Bush's partial birth abortion ban shot down by California Supreme Court Judge., page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 2-6-2004 @ 08:52 AM by Hoppinmad1
Heres the story.
story.news.yahoo.com...

Well unfortunatly it happend. I knew it would and was not suprised. I once posted a topic about how issues such as abortion, gay marriage, and such shouldn't be a reason to vote for a presidential cantidate. This is the reason why.

All it takes is one activist judge to shoot down an issue. There needs to be some sort of public way to override a supreme court decision such as this that has so much controversy involved. The majority of americans don't support this. Why should one person be able to decide the will of millions?

I really don't feel the issue here should be right or wrong. The issue is the fact that 2 elected bodies our house and our senate and our own president passed a bill banning this procedure. One judge in california has practically ended it and said its unconstitutional. How does this happen?

One of the guys here said oh that gives the people too much power. Our government was founded for the people by the people. Not for the judge by the judge. The judge is not even elected by the people they are appointed. How can one person go against the will of the entire congress and president. The people appointed our congress. One person who we will never know if their personal beliefs are part of the decision is the final say so in this. Please write your congressman about this is you feel this is wrong. Heres a link to make it easy.

www.house.gov...

Well I know the supreme court is just another set of the checks and balances but the way they have been deciding things lately just makes me sick. There has got to be a check and balance on them they do not need to be the final approving athority.

Oh and if you think partial birth is humane and is a given right go here and take a peek before you say anything else.

PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION PHOTOGRAPHS
DON"T VIEW IF YOU CANNOT HANDLE VIEWING. EXTREMELY GRAPHIC, ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPHS. OF. ABORTED BABIES
www.abortiontv.com...
www.partial-birth.com...

Tell me that this is just a mass of cells now.
[Edited on 2-6-2004 by Hoppinmad1]

[Edited on 2-6-2004 by Hoppinmad1]

[Edited on 2-6-2004 by Hoppinmad1]


reply posted on 2-6-2004 @ 03:42 PM by Venus
Originally posted by namehere
do u realise what partial birth abortions are? they give birth then the doc kills the baby thats alive, it is not like normal abortion, its actually murder, what gives you the right to kill another for no reason? how can you live with yourself accepting murder as a right? it may be in your body but the baby isnt part of it after its born.


PLEASE DON'T EVEN TRY TO LECTURE ME ON THIS ONE......YOU WILL LOOSE.
I am pro-choice..........I do not advocate murder......I fight for a woman right to choose and any restrictions placed on that, IMO, is constitutionally wrong. Let me give you a little education:

Why Are D&X Procedures Performed?
This is a topic that is rarely discussed during public debates:

1st Trimester: D&Xs are not performed during the first three months of pregnancy, because there are better ways to perform abortions. There is no need to follow a D&X procedure, because the fetus' head quite small at this stage of gestation and can be quite easily removed from the woman's uterus.
2nd Trimester: D&Xs are very rarely performed in the late second trimester at a time in the pregnancy before the fetus is viable. These, like most abortions, are performed for a variety of reasons, including: She is not ready to have a baby for whatever reason and has delayed her decision to have an abortion into the second trimester. As mentioned above, 90% of abortions are done in the first trimester.
There are mental or physical health problems related to the pregnancy.
The fetus has been found to be dead, badly malformed, or suffering from a very serious genetic defect. This is often only detectable late in the second trimester.

3rd Trimester: They are also very rarely performed in late pregnancy. The most common justifications at that time are: The fetus is dead.
The fetus is alive, but continued pregnancy would place the woman's life in severe danger.
The fetus is alive, but continued pregnancy would grievously damage the woman's health and/or disable her.
The fetus is so malformed that it can never gain consciousness and will die shortly after birth. Many which fall into this category have developed a very severe form of hydrocephalus.


What pro-lifers want, is in a case where the fetus is already dead or malformed, is to let the woman go ahead and carry it to term. Why shouldn't she, right? She was the one that got knocked up! Think before you post next time.


[Edited on 6/2/2004 by Venus]


reply posted on 2-6-2004 @ 03:53 PM by namehere
Originally posted by Venus

PLEASE DON'T EVEN TRY TO LECTURE ME ON THIS ONE......YOU WILL LOOSE.
I am pro-choice..........I do not advocate murder......I fight for a woman right to choose and any restrictions placed on that, IMO, is constitutionally wrong. Let me give you a little education:

Why Are D&X Procedures Performed?
This is a topic that is rarely discussed during public debates:

1st Trimester: D&Xs are not performed during the first three months of pregnancy, because there are better ways to perform abortions. There is no need to follow a D&X procedure, because the fetus' head quite small at this stage of gestation and can be quite easily removed from the woman's uterus.
2nd Trimester: D&Xs are very rarely performed in the late second trimester at a time in the pregnancy before the fetus is viable. These, like most abortions, are performed for a variety of reasons, including: She is not ready to have a baby for whatever reason and has delayed her decision to have an abortion into the second trimester. As mentioned above, 90% of abortions are done in the first trimester.
There are mental or physical health problems related to the pregnancy.
The fetus has been found to be dead, badly malformed, or suffering from a very serious genetic defect. This is often only detectable late in the second trimester.

3rd Trimester: They are also very rarely performed in late pregnancy. The most common justifications at that time are: The fetus is dead.
The fetus is alive, but continued pregnancy would place the woman's life in severe danger.
The fetus is alive, but continued pregnancy would grievously damage the woman's health and/or disable her.
The fetus is so malformed that it can never gain consciousness and will die shortly after birth. Many which fall into this category have developed a very severe form of hydrocephalus.


What pro-lifers want, is in a case where the fetus is already dead or malformed, is to let the woman go ahead and carry it to term. Why shouldn't she, right? She was the one that got knocked up! Think before you post next time.


[Edited on 6/2/2004 by Venus]


atleast pro lifers think of others before themselves unlike your side, you disgust me, its not a right, it only exists because you whined so much about it being unfair.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Why my mind is closing towards Capitalism
  Posted 11 days ago with 78 member flags
Hippy Do-Gooders have Destroyed the World
  Posted 12 days ago with 23 member flags
Facts About Socialism
  Posted 4 days ago with 23 member flags
Are Liberals REALLY More Intelligent Than Conservatives?
  Posted 8 days ago with 18 member flags
Why conservatives . . . . . suck!
  Posted 1 days ago with 16 member flags
The "Occupy are Socialists," Megathread
  Posted 12 days ago with 8 member flags
Unpopular Opinions: Say NO to Human Rights
  Posted 7 days ago with 7 member flags
This is what needs to happen: REVOLUTION!
  Posted 15 days ago with 5 member flags