Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate OKs Ban on Partial Birth Abortion
AP ^ | 10/23/2003 | Jim Abrams

Posted on 10/21/2003 5:35:13 PM PDT by Nachum

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate on Tuesday voted to ban the practice that critics call partial birth abortion, sending President Bush a measure that supporters and foes alike said could alter the future of U.S. abortion rights. A court challenge is certain.

Years in the making, the bill imposes the most far-reaching limits on abortion since the Supreme Court in 1973 confirmed a woman's right to end a pregnancy.

"This is an enormous day. It's been a long seven-year fight about the issue of partial birth abortion," said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan. He was a leader of the drive to end abortions, generally carried out in the second or third trimester, in which a fetus is partially delivered before being killed.

"This is very important legislation that will end an abhorrent practice and continue to build a culture of life in America," Bush said in a statement.

Opponents of the bill also stressed its importance, for different reasons.

"This is indeed a historic day," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., lead opponent, "because for the first time in history Congress is banning a medical procedure that is considered medically necessary by physicians."

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, warned that the abortion ban was a first step toward overturning the 1973 court ruling. "I see where this is going: a couple of votes here or there in the next election, you can kiss Roe v. Wade goodbye."

The 64-34 vote came three weeks after the House passed the same measure by 281-142.

Bush had urged Congress to pass the ban, which Republicans had pursued since the GOP captured the House in 1995, and the president had said he would sign it into law.

But opponents said the first federal ban on abortion since the Roe v. Wade decision was unconstitutional and, like similar state laws, would be struck down.

The president, said Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. "will become the first United States president to criminalize a safe medical procedure." Doctors who violate the ban would be subject to prison terms of up to two years.

The two sides differed widely on the frequency and definition of partial birth abortion, which is not a formal medical term.

The bill defines partial birth abortion as delivery of a fetus "until, in the case of a headfirst presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of the breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus."

Opponents of the legislation argued that, as defined in the bill, it could apply to several safe and common procedures, and that the real goal of the legislation was to erode overall abortion rights.

"I see what this is about ... this is about politics," said Boxer. "I never dreamed I'd be down here with senators who think they know more than doctors."

But Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., chief sponsor of the bill, said the procedure was both inhumane and unnecessary. "We can't allow this kind of brutality to corrupt us. It makes a much more brutal and harsher country if we stand here and say, yes, for whatever reason, we are going to allow this to occur."

"This legislation we just passed will save lives ... potentially thousands of lives," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., a heart surgeon.

Several groups, including the National Abortion Federation and the Center for Reproductive Rights, plan to challenge the measure in court as soon as it is signed into law. "We will take this fight from the Capitol to the courtroom to safeguard the lives and health of women," said Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Gloria Feldt said her group would seek an injunction preventing the legislation from taking effect.

A key focus will be the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling in 2000 that a similar Nebraska law was unconstitutional because the definition of the practice was too vague - making it unclear to doctors what procedures were illegal - and didn't have an exception concerning risks to the health of the mother to go along with an exception for when the life of the mother was in danger.

Santorum argued that supporters had met those constitutional questions by tightening the definition and offering extensive findings that the procedure was never needed to protect the health of the mother.

President Clinton twice vetoed partial birth bills on the grounds that they did not include health exceptions.

Anti-abortion leaders said the coming court battle would have far-reaching ramifications.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; ban; birth; oks; on; partial; pbaban2003; senate

1 posted on 10/21/2003 5:35:13 PM PDT by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum
The same people who accused Bush of killing innocent Iraqi children will be upset that he won't kill innocent American children.
2 posted on 10/21/2003 5:40:49 PM PDT by RightWingAtheist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist
#2. Excellent Point, you have made in your post!!!! The Left is pure TRASH!!!!
3 posted on 10/21/2003 5:42:31 PM PDT by Defender2 (Defending Our Bill of Rights, Our Constitution, Our Country and Our Freedom!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
fyi to index as a reply to the new charge that the Repubies and GW never do anything right.
4 posted on 10/21/2003 5:47:22 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (Get a free FR coffee mug! Donate $10 monthly to Free Republic or 34 cents/day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist
Your statement below is an incredible but true statement:

The same people who accused Bush of killing innocent Iraqi children will be upset that he won't kill innocent American children.

The name, Howie Dean, immediately comes to my mind as the poster boy of your statement.

5 posted on 10/21/2003 5:49:07 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (Get a free FR coffee mug! Donate $10 monthly to Free Republic or 34 cents/day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
It's a good thing the senate bans abortion now. Abortion is nothing short of mass murder, the kind of thing for which Nazis are reviled half a century after they were themselves wiped off the planet's surface.
6 posted on 10/21/2003 5:49:15 PM PDT by Tax Government
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
The president, said Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. "will become the first United States president to criminalize a safe medical procedure."

