Coos Bay Tom wrote:
Them MAGAs don't want to be called --Progressives
You are right! MAGA do not want to be called PROGRESSIVES! The most cherished gift that God gave a woman is to give birth to her child…IN MY HUMBLE OPINION! I am a conservative Christian. I will not support the senseless murder of babies, A******n, when it is used as a form of birth control. Do you know what Partial Birth A******n is?
How can any person that believes in God and the sanctity of life support the party that supports the most evil act imaginable……murder of the most innocent, especially a fully formed viable baby…..…sticking a pair of scissors in a baby’s head and sucking his brains out, selling any part of that baby that is deemed usable, and then tossing what’s left in the trash! Can you even imagine the pain that that baby feels?
What is partial-birth a******n?
Partial-birth a******n (PBA) is the term Congress has used to describe a procedure that crosses the line from a******n to infanticide. The doctor delivers a substantial portion of the living child outside his mother's body --- the entire head in a head-first delivery or the trunk past the navel in a feet-first delivery --- then k**ls the child by crushing his skull or removing his brain by suction.
Why would anyone use this procedure?
Some a******n doctors use PBA in the middle and last months of pregnancy, when dismembering a child becomes more difficult due to the child's stronger bones and ligaments. After the mother undergoes two to three days of cervical dilation (increasing her risk of infection and subsequent preterm births), the doctor in minutes can partially deliver the child "intact" before k*****g him or her and completing delivery. In the more commonly used dismemberment method, the mother's cervix is dilated manually only enough to remove the child's severed body parts; dismemberment and removal takes the doctor longer to complete.
Does Roe v. Wade protect an a******n method as extreme as PBA?
In Carhart I the Supreme Court treated PBA as just another method of a******n, largely ignoring the fact the the child is almost completely delivered when he or she is k**led. Yet even when the Court struck down Texas's a******n statute in Roe, it had left standing a provision of Texas law that prohibited k*****g a child in the process of being delivered.
Why was a ban on this procedure needed? Don't most states already have laws against late-term a******ns?
Such laws exist in most states but they generally have two deficiencies. First, they apply only after "viability" --- when the child if delivered could survive indefinitely outside the womb --- and PBA is used to k**l mostly-delivered children before this stage. Second, as required by Roe and Casey, even laws restricting a******n after viability allow a******n when it is deemed necessary to preserve the mother's "health" and "heath" was defined in Roe's companion case Doe v. Bolton to include "all factors" --- emotional, familial, age, and so on --- related to "well-being." This "heath" loophole allows a******ns to be performed on request during all nine months of pregnancy for virtually any reason.