The Constitutionality of Partial-Birth Abortions

[Playingplayer]

That makes sense, Mermaid, but does that mean that we should resign ourselves to it because it's inevitable? I suppose I'm an idealist, but I would like to think that if society extended more help to expecting mothers, both emotional and financial, instead of largly shunning these women of "Loose Morals" We could both eliminate the need for abortion by ensuring that both the baby and mother are cared for and happy. The problem, as I see it, is that a lot of people who are Pro-Life don't want this and want to deny women both contraceptives to prevent pregnancies and help in their times of need. I'm proud to seperate myself from them while staying Pro-Life.

Sorry about that, about the Partial Birth Abortions, I really believe there is no excuse for it, if you absolutly positively must have an abortion, why would you wait until the baby's nearly born? Not only is the baby killed, it is more dangerous for the mother to wait until the baby's developed. There seems to be no reason, logic or rational for this other then the maxim "my body, my choice".

[eyespewgreekfire]

Just so you guys know, partial birth abortion does not mean killing the baby postnatally. It means abortion in either the second or third trimester, which is not nearly as gruesome. Personally I support abortion late in term if there is danger if the pregnancy continues but think this judge is way out of line. Also, in her self interest, I get the feeling she's not doing herself a favor either, making so many people angry.

[Jam930]

Ending a human life due to inconvenience is selfish and wrong.

[alvask8er]

So what about checks n balances? Cant the legislative override the judges veto?

As for the method of partial birth abortion, that sounds insanely cruel and unnecessary. Fetal skulls are really not all that strong, and they have a huge softspot, known as the anterior fontanel, and you could stick that vaccum right through there without the need to crush the skull. Dont get me wrong though, that is still fucking wrong.

Im pro-choice only if its very early on and it was a case of rape or if the woman would not be able to raise a healty child(ie like a 13 year old or somthing....even though they can get pregnant, their bodies really arent ready for it.)
Don't click here unless you are fucked up

[Jam930]

Statistically almost zero percent of rapes result in pregnancy.

Strange how belief in anything like a "soul" is completely forgotten.
The beginning of life is when the sperm enters the egg.

[Chrissi]

Originally Posted by Jam930

Statistically almost zero percent of rapes result in pregnancy.

Where'd you get this?

Actually, Chrissi, Jamie is quite right here. About 1 or 2 out of 1000 rapes results in pregnancy.

Originally Posted by Dr. J.C. Willke

There are about 100 million women in the United States old enough to be at risk for assault rape. Let’s use a figure of 200,000 forcible rapes every year. The studies available agree that there are no more than two pregnancies per 1,000 assault rapes.

So much for the numbers. Let’s look at it from another angle and see if that figure makes sense.

- Of these 200,000 women who were raped, one-third were either too old or too young to get pregnant. That leaves 133,000 at risk of pregnancy.

- A woman is capable of being fertilized only three days out of her 30-day month. So divide 133,000 by 10, and 13,300 women remain.

- One-fourth of all women in the United States of child-bearing age have been sterilized. That drops the figure to 10,000.

- Only half of the assailants penetrate her body and/or deposit sperm. Cut it in half again. We are own to 5,000.

- Fifteen percent of men are sterile; that drops the figure to 4,250. Fifteen percent of non-surgically sterilized women are naturally sterile. That reduces the number to 3,600.

- Another 15% are on the pill and/or are already pregnant. Now the figure is 3,070. Now factor in something that all adults know. It takes from five to ten months for an average couple to achieve a pregnancy. Using the smaller figure, to be conservative, divide the 3,000 figure by 5, and the number drops to about 600.

In a healthy, peaceful marriage, the miscarriage rate ranges up to about 15%. In this case, we have incredible emotional trauma. Her body is upset. Even if she conceives, the miscarriage rate is higher than in a more normal pregnancy. If she loses 20% of 600, there are 450 left. Finally, we must factor in one of the most important reasons why a rape victim rarely gets pregnant, and that is psychic trauma. Every woman is aware that stress and emotional factors can alter her menstrual cycle. To get pregnant and stay pregnant, a woman’s body must produce a very sophisticated mix of hormones. Hormone production is controlled by a part of the brain which is easily influenced by emotions. There’s no greater emotional trauma that can be experienced by a woman than an assault rape. This can radically upset her possibility of ovulation, fertilization, implantation and even nurturing of a pregnancy. So what further percentage reduction in pregnancy will this cause? No one really knows, but this factor certainly cuts the last figure by at least 50%, and probably more, leaving a final figure of 225 women pregnant each year, a number that closely matches the 200 found in clinical studies.

I think the real question is why we should consider partial birth abortion to be abhorrent and regular abortion to be a commonplace, "medical" practice. At what point is the baby's life no longer forfeit?

And beware before engaging me in this argument. View the old abortion thread (called "legal" abortion or something like that) where I successfully argued the pro-life stance for a good 8 pages.

[Jam930]

Never question my statistics.

[TheAppleEater]

I do not agree with abortion but I think I would let the woman do any kind of abortion... If that woman relizes what she did and saw the corpse of a baby come out of her, I'm sure that would much more of a punishment than anything legal.

[Jam930]

The Constitutionality of Partial-Birth Abortions

Well noone has really talked about the "constitutionality" of partial-birth abortions yet...

Probably because none of us really know anything about the constitution.

I do; and I know that the Constitution doesn't say a thing about partial-birth abortions.

[Chrissi]

I didn't mean to doubt Jamie. I just wanted to know where it came from, so I wouldn't be giving her my blind faith in everything she says.

[HeLGeN-X]

Originally Posted by Jam930

Well noone has really talked about the "constitutionality" of partial-birth abortions yet...

"Noone" is not a word, it's "no one". Anyway.
I support abortion, period.

[Chrissi]

But this isn't abortion, it's partial-birth abortion. I mostly support abortion, but DEFINITELY not this until I see some kind of... reason behind it.

[HeLGeN-X]

Same thing, I support them both then, how about that.

[DracIV]

That judge is a freakin moron! This isn't even abortion that she ruled on; the baby is fully developed so it isn't abortion it's murder, plain and simple. Anyone who condones murder is messed in the head.

[Chrissi]

HeLGeN-X, why do you support partial-birth abortions?

Chrissi, why do you support abortion but not partial-birth abortion? Does the baby's physical location determine whether it is a legally protected human or if it is destroyable "property?"

[Chrissi]

It changes a whole lot.

Like why would you wait until the baby is fully developed and being born? Why, if you were going to have an abortion, wouldn't one go for it early on when the baby isn't really developed?

I don't really -support- abortion, I just kinda.... I don't know. I can look either way on the topic. I can see that some people are really against it because a life is a life, and taking a life is bad... but I can see why people would support it, especially at early stages, because I don't know that the baby actually has feelings and is conscious until a certain point in the pregnancy.

I guess not being against it makes me for it. Buuuut the only reason I "support" abortions is because I don't think that the baby is developed enough to care whether it had a life or not, up until a certain point. I don't know exactly when that point is, but I know there is a point.

I don't support abortions after that point. In any way shape or form. Doctors generally don't do it late in the pregnancy because well, it's a baby after enough time.

I don't support partial-birth abortion because I see no reason to! I don't see what good it does.. why in blazing hell would anybody EVER need one? I just don't get it!

NOTE that I am not saying there ISN'T a reason that anybody would ever need one. I'm saying that I don't know of it. If somebody could just tell me the reason, I may change my mind. If it's an important reason, but I can't really think of any.

[Jam930]

I kind of support abortions... when it's under certain circumstances.

Mutations, extreme mental disorders, autism and things like that. You can have a check to see if the baby will have any of those defects fairly early on though...

A partial-abortion could be because they see that the baby is... defected, mutated. This should be seen with an ultra-sound but if they don't get one or don't see it... well they might just decide to kill it.

But, ending a healthy human life for inconvenience is still just sick.