Doctors angered at Supreme Court ruling.
Doctors angered at Supreme Court ruling.
Medical experts speak out about the court’s ruling upholding what the right wing terms “partial birth” abortion:
At Bellevue’s Reproductive Choice Unit, for example, unnerved residents circulated stories about the hospital’s sordid past, when floors were once full of women who attempted termination on their own. “I don’t think many of us know what partial birth is — it’s not a medical term at all,” said Kiran Chawal, a third-year resident there. “We’ve all looked it up to figure out what they’re talking about. It’s difficult to understand or interpret.”
The legislation of medicine is what angers doctors most, regardless of their political leanings. “It’s not a pro-choice issue as much as it is a medical issue,” says Chawal. “You’re telling doctors how to perform a procedure. Are they going to tell me next week that I can’t use a speculum to do a Pap smear?” Jessica Salas, one of the chief OB residents at Bellevue, doesn’t perform abortions because of her own moral concerns, but she is nevertheless opposed to the ban. … “It’s a sad day for practitioners in general. They’re telling us how to do our jobs and to do something that’s not safe for the patient.”
UPDATE: Ilene Jaroslaw writes in Newsweek: “I needed that now-banned procedure known as ‘partial-birth’ abortion. Why the Supreme Court’s decision to outlaw it was a dark day for American women.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Medical decisions should be between a woman and her doctor.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:38 pmPERIOD.
Neocons love to micro-manage – especially when they know NOTHING about that which they are nit picking…
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:39 pmI would support a “partial birth abortion” for the Court. Impeach the five bushco sycophants and continue the process for every bushie the fool has appointed, ever, and then dethrone him.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:40 pm#1 Zooey
And then only if the woman agrees with the doctor.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:42 pmIts hard to argue with numbers…
http://www.alternet.org/story/50941/
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:44 pm#1 Zooey
And then only if the woman agrees with the doctor.
Comment by Clyde the Ripper
Correct, Clyde. Thank you.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:47 pmDo not be surprised by the rulings of the Supreme Court’s catholic majority. They are merely following the church position. Expect more similar rulings long as they have the majority.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:48 pmIn a few short years, we will be hunting Republicans down in the streets.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:49 pmMay Anthony Kennedy’s, Antonin Scumlia’s, John Robert’s, Step-in-fetchit, Thomas’, and Samuel Scumlito’s…
…daughters, neices, and granddaughters…
…be adversely affected by their misogynistic tendencies and ruling…
…soon…
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:49 pmMost men in this Country would raise Holy Hell If the SCROTUM (or is it SCOTUS) ruled it was illegal for a man to have a vasectomy. Even if they never intended to have the procedure. The old adage that held that a man would disagree with what you had to say but defend to the death your right to say it has changed significantly. It is now: “If you disagree with what I say you better be able to defend yourself or it is your death.” Typical Neocon.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:51 pmMight is right
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:53 pm“They are merely following the church position. Expect more similar rulings long as they have the majority.
Comment by George Stockman — April 23, 2007 @ 9:48 pm”
But the Bible thinks abortion is okay. The Christian god not only performs them for smite, according to the ‘good’ book, but will perform them on demand for those who ask through prayer.
Pro-abortion (not pro-choice) passages:
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:54 pmHosea 9:11-16
Numbers 5:11-21
Numbers 31:17
Hosea 13:16
2 Kings 15:16
The right gets to illustrate the graphic portions of abortion.
So us at the left get to illustrate the carnage of their war.
It’s only fair.
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:55 pm“…soon…
Comment by big papa — April 23, 2007 @ 9:49 pm”
The odds favor it…
It’s logical that if you teach women that they are second-class citizens, then they are far less likely to have enough self-esteem to prevent such occurences…
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:57 pm“Most men in this Country would raise Holy Hell If the SCROTUM (or is it SCOTUS)
Comment by Clyde the Ripper — April 23, 2007 @ 9:51 pm”
LOL! Good one Clyde
April 23rd, 2007 at 9:58 pmJake, your war killed how many fetuses?
How many children today lost their parents?
Who will feed them Jake?
Who will tell them to not hate America?
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:02 pm#10 — Clyde the Ripper:
The current Supreme Court would never rule in favor of vasectomies once someone explained to them that it was a form of contraception.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:02 pmActually, Clyde,
The Church did not allow men to have vasectomies.
(be fruitful and all that crap…)
But,…
After mom had 6 kids within 7 years, off Dad went…!
