson
You are kicking ass. I am laughing so hard now!!
April 18th, 2007 at 11:40 am“Therefore, there are not enough babies up for adoption. I’m just responding to that point. Care to answer my other question though: You are fine with laws than punish killers for the murder of born babies, right?
Comment by Elizabeth — April 18, 2007 @ 11:33 am”
Unlike the RIGHT…… If a mother is not going to be able to take care of the child, I would rather see her abort it than bring it into a life of missery!!!!
I care more for what the child will have to endure with a life that the mother will not be able to care for them or that they will end up in a orphanage….
Since YOU are more concerned about the baby then the CHILD, I see you care not one once of concern for those children living thier lives in orphanages…..
It’s one thing if the parents die and the child has no one else to take care of them for them to end up in there, but many are there because the parents cannot/will not take care of them……
But the RIGHT does not give a rats A$$ about that……… They saved the baby….. YEAH!!!!! Everyone go home now and let someone else worry about the child…… They are on thier own, and best wishes to them…..
April 18th, 2007 at 11:41 ammen dealing in womens issues. and they continue to get it wrong.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:42 amAh the Right Wing.
They love your fetus, but hate your kid.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:42 am#118 to Zooey : The point is that we now have a test to determine whether or not a baby in the womb has down syndrome or some other possible malady. 90% of these children are now aborted! This sounds suspicously like “the final solution” to me and it makes me heartsick to think about it.
This is what the culture of death (your precious abortion sacrament)has given us.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:42 amIf a woman in the late term of her pregnancy says: “I feel something is wrong, and if I go thru with this pregnancy it will kill me.”
If the doctor says: “I do not think anything is wrong, but women do unexpectly die in childbirth in many cases where we doctors think there is nothing wrong, because we are imperfect doctors and not perfect fortune tellers.
If the laws says: “We do not give a damn about what you and your imune system think, we demand that you go through with something that can and does kill X number of women per year, because anti-abortionists religioous ideas are more important than your life.”
If that woman is denied that late term abortion, and dies in childbirth:
Are you anti-abortionists going to plead guilty of murder in this case, because you preventing her from having the late term abortion that she said she needed to not die in childbirth?
If you anti-abortionist are not willing to plead guilty of murder in this case, then why should we not arrest you and put you on trial for murder and punish you with the death penalty if all life is so “sacred”?
Surely the women’s life is just as if not more “sacred” than the life of a fetus?
Why do anti-abortionists REFUSE to debate this case, but IGNORE it?
Why the hell are MEN deciding this case anyway?
Should not the MEN on the Supreme court have recused themselves from this case, because it is impossible for them to be affected by the ramifications of this decision?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:43 amZooey:
Even a 1% chance of a child surving pregnancy is better than ZERO percent chance surviving an abortion. What “link” do you think I need to prove that?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:43 amThe only good thing about liberal moonbats such as you is that your inability to reproduce restricts your potential for seizing power
Comment by slntnsnty(I’d like to by a vowel!) — April 18, 2007 @ 11:37 am
Umm, I have 4 children (17, 5,5, and 3)
April 18th, 2007 at 11:43 amKinda defeats your statement, eh slntnsnty
Good Morning Lady Z and Juan C…Here we go again with the reich winged, bible thumping, anti choice people who don’t realy give a damn that thousand’s of men, women and children are dieing in Iraq at bull shit bush’s hand but they come on this thread and play the pios and enraged over abortion….Well folk’s wake the hell up, bush was for abortion when it suited him and paid a girl friend to have one….Many troll’s here either can’t get an abortion because they are male and many other’s are to young to even make a baby if they could round up a woman stupid enough to sleep with them…Geees…Why don’t you troll’s get a true grip and go after the mass murderer you voted for instead of screaming about a procedure you can not eliminate no matter what you do…One way or the other doctors and patience will take care of this issue when it is needed or else women will be forced like in the past to get illegal back street abortion’s and many will die..This is a woman’s issue only, it is our body….Another point that was brought home to me the other day…There are more women than men in our country and the world, it’s about time we took the stand further and removed all remain’s of the reich wingers and neo-con’s…It will happen, you troll’s are becoming obsolete….Get over it and get the hell back to red state sites….Blessings
April 18th, 2007 at 11:43 amAre you claiming there is NOT a shortage of babies available for adoption in the U.S.?
Comment by Elizabeth
Are you kidding me? Do you know how many children there are in foster homes or orphanages in the US?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:44 amThe problem is most most people like you want a perfect “white” baby, the hell with the children that already do not have a home.
My case in point!!!!!
ONCE it’s born…. To hell with them!!!!!
If your so concerned about children, notice I said children because a baby is a child also, then go and adopt!!! Otherwise, YOU are a postering HYPOCRITE!!!!
Save the baby, kill the child!
Comment by RemoveBush
My second son was adopted, and he was 5 at the time. He is now 11. For the adoption argument, if the babies were given up for adoption right after birth they would have no trouble being adopted. So it really isn’t a case of after they are born the hell with them. Fact is people want babies, it’s human nature to want to care for a child from the beginning. Sad, but I don’t see that changing.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:45 amAnd, of course, delivery of a healthy baby via C-section is always an option, but that would leave the mother with an abdominal scar. Sure, she’d be alive and healthy as would her baby, but she might not be able to wear a thong to the beach for a year or so. Horrendous
Comment by Ted — April 18, 2007 @ 11:04 am
You think women have late term abortions to avoid a C-section scar. Basically babies flip around until the day of delivery so how would a woman know she needed a c-section.
And there are drugs that can be used to induce labor at any time during pregnancy and a HEALTHY fetus, after 26 weeks has a good chance of surviving. So if you anti-abortion folks want this to be the standard of practice so be it.
Under this procedure the woman has to be hospitalized and medicated and go through a much longer delivery than a normal pregnancy because her cervix is not dialated and ready for delivery. And the medication costs about $750 a dose.
Then of course the baby will need months of neonatal care at about $250,000 a week if it healthy to begin with. Since most late term abortions are because the fetus has some serious abnormality which boost the medical care up from months to a lifetime.
These costs will have to be paid by the government because obviously the mother, who was deprived her right to choice, can’t be expected to pay millions of dollars because you demanded she not have an abortion.
But it’s all good because on of you fundies will no doubt want to “foster care” one of these disabled infants so you can collect that check every month. What, are you saying the money isn’t enough to make caring for that child who will never walk or talk or eat or even breathe on a regular basis practical. Now what?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:46 amggibson:
There is no baby (less than 1 year old) that cannot be adopted here in the U.S. if he or she is legally up for adoption. That being said, I understand that older children are harder to adopt out. RantingTommy said above: If you want to prevent an abortion, ADOPT THE FETUS OR STFU.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:46 amSharon, thank you for showing who the left is. A bunch of lying, sad, sorry little sick people ~ not to mention mental midgets.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:46 amAre you claiming there is NOT a shortage of babies available for adoption in the U.S.?
Comment by Elizabeth
There is no shortage of CHILDREN available for adoption in this country. That’s what I said.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:47 amIf a woman in the late term of her pregnancy says: “I feel something is wrong, and if I go thru with this pregnancy it will kill me.â€
If the doctor says: “I do not think anything is wrong, but women do unexpectly die in childbirth in many cases where we doctors think there is nothing wrong, because we are imperfect doctors and not perfect fortune tellers.
Comment by criticalthinker
If you can post one link of a stituation where a woman has said “I feel something is wrong, and if I go thru with this pregnancy it will kill me.†and the doctor saying that she is fine only to have the woman die during delivery I will re-think my stance on this issue. However, I believe you are simply creating a false hypothetical.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:48 amEven a 1% chance of a child surving pregnancy is better than ZERO percent chance surviving an abortion. What “link†do you think I need to prove that?
Comment by Elizabeth
Abortion is safer than pregnancy FOR THE WOMAN.
Remember her?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:49 amRemoveBush, theswan, and “critical”thinker:
I am a woman. Can I participate in the debate then?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:49 amIt is sad to recall that significant numbers of Democrats supported the legislation that so jeopardized women’s health and reproductive rights:
Congress passed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 on October 22, 2003. Large numbers of Democrats joined a nearly unanimous GOP in both houses; the bill passed 63-34 in the Senate, and 281-142 in the House. President Bush signed it into law at a White House ceremony on November 5.
For the disturbing history, see:
April 18th, 2007 at 11:49 am“Slippery Slope: Democratic Wavering in the Battle for Reproductive Rights.”
#120–WELL SAID!!!
Stop being baited by morons like pam, patrick1, etc. let them post and ignore them. they live to engage us and if we ignore them, well, they’ll go away!!
come on people! dont let them get the better of you!!
April 18th, 2007 at 11:49 amSharon, thank you for showing who the left is. A bunch of lying, sad, sorry little sick people ~ not to mention mental midgets.
Comment by pam — April 18, 2007 @ 11:46 am
Care to debate that, pam? I’m right here, my lunch hour is near, so I won’t be going anywhere.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:50 amThe ball is in your court. Let’s go!!!
Wayne:
Most of the babies adopted from outside the U.S. are not the perfect “white†baby either.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:50 amslntztdy: “perhaps you should keep killing your offspring”
Abortion rates are higher in red states than blue states. Check the CDC website.
Conservatives are doing their touchdown dances today. But, oh, oh. The only people who will be happy with this decision are people who would vote for the repub anyway. There are millions of moderate women considering a vote for Hillary Clinton. There are lots of moderately conservative republican women leaning in her direction. This decision may result in 10 to 20 million votes for democrats.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:51 amPam ~
You’re making me ANGRY. Please do not invoke my name in you political agenda.
I’ve got my EYE on you.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:52 amFact is people want babies, it’s human nature to want to care for a child from the beginning. Sad, but I don’t see that changing.
Comment by rabidbunny
So all those poor girls getting knocked up are a perfect source for all the barren middle class couples longing for that little baby.
