Currently, Roe permits no restrictions of abortion.
Not true. Read the courts opinion. States can regulate late term abortion to protect the rights of the baby.
[The Roe decision also stopped States from prosecuting only ~early term~ abortions as murder.]
Peterson was just convicted in CA of [late term] murder of an unborn baby.
Obviously, you have little regard for the truth of this issue, s-test. Why is that?
You need to read what I wrote before responding to it. States may permit the prosecution of folks OTHER THAN THE MOTHER who harm unborn children.
Specious claim. States have always had the power to prosecute criminal acts.
Are you really this illogical?
What I said was, "Currently, Roe permits no restrictions of abortion." I will expand, if you did not catch my meaning, "Roe permits no real restrictions on induced abortions procured by the mother."
That is not true. States can 'really' regulate late term abortion. Read the court opinion.
What Mr. Peterson did does not fall under "abortion procured by the mother."
Gee, who would have guessed..
In fact, in approving the most mild regulation of abortion (parental notification with judicial bypass, minor waiting periods, etc.), Justice O'Connor has pointed out that any regulation that had the effect of actually denying a woman of any abortion at any time during pregnancy would not pass Roe's scrutiny. sitetest.
Justice O'Connors opinions can be challenged by any State. Feel free to get your State to do so.
Dear tpaine,
"States can regulate late term abortion to protect the rights of the baby."
So long as it doesn't prevent a woman from procuring an abortion.
A distinction without a difference. The ultimate fig leaf of semantics.
I thought I had the last word between us? At least that's what you said several hundred posts ago.
sitetest