[Sabertooth]

Sabertooth, How will it be sidestepped?

Let me set this up... As I understand it, this PBA ban was crafted to meet certain SCOTUS requirements, as written by Sandra Day O'Connor. As a result, an fairly narrow definition of PBA was necessary.

In the case of a head first extraction, the head must not be fully exposed. In the case of a breach delivery, the navel of the baby must not be exposed. Either is the case with most PBAs now performed.

However, what is being outlawed here are techniques. So, the legislation can be sidestepped by way of new techniques that kill the baby further up into the mother's womb, without navel or full cranial exposure.

Think about the various "assault weapons" bans, and how easily many of them were sidestepped.

So again, as I see it, this legislation is better than nothing, but only if we recognize its limits and shortcomings.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"In the case of a head first extraction, the head must not be fully exposed. In the case of a breach delivery, the navel of the baby must not be exposed. Either is the case with most PBAs now performed."

But ONLY in the case of the mother's life being in danger..that requirement has to be met first.

[Jim Robinson]

I think if the baby ends up dead in the hands of a partial birth abortionist, he's gonna have some real problems, no matter how cleverly he twists and turns it. Of course, that depends on the determination of the prosecutor.

[fatima]

Sabertooth,Thank you for your answer.