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:03 pm;)
Bush isn’t pro-life, he’s just pro-birth. He needs more recruits for his Oil Wars.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:04 pmSandy Geeeee,
Bush paid for his girlfriend’s abortion.
That info has been around this site for years.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:07 pmMy stand has been for years that an abortion should be permitted in every circumstance when it is requested by the woman. When the father refuses responsibility and the mother cannot afford to raise the child abortion should be mandatory. I have grown more sensitive in my waning years and have recently modified my stand: in the case of bushco abortion should be retroactive.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:07 pmThe Republican elites will always be able to have abortions if needed. The rules don’t apply to them.
-GSD
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:08 pmClyde,
You are a renaissance man.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:11 pmThe sad thing is that you have conservatives screaming y on SCOTUS when they said the EPA had to get off their rears and do something about global warming, but not a single one of them is condeming the ban on this draconian, blatant assault on women’s rights. The Grand Old Priggs. Shameless.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:12 pmDoctors, it gets worse. As a teacher of thirty-five years, I have been told how and what to teach by people without a high school diploma.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:13 pmpoor Margaret Sanger must be turning in her grave.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger
Abortion rights (eventually) were a result of her tireless work, and now Bush, Co. wants to take us back.
Disgusting.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:16 pmThe “God damned piece of paper” called our Constitution calls for the separation of Church and State in the sense that no law shall be passed that favors one religion over any other. Since the five scrotums voted in favor of the tenets of the Catholic Church they should be removed for treason (a betrayal of trust–look it up in youn Funkinwagnal) and/or conspiracy to commit treason. One of the basic concepts of a democratic or republic government is that the Government shall not legislate morality. It has been tried many times in this Country and has failed every time. It failed with Prohibition and it failed with abortion (Roe v. Wade) amd it will fail again and again. Let’s impeach all the bastards and get along with the important things–the NBA play-offs.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:21 pmI think if we just educated kids, and adults, maybe had a better health care system where anyone could get 99% reliable birth control free and easy, even without the parents permission! If the child is smarter than the parents the govt should support that. We might not have the problems we do. And you know trust your kids, talk to them, let them know that you want them to save it, but if they don’t, use a condom. And when your daughters dating a lot, you might just want to talk about the pill. Sex in this nation is such a dirty thing to many people, and it’s sad really. Each child is going to make his or her own decision, all you can do is SUPPORT them!
And finally with the minor few pregnancies a smart nation would have, those could be terminated as well, it’s the womans choice, do not force someone to bring a child she doesn’t want, that’s a 1000 times worse than an abortion. Then we have more kids like Cho, who feel unwanted and unloved in life.
And for all you pro-lifers, go adopt one of the 1000’s of kids who aren’t babies and need a home. And while your at it go adopt an unwanted pet because someone wasn’t smart enough to use birth control for their animal. Stop with the whole pro-life movement and show you really mean what you say about caring about life. Then once there are no more unwanted kids and dogs, can you worry about someone else’s body/life, until then you’re a hypocrite.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:22 pm#23
True, is that good or bad? I am old enough to be one, but young enough not to recognize the symptoms.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:24 pmGood books:
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:26 pmMargaret Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale
John Irving, The Cider House Rules
Frank McCourt, Angela’s Ashes
#28 Can-O-Whoop-Ass
You just said it all , My Man.
We can now move on.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:27 pmA visionary, Clyde.
A man who is intellectually, spiritually, etc.,
ahead of his time.
Your thinking on this subject is truly ahead of your time, and I salute you.
:))))
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:29 pmFrom the moment he entered the White House, President Bush proclaimed the “doctor-patient relationship” the centerpiece of his policies when it comes to Americans’ health care. Just not, as it turns out, for American women. As today’s Supreme Court decision upholding the 2003 Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act shows, President Bush and his Republican allies don’t care much at all about the doctor-patient relationship when it comes to women’s reproductive health and safety.
For the details, see:
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:30 pm“The GOP War on the Doctor-Patient Relationship.”
#28 – Can-O-Whoop-Ass
**standing ovation**
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:34 pmCan-O. You opened one up.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:45 pmThanks Clyde and Zooey… Okay so I went on a little rant, man why is common sense not so common with the right tards?
You know growing up in the late 70’s and 80’s with the whole Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll thing, why did I turn out so normal, and idiots like Jake who probably grew up in you know a “good Christian home” grow up so f-cked up, and just plain mean?