Hey, that “abstinence only” program really is working!
We could call it “Baby Mining.” That’s cool.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:53 am“If men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament” Gloria Steinham
Truer words were never spoken.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:54 am#145 comment by kip. So the only way you can “win” an argument with a conservative is to give up?
Hilarious, and thank you.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:54 amFact is people want babies, it’s human nature to want to care for a child from the beginning. Sad, but I don’t see that changing.
Comment by rabidbunny
So, when you support bombing Iraqi children, do you consider them also…human??
April 18th, 2007 at 11:54 am“Then of course the baby will need months of neonatal care at about $250,000 a week if it healthy to begin with. Since most late term abortions are because the fetus has some serious abnormality which boost the medical care up from months to a lifetime. ”
And don’t forget, if this baby is born in Texas, they stand the chance of being killed by the hospital under the Futile Care Act. More Republican Culture of Death.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:55 am“I am a woman. Can I participate in the debate then?
Comment by Elizabeth — April 18, 2007 @ 11:49 am”
And what does that have to do with anything????
It’s WOMEN who are having Abortions, not men……. So your comment is the most rediculouos dribble I have ever come across…..
April 18th, 2007 at 11:55 amPam, since you obviously believe abortion procedures should be illegal, please tell us. Should a woman who is pregnant but can’t handle another pregnancy be forced to carry her pregnancy to term? How does that work? Would you build “pregnancy camps?” Would these camps have fences? Armed guards? Would a woman who contracted an abortion provider for the procedure be subject to criminal santions. Would she go to jail? If she was jailed and had other children, who would take care of them? If a doctor was jailed, would the state make sure people in his/her area had proper medical care.
You’re the one who wants this to be illegal. Could you explain some of the details to us on how this will work in the real world?
April 18th, 2007 at 11:56 amCare to debate that, pam? I’m right here, my lunch hour is near, so I won’t be going anywhere.
The ball is in your court. Let’s go!!!
Comment by DRxJ
You go, DRxJ. Sharon doesn’t deserve that.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:56 amMost of the babies adopted from outside the U.S. are not the perfect “white†baby either.
Comment by Elizabeth
As long as you people leave one child in the US without a home and someone to love and care for them, you are hypocrites. Period.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:56 amTake care of the children now alive and needing a home.
Anything less and your words are hollow and mean nothing,
Oh, and by the way - all you men can tell me what to do with my body when you get pregnant - until then, just shut up.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:57 amA bunch of lying, sad, sorry little sick people ~ not to mention mental midgets.
Comment by pam
Pam, when you get the chance to have a small percentage of Sharon´s humanity and integrity, you could be the greatest person in the world. Do yourself a favor and go pray for all the children that the US administration is killing in Iraq.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:57 amIt is interesting that so many people justify killing babies in late term abortions because terrorists are killing people in Iraq. What is that? Do you think for every baby killed a terrorist will kill one less person? Or is your heart filled with so much hatred, as spewed out by hatemongerers like Howard Dean, that you kill babies in hatred of republican leadership? How does a political party become so hate filled that babies have to die as a result?
If you hate conservatives so much, go after them - don’t kill innocent babies in protest.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:59 amMany couples have to adopt out of the country because there is a shortage of babies up for adoption here.
Comment by Elizabeth — April 18, 2007 @ 11:19 amâ€
WRONG. There is a shortage of PERFECTLY HEALTHY, white, infants to adopt. There are plenty of mentally or physically disabled, drug related problem white infants and many healthy brown babies available for adoption. And there are tens of thousands healthy and disabled older children in foster care waiting for adoption.
A mother who aborts a healthy white baby late term would be a real idiot since she could no doubt make a deal with a wealthy white family to get her medical expenses and tens of thousands of dollars for that child.
What world to you people live in. Try the real world some time would you.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:00 pmThis vote was all but assured when Alito replaced O’Conner on the Court.
Roe is now only 1 vote away from being declared null and void in its entirety.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:00 pmWe could call it “Baby Mining.†That’s cool.
Comment by Zooey
Better than “Baby Killing”
April 18th, 2007 at 12:00 pmIf this is a “woman’s choice” we should only allow women to kill these babies - outlaw all male abortion doctors.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:01 pmSharon, thank you for showing who the left is. A bunch of lying, sad, sorry little sick people ~ not to mention mental midgets.
Comment by pam
Exactely WHO? voted for dipshit in chief TWICE?
I guess when you are this dumb even Bush looks like a wiseman.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:01 pmSo, when you support bombing Iraqi children, do you consider them also…human??
Comment by Juan C
I do not support the bombing of any children.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:01 pmZooey:
I am not forgetting that women die during childbirth or that older children are harder to place than newborn babies. Keep in mind that RantingTommy was the one who said: If you want to prevent an abortion, ADOPT THE FETUS OR STFU.
RemoveBush:
Please review the posts above ranting about men should not have any saying in this issue. Just checking where you stood on that.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:02 pmOh, and by the way - all you men