Topic awaiting preservation: Federal Judge in N.Y. Blocks Abortion Ban (Page 1 of 1)

Federal Judge in N.Y. Blocks Enforcement of New Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

Sometimes, the courts in America do tend to take me by surprise. What an interesting developement...

quote:

---

The new law outlaws a procedure generally performed in the second or third trimester in which a fetus is partially delivered before being killed, usually by puncturing its skull.

---

Jesus Christ...
What is wrong with this picture.
What does the constitution have to do with this?
This is outright murder. I mean babies can be delivered
and survive during the third trimester, so I am sure that
they have feelings and stuff like that. This just seems crazy to me.


.quotes.

What Gilbert said ^^^ This procedure destroys viable fetuses. It's savage.

. . : slicePuzzle

most hospitals/doctors don't consider a fetus to be 'viable' unless they are above a certain weight ....that weight differes depending on who you talk to. from what i can gather it's between 500-700 grams. that weight is usually not reached until the very end of the 2nd trimester/beginning of the third.
just because a fetus could be saved doesn't mean that it should be saved. more often than not fetuses born that early don't go on to lead a 'normal' life and usually require extensive medical care for the remainder of their lives. so then what is to become of them if they live? they'll get adopted? i doubt it....

here's an older article discussing viability.


__________________________
Cell 1007::

Before I get myself too worked up, Lacuna, are you in favor of this procedure?

quote:

---

Because the point of viability varies, the court ruled, it could only be determined case by case and by the woman's own doctor. Even if the fetus is viable, the court said, states could not outlaw an abortion if the woman's life or health was at stake.

---

So what is the problem with the ban? What possible reason can be given for opposing the ban? Doesn't it still allow the killing when the life of the mother is threatened?

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 11-09-2003).]

i cannot envision a situation in where *i* would have an abortion, but i absolutely defend a woman's right to have an abortion. just because it's not something i agree with doesn't mean that i should shove my opinion on everyone else in the form of a ban on abortion. it's not something i agree with, so i don't do it. quite simple.

i oppose this ban because i think it opens the door to anti-abortionists to steadly (and very slowly i'm sure) inch up the cut off line for when a woman can/can't have an abortion.

__________________________
Cell 1007::

Until, finally, the cut-off period for an abortion is 15 weeks before conception

Ah yes, the slippery slope. Well, I can assure you that this is viewed as an incremental step towards further restrictions by many. You are right to worry about that.

Since I favor more restrictions (not a complete ban) of abortions, I really want to see this procedure prohibited because it is primarily intended to be used for late term abortions. It is also particularly brutal and cruel. I think we as a society should do everything we can legally to protect fetuses once that fuzzy line of viability has been crossed. Before viability, the future of that unborn child has to rely on the mercy of the mother. The government should stay out at the early stages because it would be impossible to enforce.

What's wrong with adoption by the way? It seems to me to be a far more humane alternative to abortion.

. . : slicePuzzle

quote:

---

I really want to see this procedure prohibited because it is primarily intended to be used for late term abortions.

---

And who are you (or anyone for that matter) to tell anyone else what they should or should not do. If you don't like abortions... don't have one.

quote:

---

I think we as a society should do everything we can legally to protect fetuses...

---

Yes... laws are always the way. Everyone should keep on believing that they can push a piece of string around if they just push hard enough.

[Cell 1303]

Rooster, as soon as you are dealing with two lives, that argument makes no sense. It would be like telling me that after someone killed their newborn infant. The question is all about when a fetus becomes human.

This is probably a good time to make sure everyone has seen this thread: Abortion

At the time of that thread, I could not have argued my position with any degree of objectivity so I just lurked. I think there were a lot of very good points made there on both sides.

. . : slicePuzzle

see...now this is where i tend to get my feathers ruffled a little...so i'm goin to apologize in advance if i come across as being a dickhead...

why should you or anyone, including our government, tell me what i can and cannot do with my body? if you don't like abortions....don't have one! no one's goin to make you have one if you don't want one.

'partial birth' abortions are LESS than 1% of all abortions performed. if it's a problem with how the procedure is performed, well, there is also another method of performing late pregnancy abortions....it doesn't get as much air time because it doesn't tug heart strings quite enough or sound nearly as gruesome.

there are also other good reasons aside from the mother's health that late pregnancy abortions are performed... i don't think that the mother's health should be the only exception.

as for adoption....i'm all for it! but seeing as how there's a lot of perfectly healthy (and unhealthy) children who aren't being adopted now, i certainlly don't think we need to add to the problem. really, how many people are going to adopt children with severe medical problems? would you adopt a baby that needs round the clock medical care or has severe brain damage? it's easy to say yes to that question, but if you really think about the financial and emotional impact on a family that does it... most people aren't willing to do that. i know i'm not willing to do that...so if you answer yes to that question ya best take the one i don't want as well.

quite honestly, i think our government needs to take care of the children who've already arrived on the planet who aren't being educated as well as they could be, who are going hungry, are homeless and being abused and neglected. find a working solution for that and i'll be more than happy to discuss banning abortion!

__________________________
Cell 1007::

Lacuna, after a certain point in the pregnancy, why do you consider *it* to be part of *your* body? It's got one of its own past a certain point. I'm not sure I understand why you see it that way. What I mean is if the baby can survive on its own in the later stages, isn't just like infanticide to have an abortion at that point?

And I know you and I can discuss this without problems I'm going to do my best to stay cool as we try to understand each other better on this.

*

[This message has been edited by Rooster (edited 11-09-2003).]

quote:

---

more often than not fetuses born that early don't go on to lead a 'normal' life and usually require extensive medical care for the remainder of their lives.

---

so... lets just kill people who are not normal, or will not develope in a normal way.

.... is that what you mean? because that is how i understand what you said.




[This message has been edited by eyezaer (edited 11-09-2003).]

quote:

---

And I know you and I can discuss this without problems I'm going to do my best to stay cool as we try to understand each other better on this.

---

hehe i find deep breathing and counting helps

i consider the fetus to be part of my (a woman's) body until it reaches the point where it can continue to live without being IN my body. i'm not talking about a woman who's 2 weeks away from giving birth and says 'oh, i change my mind'... as far as i'm aware you can't do that. i'm talking about a fetus, that if saved from a late pregnancy abortion (22-28 weeks in a pregnancy) , a) most likely cannot live with/without the aid of machines and b) if it does live, will most likely have severe problems. for me, in my opinion, when the fetus can live outside of my body without the aid of machines, it then becomes a life apart from my own.

also, the thought of forcing a woman to give birth to a child she doesn't want to have be born in the first place, is frightening! for the sake of argument... lets say this does happen. let's say a woman is forced to give birth to a baby she doesn't want. do you keep her confined and under survalance so she doesn't try to do it herself or try to kill herself until her due date? do you deliever the baby early and hope it lives...and if it does live, that it doesn't have major medical/mental problems? after the baby arrives... do you send it home with the mother, who several weeks earlier, wanted to end it's life or does the state step in and take it and start shuffling it from foster home to foster home until a couple with a very large heart step up? i'll stay away from the financial aspect of that scenario for now....
i realize that's a very loose hypothetical....but you see where i'm going with it (i hope haha).

i would also like to just point out, that the decision (for most women) to have an abortion is NOT one that is taken lightely. these women have to live with what they've done for the rest of they're lives! there won't be a year that goes by when they don't think 'oh, my child would have been this old now'.

ok...i'm drifting now hehe sorry.....

edit: eyezaer, sorry, you snuck in while i was posting.

to try to answer your question (which is a good one)....i suppose in a way that is what i'm saying, but only as far as possibly saving aborted babies is concerned. i don't see the benefits in saving a fetus, that if it lives, will spend the rest of it's life on machines or with severe mental damage. that's just the way that *i* personally feel about it, but i do think it's something that should be taken into consideration.

[This message has been edited by Lacuna (edited 11-09-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Lacuna (edited 11-09-2003).]

quote:

---

i don't see the benefits in saving a fetus, that if it lives, will spend the rest of it's life on machines or with severe mental damage.

---

I agree with you, Lacuna. I hesitate to add to this because I can see this opening up the can of worms about choosing who lives and who dies. However, the idea of trying to save every baby born is a fairly recent development. My grandmother spent 50 years of her life as a nurse in a major hospital. She would often tell us about the work she did. One of the things she told us was how they dealt with severely disabled children who were born, whether it was physical, mental or both. If a baby was born in such a fashion, it was taken to a special nursery. It was taken there to die. How did it die? Basically food and water were withheld. Does this seem cruel and barbaric? In a way, yes. But, my grandmother explained to us, it was the most humane thing they could do for the child. Why put a child through a life of extraordinary and excruciating suffering?

So, what does this cheery anecdote have to do with the bill that has been passed? As Lacuna said earlier, the health of the mother is not the only consideration for late term abortions. There are some diseases and disorders that aren't detected until late in the pregnancy. This new law doesn't account for those types of circumstances either. Why bring a baby to full term that hasn't developed a brain? There are viable reasons for performing a late term abortion, not just because a mother suddenly decides she doesn't want to have the baby.

I'm kinda split on this. See, I beleive that abortion is murder, and would be opposed to my gf or wife getting a needless abortion, but I wouldn't stop them, nor would I try and stop anyone from getting an abortion aside from merely talking to them. I beleive (after watching a NOVA in Biology about MPTP) that the Swedish have some sort of law where you can only get an abortion if the baby is under 8 weeks, and stuff...

...Anyways, Anything past the 8/9/10 week range, to me, is where it gets nasty. And hazy. Personally, I think it's just become far too rampant. Theres some girls at school who don't bother using condoms because they figure that they can have abortions. I don't get the logic, and obviously their not thinking things through, but it shows a particularly disturbing train of thought that seems to be spreading.

"Simplicity, simplicity simplicity, (Thoreau)" sums up the public attitude towards abortions pretty well. It makes their life simpler, so they do it regardless of the consequenses.

__________________
War is Peace,
Freedom is Slavery,
Ignorance is Strength.