So I’m bored.. GF’s asleep.. TV and video games make too much noise, though I do have headsets, I like the surround sound true speakers give.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:45 pm#32
True,
Thank you very much for the compliment but I am not sure I deserve such praise. When you say I am ahead of my time you are comparing me to my contemporaries who are desperately behind their time: by choice and selection. This Country has taken a momentary regression in time, if eight years or less can be considered momentary. The eight years of President Clinton scared the hell out of the scurrilous scavengers of the Republican Party (namely the big Corporations and their remora (I haven’t forgotten the metaphor posting a few days ago) and forced (illegally) the bushco cave-man (not GEICO’S) on us for awhile. The true renaissance will be here soon and all of us here now will truly be in league with our time.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:48 pmYou know growing up in the late 70’s and 80’s with the whole Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll thing, why did I turn out so normal, and idiots like Jake who probably grew up in you know a “good Christian home†grow up so f-cked up, and just plain mean?
Comment by Can-O-Whoop-Ass
You learn what you live. And sometimes you have to overcome what you live — but that takes character and brains. Things trolls lack.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:49 pmIt wasn’t a rant, Can-O-….
It was the truth.
You had the guts to speak it, and we applaud you.
Re: the headphones vs surround sound -
pretend you’re back in the 80’s.
It’ll be “bitchin’ ” !
:)
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:50 pmWell then Clyde,
You are truly a Gentleman.
No arguements there.
:)
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:55 pm…and they don’t dance and if they don’t dance, well, they’re…no friends of mine.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:55 pmYes, this is the whole problem.
What they have named “partial birth abortions” are rarely medical procedures that represent choice; they represent necessity.
Pretty sanctimonious isn’t it.
I have a sister who is dead set against abortion, but needed tubal pregenancoes ended to save her life. Not choice but necessity.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:56 pm#36 Can-O
“…growing up in the late 70’s and 80’s… ”
If I’m the “renaissance man” you are the “whipper-snapper.”
Just stay young! And we shall all benefit!
#38 Zooey
Have you noticed we have been having a very nice high-grade, if you will, discussion of the subject without the idiots? Maybe KKKarl doesn’t pay overtime on Monday night.
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:57 pmGreat, JPark,
I have that song stuck in my head……
grr…
;)
April 23rd, 2007 at 10:57 pm#42 Almost everybody agrees with abortion to save the mother’s life. And this procedure is the one that usually does it. There is very little danger in the first trimester. But the evangelicals win. What they don’t get is that they get a baby born without a mother. I thought that was an abomination to them.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:01 pm#38 Zooey
Have you noticed we have been having a very nice high-grade, if you will, discussion of the subject without the idiots? Maybe KKKarl doesn’t pay overtime on Monday night.
Comment by Clyde the Ripper
Always lovely, my friend.
But it doesn’t take much to summon them — it’s on your head, Clyde….
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:02 pm#44 Sorry, True. The fact is many of the early 80’s songs are brain parasites. Try NOT to think of Burning Down the House!!!
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:04 pmEargy Earp:
See, that is where the “pro-life” movement has a logical break – if abortion is the only way to save the mother’s life, the hard-core pro-lifers would rather let the mother die than abort. And yet they preach about the sanctity of life?
It’s the mindset that a woman is a person until she gets pregnant. Then (in the minds of these people) she’s an incubator and nothing, not even death, must interfere with her “function” to deliver a baby.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:04 pmOr the one I hated…”Our House, in the middle of Our Street.” I never got that one.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:06 pmTry NOT to think of Burning Down the House!!!
Comment by JPark
Ahhhhhh!!!!
:}
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:07 pmOr the one I hated…â€Our House, in the middle of Our Street.†I never got that one.
Comment by JPark
Madness – - One Step beyond!
(althought I think that single came out after that album…)
You’re really testing my memory tonight.
May I ask how old you are?
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:13 pm#51 I am 34 so I was about 10-12 when all that good stuff came out. Wang Chung tonight, baby. :)
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:19 pmThe Catholic church didn’t pay for Vatican City and all the other edifices owned by the Church nor provide the altar boys for the wayward priests by preaching abstinence and contraception over tithing. The Mormons are the same except it is the men that take advantage of the young girls. Most other organized religions stress giving to the church to the benefit of the clergy. The same principle applies today to the Corporation: to enhance my position at any level of the pecking order it behooves me to have as many underlings as possible because, by definition, I am better than they, and deserve a bigger piece of the pie. It doesn’t matter that they have nothing I have my God, and By God, my God will get mine for me.
Is there any question why I am an agnostic?
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:19 pm#51 True
He is a lot younger than me!
I remember Cool Water, Sixteen Tons, and a newbie: Wake Up Little Suzie.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:22 pmDarn you, JPark!
Yet another song in my head……
I’m going to be 41 in a couple of days, so I guess I remember hearing the songs more.
(you know, hooking school, on the back of a motorcycle, going to Walden Pond…)
….ahem.
Anyway…..
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:25 pmOMG, Clyde.
I fell asleep and had to go home to angry parents – just like “Wake Up”…
It was one of the times I didn’t do anything wrong, but got in trouble just the same!
:}
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:27 pmHungry Like the Wolf. I am telling you no song embeds itself in your head like an 80’s song.
Eww, motorcycles. :(
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:29 pmJpark,
Well I’ve never really been into the pop culture, my FIRST ever concert was Van Halen at age 13, then Alice Cooper. Then many many more.. When I was 16 I got into stuff like Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Sabbath, Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Jimi Henrdrix, The Doors, Queensryche, and really I still love listening to it all. Hell I still like Twisted Sister!
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:29 pmJPark,
You are truly sick throwing out those songs titles! Here’s a more recent, but deadly ear worm.
The White Stripes — My Doorbell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOYmK6mGa68
I’m sorry. It had to be done.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:30 pmTrue, Clyde, and other friendlies: Do not listen to the song in #59.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:33 pmFair warning….
#59 My son and I have Avenged Sevenfold’s Sidewinder burrowing into our heads. We like the heavy drums. :)
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:36 pm#60 I am not a huge fan of the White Stripes but there rhythms are like crystal meth. :)
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:39 pmJPark….listen to the song… :D
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:41 pm#59 Zooey
Don’t worry! My Grandson gave me an iPod for Christmas. He didn’t bother with the earphones ’cause i can’t hear anymore anyway!
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:43 pmI’m with Jpark on the motorcycles. eww.. I had my fun, then was cut off, hit a car and flew through the air with the greatest of ease before that darn road stopped me. 45 to 0 in 2 seconds flat :) I still like looking at motorcycles, but too many Jakes driving around in SUV’s.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:44 pm#59 Zooey
I lied! Everything was true except the bit about the earphones. I loaded up the iPod with 642 songs, none of which were written or recorded after 1969. The truth is I enjoyed them immensely except that I had to turn up the volume so loud that Granny hid the iPod.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:48 pm#65 I haven’t touched a motorcycle since my dad was cut off by some old bitty pulling a U-turn from the shoulder. He was a mess. They said he died instantly but it didn’t make it any better. He had virtually every bone crushed. If he were in a car he might be alive today.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:49 pm#63 I listened to it. The girls in the intro were CREEPY!!! It proved to myself that I still am not a fan of the White Stripes but their rhythm and drums kick a$$. I just don’t like the vocals.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:52 pm#46 Zooey
A RECORD!
67 Comments and no trolls! Clyde did it again! Fie on Zooey, with all the love in the world!
Good Night, All.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:55 pmHave a good night Clyde.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:57 pmJpark,
I’m so sorry to hear that! :( I feel kinda bad for making a joke about my accident now.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:59 pmA RECORD!
67 Comments and no trolls! Clyde did it again! Fie on Zooey, with all the love in the world!
Good Night, All.
Comment by Clyde the Ripper
Too bad about the iPod, Clyde. Maybe you’ll find it one day. :)
Love to you and Granny.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:05 amHey, folks, right now Im listening to Motley Crue. Same Old Situation.
And Im not saying sorry. ;)
April 24th, 2007 at 12:06 am#63 I listened to it. The girls in the intro were CREEPY!!! It proved to myself that I still am not a fan of the White Stripes but their rhythm and drums kick a$$. I just don’t like the vocals.
Comment by JPark
Isn’t it awful? I’ve heard the song once — on the radio — and never again. I had to call my sister, the one who talks for 2 hours at a time, just to get it out of my head. Ugh.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:07 amHey, folks, right now Im listening to Motley Crue. Same Old Situation.
And Im not saying sorry. ;)
Comment by Juan C
Don’t apologize, just don’t listen to the song in #59. You’ll be sorry. :P
April 24th, 2007 at 12:08 am#71 Nah, it was something that altered my life forever. And apparantly your viewpoint was altered by your experience. The only person I would be pissed at making a joke is the b!tch that killed my father.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:09 am#74 My brain is tuned toward harmony. I love a good beat but vocals get in my brain…and stay there. That Killers tune stayed in my mind forever. I don’t remember what it is now, fortunately!!