I wonder if Lautenberg thinks that starving a person to death is a "safe medical procedure?"

7 posted on 10/21/2003 5:56:51 PM PDT by Agnes Heep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Anyone have the voting record? I cant seem to find it on the http://thomas.loc.gov/ website.
8 posted on 10/21/2003 6:08:00 PM PDT by hoosierboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
A little anecdotal memory.
When the RvW decision came down in the '70s, the first trimester limit seemed to be viewed by pro-lifers as arbitrary and change-able. They voiced the concern that abortion would become widespread and even be performed up to the time of birth.

Of course the pro-abort spokespeople got the message out that people should take a hard look at these fanatically stupid pro-life nuts. The aborters said they were being painted as monsters who want to kill as many children as possible and even fully developed ones at that.

What kind of credibility can you give insane religious nuts who accuse other decent people of satanic plans? After all, the aborter's primary concern was women's health.

Who could argue with that in 1976?
9 posted on 10/21/2003 6:14:12 PM PDT by martian_22 (An elephant should never forget.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
A number of Democrats voted for the bill. And Arnold in California has endorsed a bill modeled on the federal approach. No one wants to take control of women's bodies away from them. The majority of Congress recognized the issue is a red herring. What the U.S Senate along with the House voted to stop today was a very barbaric late term abortion PROCEDURE that ought to have no place in a civilized society.
10 posted on 10/21/2003 6:19:16 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
A number of Democrats voted for the bill. And Arnold in California has endorsed a bill modeled on the federal approach. No one wants to take control of women's bodies away from them. The majority of Congress recognized the issue is a red herring. What the U.S Senate along with the House voted to stop today was a very barbaric late term abortion PROCEDURE that ought to have no place in a civilized society.
11 posted on 10/21/2003 6:19:28 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
"I see what this is about ... this is about politics," said Boxer. "I never dreamed I'd be down here with senators who think they know more than doctors."

This isn't about what doctors know, you evil idiot. When would a 3rd trimester fetus have to be KILLED to save the life of the mother? It would just be delivered: no murder in the birth canal necessary for the mother's health.

12 posted on 10/21/2003 6:19:47 PM PDT by Pharmboy (Dems lie 'cause they have to...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
""This is indeed a historic day," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., lead opponent, "because for the first time in history Congress is banning a medical procedure that is considered medically necessary by physicians.""

Just how can this c**t lie about this? She should be subjected to the same treatment.

13 posted on 10/21/2003 6:25:30 PM PDT by lawdude (Liberalism: A failure every time it is tried!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWingAtheist; RJayneJ; Howlin; JohnHuang2; Victoria Delsoul
Post #2 gets my vote for Quote of the Day!
14 posted on 10/21/2003 6:27:46 PM PDT by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Southack
Thanks for the nomination! };^D)
15 posted on 10/21/2003 6:39:04 PM PDT by RJayneJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Southack
"This is very important legislation that will end an abhorrent practice and continue to build a culture of life in America," Bush said in a statement.

Amen!

Yes, post #2 is pretty good.

16 posted on 10/21/2003 6:42:37 PM PDT by Victoria Delsoul (I love the smell of winning, the taste of victory, and the joy of each glorious triumph)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Victoria Delsoul
how they voted:
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Breaux (D-LA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Yea
Campbell (R-CO), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Nay
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Corzine (D-NJ), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Daschle (D-SD), Yea
Dayton (D-MN), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Edwards (D-NC), Not Voting
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (D-FL), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Not Voting
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Miller (D-GA), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nickles (R-OK), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Talent (R-MO), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Nay

17 posted on 10/21/2003 6:58:41 PM PDT by Knurd Rebos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Knurd Rebos
Thanks so much for your post.

And thank God for the Republicans.

18 posted on 10/21/2003 7:18:39 PM PDT by Victoria Delsoul (I love the smell of winning, the taste of victory, and the joy of each glorious triumph)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
"This is indeed a historic day," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., lead opponent, "because for the first time in history Congress is banning a medical procedure that is considered medically necessary by physicians."

Nonsense, Ms Boxer. This is not a first. They outlawed bloodletting, leeching, and snake-oil medicine many years ago. As far as that goes, physicians murdering your unborn babies was also outlawed by most civilized societies many years ago also.

19 posted on 10/21/2003 9:34:09 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Conservative by nature... Republican by spirit... Patriot by heart... AND... ANTI-Liberal by GOD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson