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

To: tpaine

Dear tpaine,

I don't think any of your posts demonstrate that any Supreme Court decision from Roe on prevents any woman from seeking and procuring an abortion at any time during her pregnancy.

The Court has permitted a few inconveniences. But no abortions are forbidden, even a partial birth abortion at term.

But again, I thought you had given me the last word between us?

Couldn't abide by that, huh?

sitetest


1,542 posted on 11/14/2004 2:23:58 PM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1527 | View Replies ]


To: sitetest
sitetest wrote:

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.

sitetest rebuts:
"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.

That's it? You answer all my arguments above with a bit of 'semantic' bull?

Typical. -- You spout off reams of quasi-legal BS in nearly every post, but when factually challenged you cave.
Whatta joke.

sitetest relies with another qausi legal opinion:


I don't think any of your posts demonstrate that any Supreme Court decision from Roe on prevents any woman from seeking and procuring an abortion at any time during her pregnancy. The Court has permitted a few inconveniences. But no abortions are forbidden, even a partial birth abortion at term.

Do you have a point that rebuts any of mine above?
-- The fact remains.
States can 'really' regulate late term abortion. Read the court opinion.

1,551 posted on 11/14/2004 2:39:46 PM PST by tpaine (No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another. - T. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1542 | View Replies ]

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