April 24th, 2007 at 12:11 am#73 That was an interesting era. People rarely admit to liking big hair bands anymore. I LOVE Cinderella!!
April 24th, 2007 at 12:13 amHey, JPark, I am sorry to hear about your loss. You are admirable.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:17 am#79 Thanks Juan. Things happen and we deal. This is one reason why I feel for every Iraqi 8 year old that loses a parent. I am pissed and always have been at the b!tch that killed my dad and lied in court. I can’t imagine the hate I would have for an occupying force that killed my father.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:22 amJPark,
I’m sorry about your dad.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:26 am#81 Eh, it was 25 years ago. A little anger pops up once in a while that some idiot killed one of the best guys and fathers in the world but I just have to try to live up to my dad’s example and be the best dad I can be to my son.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:29 am#81 Eh, it was 25 years ago. A little anger pops up once in a while that some idiot killed one of the best guys and fathers in the world but I just have to try to live up to my dad’s example and be the best dad I can be to my son.
Comment by JPark
That’s the best way I can think of to honor your dad.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:33 amThat’s really impressive, JPark.
Thanks Zoo, I don’t often succeed, but I try.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:51 amThis is hardly plausible.
‘The Flu’ isn’t a medical term either, but when it is commonly referred to as this in society doctors generally clue the fk up rather than pretending to be ignorant of what is being discussed.
It boggles the mind what kind of conversation took place in forder for such a quote to enter a news report.
The ban has been in place since 2003. At what point would these doctors have bothered to find out which particular medical proceedure was banned 4 years ago if they only found out by accident now and because a reporter explained it to them ?
April 24th, 2007 at 5:25 amit was probably kept secret, like so many other things in this White House.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:32 amExcuse me, but where have these advocates been for the last several years??
Even as late as last Friday night, programs such as Bill Maher’s have had the rantings of Republican activists (like Amy Holmes, whose claims that the procedure is for lazy late term abortion seekers only) go unrefuted.
In the last ten years, I have yet to hear any of the cable news programs, or any mainstream news magazine program, put on medical experts to challenge the right-wing’s claim that it’s not necessary, it’s used regularly for people with no medical need – who just want to “kill their babies.”
My yelling back to the TV doesn’t cut it.
Where has the Democratic party been in keeping on top of this, providing speakers to these programs?
April 24th, 2007 at 7:19 amJust an aside. . . .
As far as I know, the Supreme Court didn’t “outlaw” procedures known as “Partial Birth Abortions” but rather allowed a legislature to do it if it chose. It basically said that the legislatively enacted law was not unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court can not make new laws it can only allow or disallow states from doing it based on the constitution, or interpret the meaning of law already enacted.
April 24th, 2007 at 8:51 amWho again is for taking a baby half way out of the womb and then crushing its skull? THis isn’t an abortian issue at all. This is an issue of how civilized we as a society wish to be. I am pro choice to a point. We should allow women to choose only to the point when a fetus has a chance at life outside the womb. Once it has a chance to live outside the womb, delivery is the only real option. How people can’t at least agree on this point is beyond me and proves how savage and blodd thirsty some in our soceity really are. How anyone is for killing a baby that could be pulled a few more inches and live is wrong by anyones standard (or should be).
April 24th, 2007 at 10:06 amHow anyone is for killing a baby that could be pulled a few more inches and live is wrong by anyones standard (or should be).
Comment by Roger_Roger — April 24, 2007 @ 10:06 am
Pulled a few more inches??? What? How do you intend on getting the head out? That’s called delivery, not surgery. If you read the story, which you obviously didn’t, it was about not having the mother carry a brainless baby to term, and removing it with the least destruction to both the baby and the mother. It preserves her health and her uterus. The only other option, which the court feels is legal and fine, is ripping apart the fetus in the womb, and then removing it. Who’s the uncivilized one??
April 24th, 2007 at 10:39 am“Most men in this Country would raise Holy Hell If the Supreme Court ruled it was illegal for a man to have a vasectomy.” Comment by Clyde the Ripper — April 23, 2007 @ 9:51 pm
This ruling said nothing about sterilization, though I agree it is a good procedure for anyone who agrees to have their baby ripped apart and/or is brain sucked out because it’s inconvenient.
“When the father refuses responsibility and the mother cannot afford to raise the child abortion should be mandatory.”
Comment by Clyde the Ripper — April 23, 2007 @ 10:07 pm
WHAT?? This is pro-choice? Mandatory abortion if the mother can’t afford to raise the child? And none of the other intellectual geniuses around here jumped on this? Who decides if she can afford it? You just said the decision should be between her and her doctor. Does her doctor decide if she can afford the baby?
“Since the five justices voted in favor of the tenets of the Catholic Church they should be removed for treason (a betrayal of trust–look it up in youn Funkinwagnal) and/or conspiracy to commit treason. One of the basic concepts of a democratic or republic government is that the Government shall not legislate morality. Let’s impeach all the bastards and get along with the important things–the NBA play-offs.”
Comment by Clyde the Ripper — April 23, 2007 @ 10:21 pm
It’s not just the Catholic church that is against pulling children from the womb and sucking out their brains, so you point is invalid. Try to focus here. Thinking, caring adults have more sense than to discuss abortion and basketball in the same instance.
“What they have named “partial birth abortions†are rarely medical procedures that represent choice; they represent necessity.”
Comment by Eargy Earp — April 23, 2007 @ 10:56 pm
No, they are procedures that are almost never the only choice. They represent a choice of convience for the mother.
“#46 Zooey
A RECORD!
67 Comments and no trolls! Clyde did it again! Fie on Zooey, with all the love in the world!
Good Night, All.”
Comment by Clyde the Ripper — April 23, 2007 @ 11:55
There have been no opposing posts here because everyone is amazed at how quickly the attention of people here wandered from a subject of substance to their to their drug hazy youth.
“Hey, JPark, I am sorry to hear about your loss. You are admirable.”
Comment by Juan C — April 24, 2007 @ 12:17 am
I am very sorry that JPark lost his father, but what he said was not admirable, it was vindictive: “my dad was cut off by some old bitty pulling a U-turn from the shoulder.” After 25 years, to still be calling an old woman vile names because of an accident: “I am pissed and always have been at the b!tch that killed my dad and lied in court.”? Admirable would be forgiving the woman for causing the accident. And, I find it hard to believe that “one of the best guys and fathers in the world” would want his son to hold a grudge for 25 years over an accident. Isn’t it the liberal view that murders and child molestors deserve another chance? Why not an old woman who caused an accident?
April 24th, 2007 at 10:47 amThis is hardly plausible.
‘The Flu’ isn’t a medical term either, but when it is commonly referred to as this in society doctors generally clue the fk up rather than pretending to be ignorant of what is being discussed.
DumbassComment by Kilo — April 24, 2007 @ 5:25 am
“Flu” is from “Influenza” you idiot. It’s a shortened version of the word. In contrast, partial birth abortion is a made up term. The word birth gets people all fuzzy and think about healthy babies and dangling bears on mobiles. In reality it’s about very sick or deformed babies and ill mothers or mothers with their health and fertility at risk.
Go back to Drudge, you liars.
April 24th, 2007 at 10:48 amAmazing how these conservative catholics prattle on about the absolute sanctity of life and how it’s better for the mother in this example, who needed the dialation and evacuation procedure, to be forced to either rip the fetus up before removing it (it’s legal), or else carry the fetus to term, risking the health of the mother and delivering a brain dead baby who will live a few weeks. These are the other “choices” they talk about.
In reality, it’s not the mother’s “choice” it’s theirs. They want to make the decision about what every mother in america gets to do with her own pregnancy. They admit there’s choice. THEY want to be the ones to make it. Not the mother, not the father, not the doctor. THEY want to make the choice. They love “choice.”
And yet, this sanctity, to preserve every bit of flesh in the body, no matter the pain or health risk, no matter the deformity of the baby,…just because it’s life…..does not extend to anything else or anyone else. It does not extend to the life of Africans who they want to take condoms away from. They’d rather they get AIDS and die. It doesn’t extend to social programs for poor mothers, to take care of their children. They’d rather the children get ill and die. It doesn’t extend to the death penalty – they’re all for frying human beings in a chair. It doesn’t extend to the wars – they’re all for burning children in napalm and putting bullets and shrapnel in their heads.
In reality, this false “respect” for life goes no further than their own narrow, religious agenda. They don’t respect any living life at all outside the uterus.
And that’s sad. And evil.
April 24th, 2007 at 11:05 amPulled a few more inches??? What? How do you intend on getting the head out? That’s called delivery, not surgery. If you read the story, which you obviously didn’t, it was about not having the mother carry a brainless baby to term, and removing it with the least destruction to both the baby and the mother. It preserves her health and her uterus. The only other option, which the court feels is legal and fine, is ripping apart the fetus in the womb, and then removing it. Who’s the uncivilized one??
Comment by Samanthat — April 24, 2007 @ 10:39 am
It is not necessary to rip the baby apart or to deliver half the baby then crush its skull. If you had read the Supreme Court decision, which you obviously didn’t, you would know that the court left an option for a woman who wanted her baby, but problems made it impossible, as well as for those who just want to kill an inconvenient child. “In addition, if intact D&E is truly necessary in some circumstances, a prior injection to kill the fetus allows a doctor to perform the procedure, given that the Act’s prohibition onlyapplies to the delivery of “a living fetus,†18 U. S. C. §1531(b)(1)(A). Planned Parenthood of Central Mo. v. Danforth, 428 U. S. 52, 77–79, distinguished.”
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-380.pdf
Kill the baby with an injection first or slice open its head while it’s still alive. Difficult decision which is more humane?
April 24th, 2007 at 11:27 amIf they are openly against this ruling, then I double dog dare them to perform one for the cameras right now, and have a trial by jury. Anyone watching would understand that they just committed infanticide, which is why both legislatures in congress and the president passed this law.
Those cowards know that it is a heinous procedure and wouldn’t dare stick their necks out of their comfortable lives to defend it.
April 24th, 2007 at 11:37 amAs far as I know, the Supreme Court didn’t “outlaw†procedures known as “Partial Birth Abortions†but rather allowed a legislature to do it if it chose. It basically said that the legislatively enacted law was not unconstitutional. The Supreme Court can not make new laws it can only allow or disallow states from doing it based on the constitution, or interpret the meaning of law already enacted.
More ‘judicial activist’ buzzwards. I worry about people who really don’t understand that the highest court in the land has the constitutionally-required role of guaranteeing individuals’ rights.
Does a woman in Mississippi have less of a right to constitutional protection than a woman in California or New York? Should poor women have fewer rights than rich women, to the best quality of health care?
That’s what having an abortion is going to come down to, because rich women will always be able to get an abortion no matter what their home states’ laws on abortion are. Rich women will be able to travel anywhere to get an abortion, whatever the stage. However they, too, will be risking their lives and health traveling while in medical crisis.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:03 pm>If they are openly against this ruling, then I double dog dare them to >perform one for the cameras right now,
fine,
I double dog dare the monsters who started the Iraq war to show the bloody carnage of just a few of the the 60,000 -600,000 pieces of “collateral damage” in Iraq on the american cameras. I promise you, seeing some bloody vaugely human lump would pale in comparison to seeing a young girl with ponytails with her legs shredded to the bone and one eye hanging from its socket as she screams in agony..
Hendler, go smoke some more meth and have some more mansex with your idols. You idiots hate women having control over thier bodies because people like you are so loathsome no women (except for hairy trolls like Mighty MEgan Aphrodite) would let you touch them..
April 24th, 2007 at 12:29 pmWho again is for taking a baby half way out of the womb and then crushing its skull? THis isn’t an abortian issue at all. This is an issue of how civilized we as a society wish to be. I am pro choice to a point. We should allow women to choose only to the point when a fetus has a chance at life outside the womb.
This is a health issue, Roger. The health of the woman. D & E or D & X, what the ill-informed call ‘partial birth abortion,’ account for approximately 8% of all abortions. Of that 8%, approximately 98% are performed for the woman’s health and on fetuses that have no chance of surviving very long (if at all) beyond the full term and delivery date. The remaining 2% are performed for the woman’s health AND on fetuses that might survive but with poor quality of life (profoundly deformed, genetic abnormalities and anomalies).
In spite of what anti-abortion whackos spew, there reallly are no late term abortions in this country. There are, however, cases of children having children; victims of incest or others who are in physically and emotional abusive families, hiding pregnancies until it’s too late. Even then, this procedure is not used.
We’ve gotten cavalier about the impact of pregnancy and childbirth on a woman’s body, as if it’s no big deal. Women still die in childbirth, even with the best medical care. “Protecting the health of the woman” includes preserving her ability to have a child.
April 24th, 2007 at 12:30 pmPolitically for the Republicans this was a total blunder. And don’t think for a second that the current SCOTUS is free from political bias. Here’s why…
Right wingers who kiss the ground Pat Robertson walks on will always vote Republican no matter WHAT anti-abortion bills never get introduced, let alone pass and are signed into law. The reason is that they can always blame the Democrats and the “liberal activist judges.” They create a fake foe and always blame them and they still get the “pro-life” votes hand over fist.
By actually enacting this legislation then letting it pass the scrutiny of the SCOTUS, liberal and most moderate liberal women (and men) are pissed off and are more likely to vote if this is “their” issue that they care about. Abortion has been legal so long, that people have become complacant.
In addition, there will be some crossover from moderate conservative women and even conservative women who maybe kept their lips shut for a while, but suddenly they were forced into this situation needing this procedure or know somebody who did, but could not get it.
So you see, it’s a net loss. The kool-aid drinkers would STILL vote republican even if an abortion ban never was introduced, let alone passed, because the voters who drink the koolaid would see it as a left-wing conspiracy as to why their right winger legislators failed to pass anti-abortion legislation. Like a pro-lifer would ever vote for a pro-chocie candidate? No way! Whereas on the flip side, this pisses off liberals and anybody who sees their rights being infringed upon.
Strategically, bad move. However, I guess at some point true social right wingers must have made their way into Congress and ruined the fun for the rest of them. Because there’s no WAY a fiscal conservative whose apathetic on the abortion issue would stay in office if his colleagues did vote for it and it didn’t pass. Then (s)he’d be lumped in with the aforementioned evil liberals.
Bad news for women now, good news for women in then next decade (I hope). Nov, 2008 can’t come soon enough…
April 24th, 2007 at 1:47 pmIn addition, there will be some crossover from moderate conservative women and even conservative women who maybe kept their lips shut for a while, but suddenly they were forced into this situation needing this procedure or know somebody who did, but could not get it.
Comment by Parrotlover77 — April 24, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
Did you not read the posts before yours? Anyone can still get this procedure. All the doctor has to do is give the baby an injection first to kill it. Then it is no longer a live partial birth abortion and that is what the court upheld a ban on. You just can’t deliver a live baby half way, then slice its head open while it is still alive.
April 24th, 2007 at 3:23 pmBad news for women now, good news for women in then next decade (I hope). Nov, 2008 can’t come soon enough…
We’ve heard that, about it bringing Republican pro-choicers (and pro-choice non-voters) to the polls to vote for Democrats, and I hope you’re right, Parrotlover77. But there are other scenarios, too, that end with them voting (or not voting) as they have in the past. Those scenarios include more pre-election terror attacks or alerts where those voters will be spun that voting Republicans in means tougher anti-terrorist action. If it’s not that or any of the other manufactured scenarios by the Republicans, let’s not forget voter fraud and more stolen elections.
If, as generally believed, this new Supreme Court with Alito and Roberts is ready to overturn Roe, once that happens it’s not going to be a simple matter of state legislatures across the U.S. passing legislation allowing D & E or D & X procedures.
If Roe is overturned, it’s 1973 all over again, with a twist.
Roe rendered all states’ laws banning abortion null, but if Roe is overturned, those laws spring back to life. The ‘twist’ is that since Roe, anti-choicers have been active at the state level with legislation on abortion restrictions. Not only will this tie up the courts and the legislatures, it’ll distract citizens, again, from what politicians are up to federally. Imagine if OJ kills another woman, or Michael Jackson is found in bed with another boy. When stressed and confused, when not stressed and confused, Americans watch pulp entertainment on the toob.
Anti-choice activists have been planning for this eventuality for years, placing extremists in states’ Congresses and courthouses. They’re ready for this, and pro-choicers aren’t.
April 24th, 2007 at 3:51 pmThey’re ready for this, and pro-choicers aren’t.
Comment by Marcy — April 24, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
You are mistaken. Pro-abortionists are as well prepared as Pro-lifers.
April 24th, 2007 at 5:13 pm#102 That was kind of retarded anti-choice boy.
April 24th, 2007 at 10:44 pm#102 That was kind of retarded anti-choice boy.
Comment by JPark — April 24, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
Can you possibly express yourself in an adult manner rather than like a middle schooler?
April 25th, 2007 at 9:49 amFree Granny Porn Lesbian Milfs Free Mom And Son Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 6:34 pmYoung Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 12:24 pmYoung Girls Young Teens Angus Young
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 10:57 am