Partial Birth Abortion Act ruled Unconstitutional

Here comes three pages of hyper-polarized arguements!!!!!!!!

 

 

YIPPPEEEE!!!! :arms

Does this actually change anything? I know that both Kansas and New York have similiar cases without opinions.

Doesn't change anything, everything is still the same.

You know i hate this argument because I have a tough time deciding. True a women's rights have to be upheld and they cna do as they please with their own bodies. BUT, my rights end where yours begin, does the partially born baby have rights that need to be defended. It is not a question if it feels pain or not at this stage, because it does. So i dont know if we need to defend the child's rights in this case over the women's right because what shes doing isnt to her own body anymore but someone else's

You know i hate this argument because I have a tough time deciding. True a women's rights have to be upheld and they cna do as they please with their own bodies. BUT, my rights end where yours begin, does the partially born baby have rights that need to be defended. It is not a question if it feels pain or not at this stage, because it does. So i dont know if we need to defend the child's rights in this case over the women's right because what shes doing isnt to her own body anymore but someone else's

Unless you're related to the unborn I don't see how this affects you.

 

Sorry, but even as a conservative that supports placing more restrictions on abortion I don't understand why some conservatives talk as if a crime has been committed against themselves. What has allowing another human being do what they want somehow take away your rights? Your right of telling them how they should act? Your right to avoid any thought this country may not agree with your view of morality (including the 77% that accept Christ, but do not want evangelists to interpret His message for them)? :blink:

wow, I thought the court wouldn't do that. Even I can understand why people would want partial birth illegal unless it threatened the mother's life.

Partial-Birth Abortion... that's a family friendly name for it. :thumbdown

For me its not an issue of morality at all, in fact the govt should not step in to regulate moral values, my argument is about the rights of the child in a partial birth abortion, which is not 'unborn' per se because he is partially born so to speak. Either way the rights of an american being violated are of concern to me even if I am not related to this person. So my conclusion is as follows unless the mother's health is at risk partial birth abortions should not be allowed b/c they violate the right to LIFE of the child.

For me its not an issue of morality at all, in fact the govt should not step in to regulate moral values, my argument is about the rights of the child in a partial birth abortion, which is not 'unborn' per se because he is partially born so to speak. Either way the rights of an american being violated are of concern to me even if I am not related to this person. So my conclusion is as follows unless the mother's health is at risk partial birth abortions should not be allowed b/c they violate the right to LIFE of the child.

I totally agree with you. Saying that you don't care because the baby isn't related to you is totally idiotic. Women have the right to do whatever the hell they want with their bodies, but if any of her acts intervene with the life of another human being, moreover if it is the child he carries in her womb, is a crime! As civilized citizens of a nation who values life, we can't tolerate abortion.

 

This decision is a huge setback for conservatice policy on abortion :confused :thumbdown

Theres a little thing i heard once, life, liberty, and property...in that order b/c you cant have the last two without the first one

Why do they let it come to this? I support abortion, but it looks like this is something different. Why would they let the pregnancy last that long?

good question. I, a person who has contempt for babies and see them as lower lifeforms than myself (for purely developmental reasons, not to sound cold people), cannot understand why people would want kill the fetus when it is cognitively significant.

I believe Abortion is wrong however, I do think that early stage abortion should remain legal simply because I have never felt that unless an absolute neccessity, things should change overnight.

 

Partial though is barbaric and that is something I feel must go, one of the things I do agree 100% with the conservatives on.

I would love to debate you guys on this subject, but I guarantee that if I get off on my abortion soapbox, people will end up offended, so I won't even start.

 

(I'm against abortion btw).

This will make it to the Supreme Court docket and there is little doubt how that decision will fall.

This will make it to the Supreme Court docket and there is little doubt how that decision will fall.

Dont be too sure about that. The people probably voting against it are rehnquist, scalia and thomas and people voting for pba will probably be souter, guinsberg, stevens, and breyer, but kennedy and o connor are swing votes. O'connor i believe is more likely to swing towards allowing pba b/c of women's rights issue. but kennedy a classical liberal by nature is the deciding factor, and he really could go either way.

In her opinion in Stenberg v. Carhart (2000, 530 U.S. 914), O'Connor suggested that though she was voting against the Nebraska law prohibiting the procedure, she did so because the law made no exception for the health or life of the mother. I assume that meant she would vote to uphold the constitutionality of a law, like the one in question, that made such a provision. But, you are right; who can know for certain?

 

At any rate, Stenberg showed us that O'Connor will be the deciding vote -- with Scalia, Thomas, Rehnquist, and Kennedy for the ban, and Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Stevens against the ban.