ASSOCIATED PRESS AND OTHER MEDIA DISTORT ROE V. WADE AND PUBLIC OPINION ON ABORTION POLICY

National Right to Life email ^ | Monday, November 29, 2004

[Diago]

AP got this one dead wrong!!!!

[Diago]

ping!

[taxesareforever]

Does "exit polling" ring a bell?

[Aussie Dasher]

Roe V. Wade means open season on the unborn...irrespective of their age.

This slaughter is a blight on civilized society.

[Always Right]

They lost the election, but the media still knows how to manipulate polls. Most people oppose abortion and only support it when the life of the mother is in danger. If you add rape and incest, the majority increases even more.

[Mr. Mojo]

In reality, however, even if the Supreme Court completely overturned Roe v. Wade, it would not "outlaw abortion." In fact, if the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, that action alone would not make any abortion illegal. Rather, the effect of overturning Roe v. Wade would be to allow (but not require) elected lawmakers to decide what degree of legal protection should apply to unborn children.

I'd conservatively estimate that 99 out of 100 Democrat voters are unaware of this.

[Diago]

ping!

[Southack]

It's nice to see the Old Media's deliberate propaganda exposed.

[mainepatsfan]

Out of all the issues the MSM is out of touch with the rest of the country abortion is probably number one.

[FederalistVet]

That really depends on how a pro-life supreme court overturns Roe V. Wade. One option is to allow the States to
regulate or even ban abortion. Another option would be for
the supreme court to ban abortion nationwide.
Since the United States government convicted the Nazis of
"crimes against humanity" including abortion international law precedent is that abortion is a "crime against humanity."
Has anyone one besides me figured out that in 1972 when abortion was allowed by the court (I avoid saying legal),
the Nazi experiments during world war two were the primary
source of knowledge for abortion?

[Indie]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38691"

"Describing himself as 100 percent pro-life with "no exceptions," Peroutka, a lawyer by profession, explained his plan to WorldNetDaily.

Peroutka claims that, despite the landmark Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, abortion is "already against the law."

"What is lacking is really a commitment to end abortion, not the tools and the ability to do it," he told WND.

To end abortion "immediately," he said, the president would simply have to declare the personhood of the unborn from the moment of conception. The executive branch, which holds the law-enforcement function of government, could then enforce that personhood through the U.S. attorneys, he says.

After making the declaration of personhood, Peroutka explains, he would then appoint new U.S. attorneys throughout the nation, as did President Clinton upon entering the presidency.

"U.S. Attorneys could be appointed who understood that the unborn child is a person under the Fifth Amendment and shall not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process," he said. "So I believe that it is doable on Day 1."

The candidate says the new government lawyers would then "prosecute those who would deny that personhood," such as operators of abortion clinics.

The personhood declaration could be accomplished, he said, through an executive order."

DROP any anti-third party bias and smartt-a$$ answers and could someone please answer this question honestly: Is Peroutka right??? He's a lawyer, you think he ought to know.

Any legal scholars here please give your opinion if this is possible.

[hunter112]

Sorry, even a very conservative Supreme Court would allow states' rights on abortion law. We'd have a few where "anything goes", a few where no abortions would be allowed, and quite a few that would move quickly to allow first trimester abortions fairly freely.

But there would be some states that would keep it outlawed, and by the end of this year, I will be moving to one (Utah).

[Coleus]

left-wing, satanic, media-bias alert
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/Roe_scope_Associated_Press.pdf http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/Roe_scope_New_York_Times.pdf
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/Roe_scope_Washington_Post.pdf
http://www.nrlc.org/Judicial/FactCheckKerryFuzzyMath.mht
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/roevwademyths.html

[madprof98]

I'm sure they don't care that they got it "wrong" when what this is really about is the new MSM crusade for every liberal's favorite "right." I expect the AP poll will be repeated in every major paper and on every major newscast just as soon as President Bush has a chance to appoint a Supreme Court justice. Will the clarifying information also be cited? HA!!!!

[BJungNan]

Thanks for the ping. An AP did not get it wrong, they completely distorted it, on purpose.

[conservativecorner]

Just the MSM doing it's liberal thingy. The amazing part is some don't even understand how really biased they are. The one's that do, I am sure, have sold their souls to the devil himself. Here's praying we get 3 new strict constitutionalists on the SS.

[topher]

AP = Association of Perverts

[blakep]

WHAT IS THE HEADLINE FOR TODAY?

AP POLL: 59% WANT ROE VS WADE UPHELD

I'm getting sick of this crap.

[topher]

Just the MSM doing it's liberal thingy.

I refer to them as Lame Stream Media.

They have more in common with DU than Journalism. And I refer to DU as DW's -- Dim-Wits.

[Victoria Delsoul]

"A Supreme Court decision overturning Roe would not by itself make abortion illegal in the United States. Instead, a reversal of Roe would remove federal constitutional protection for a woman's right to choose and give the states the power to set abortion policy."

Uh oh, no wonder the old media won't report this.