Roe V. Wade Anniversary Raises Questions

Las Vegas Sun ^ | 1-21-05 | DAVID CRARY

[formercalifornian]

NEW YORK (AP) -

Coming just two days after George W. Bush's inauguration, Saturday's anniversary of the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion is dominated by the hopes of one side - and fears of the other - that the president will try to overturn Roe v. Wade through appointments to fill expected high court vacancies.

Anti-abortion activists were among the legions of Bush supporters converging on Washington in the past few days, and most will remain for Monday's annual March for Life. Though Bush is widely admired within the movement, some of its militants still question his commitment to reversing the 32-year-old decision.

"President Bush has an ethical obligation to protect the unborn, and he has a political debt of honor to those who put him in office," said Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue. "His staff must thoroughly investigate any possible appointee, and if they are not unalterably committed to overturning Roe v. Wade, they must be dismissed from consideration."

Anti-abortion lawmakers in Congress and several states, meanwhile, are introducing the latest in a wave of measures aimed at making it more daunting to obtain an abortion. The bills would require abortion providers to tell women 20 weeks or more pregnant that an abortion could cause pain to their fetus, and to offer anesthesia administered directly to the fetus.

Abortion-rights supporters, simultaneously apprehensive and determined, are engaging in postelection reassessments, some of them wondering openly if their rhetoric and strategies should be modified to better compete for public support.

Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, is suggesting there is little to be gained - in the court of public opinion - by opposing the notion that a fetus represents some form of human life. She proposes "a new pro-choice discourse" that would acknowledge both women's rights and respect for fetal life.

"Abortion is a serious matter; it is a woman's right and no woman needs to apologize for making this decision," Kissling wrote recently. "On the other hand, no woman needs to brag about her choice, and the decision of one pro-choice organization to sell T-shirts announcing 'I had an abortion' was in poor taste."

However, Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said abortion-rights supporters should not cede the terrain of "moral values" to their opponents.

"We need to talk to neighbors around the kitchen table about the values of freedom and privacy; we don't run away from the arguments," she said in an interview. "Our movement is on stronger ground when we take seriously the moral dimensions of the issue."

Vicki Saporta, president of the National Abortion Federation, said her fears about future judicial appointments were tempered by polls indicating most Americans don't want Roe v. Wade overturned, and agreed with Keenan that "we shouldn't think that the positions we've taken are not just and moral."

Saporta and her allies are reacting cautiously to the legislation regarding fetal pain.

"We're looking at the science behind that bill," she said. "We want to make sure women get correct medical and scientific information."

Kissling, of Catholics for a Free Choice, says the legislation provides abortion-rights supporters with a chance to show they do value fetal life. She objects to the federal bill, saying it requires doctors to follow a script that is insensitive to women, but she supports the concept of offering fetal anesthesia in appropriate circumstances.

"Abortion should be a humane and compassionate procedure," she wrote in the latest edition of her organization's journal.

Dave Andrusko of the National Right to Life Committee accused Kissling of "Alice in Wonderland" reasoning. You can't concede that a fetus is human, and then say it's allowable to destroy it, he argues.

In addition to Congress, fetal pain bills are being introduced in Arkansas, Colorado, Montana and elsewhere. Another Montana bill would require issuing death certificates for abortions; South Dakota lawmakers may vote to ban abortions altogether.

In the days prior to the Roe anniversary, there were other notable abortion-related developments:

-NARAL Pro-Choice America projected that 19 states would quickly outlaw abortion, and 19 more might follow suit, if Roe v. Wade were overturned. This could happen if two of the justices on the nine-member Supreme Court who support abortion rights departed and were replaced by justices opposing abortions.

-Norma McCorvey, the woman known as "Jane Roe" in Roe v. Wade, asked the Supreme Court to overturn its 1973 decision. McCorvey now opposes abortion and said the case should be heard again in light of evidence that the procedure may harm women.

-Roman Catholic parishioners in Colorado said they would bury the ashes of up to 1,000 aborted fetuses Sunday to mark the Roe anniversary.

-Liberal and moderate religious leaders, including at least 150 rabbis, mobilized in an effort to spread the message that not all devoutly religious Americans oppose abortions.

[formercalifornian]

"We need to talk to neighbors around the kitchen table about the values of freedom and privacy; we don't run away from the arguments," she said in an interview. "Our movement is on stronger ground when we take seriously the moral dimensions of the issue."

Kitchen table discussion:

So, Kate, what'll it be? Burning the little guy's skin with saline, or going for the prostaglandin approach? Please pass the mashed potatoes.

Here. Love this butter substitute. Try it! And have some gravy. I was leaning toward the prostaglandin. A lot of strong contractions, I know, and there's always a chance the head will pop off during the procedure, but it somehow seems, well, slightly more humane. Could I have the salt?

[vpintheak]

Liberal and moderate religious leaders, including at least 150 rabbis, mobilized in an effort to spread the message that not all devoutly religious Americans oppose abortions.

These scumbags need to be stripped of any leadership they have, and then be tarred and feathered.

[TigersEye]

The following was written in response to an article that gave economic hardship as the justification for abortion.

There are all kinds of reasons given for killing human beings in the womb. None of them change the fact that abortion is the intentional killing of a human being. If money is the issue it is a factor that is known before conception occurs. Just as abortion is a choice a woman consciously makes so is fornication.

This woman (the author) seems to believe that choosing to kill a human being is a better choice than choosing not to fornicate. Either that or she believes that previous conscious decisions have no relation to present circumstances. That's a complete denial of causation which is a form of dissociative psychosis of some kind.

Or she believes that women have no responsibility for previous decisions which is an utter repudiation of individuality. IOWs there is no such thing as free will which means that not only is the fetus not a human being neither is the woman. Without free will the term 'human being' becomes nothing more than an arbitrary label for a particular biological entity that has no intrinsic value any greater than an animal a plant or an inanimate object. If that is the case then there is no logical argument for the protection or preservation of anything whatsoever, everything that exists is absolutely meaningless, and there is no justification for laws of any kind.

It logically follows that "women's rights" is a concept with zero value but such a philosophy would also seem to render logic and reason to be illogical and irrational constructs of the mind. Of course that would be the human mind and since human beings are meaningless and valueless the human mind must be too.

And there we find ourselves trapped in the ever descending spiral of the liberal dilemma; the inability to choose (what irony) between reason and madness.

[TigersEye]

I guess if Hitler had offered the Jews anesthesia he'd now be known as a great humanitarian!

[montag813]

Kissling, of Catholics for a Free Choice, says the legislation provides abortion-rights supporters with a chance to show they do value fetal life...she supports the concept of offering fetal anesthesia in appropriate circumstances.

How magnanamous of her...showing concern for the suffering of the unborn after only 40,000,000 have already been slaughtered.

[montag813]

"We're looking at the science behind that bill," she said. "We want to make sure women get correct medical and scientific information."

Just as they "looked at the 'science'" when they lied to get abortion laws overturned in the first place? Such as saying 10,000 women died from botched abortions when the real number was 28? Such as telling women that the baby was just a "blood clot" and refusing to let women see an ultrasound or even hear a heartbeat? Yes, they are such grand proponents of "science".

[montag813]

she objects to the federal bill, saying it requires doctors to follow a script that is insensitive to women

Telling women their soon-to-be-dismembered babies will feel pain is "insensitive"? This is a "Catholic"??? Where on earth is the Church to eject this bloodthirsty fiend from their flock?

[jwalsh07]

No she is not a Catholic, she is an apostate Catholic. Church teaching is pretty clear, abortion is a grave evil, you can not support it and recieve the sacraments. In short, You Can't Be Catholic and Support Abortion. You can do one or the other in pluralistic America but you can't do both.

[TigersEye]

"We're looking at the science behind that bill," she said. "We want to make sure women get correct medical and scientific information."

Here's some information for her.

Abortion is not about saving women’s lives!

Total Abortions since 1973

44,670,812

------------------------------------------------------------

Why the drop after 1960? (in deaths of women from illegal abortions)

The reasons were new and better antibiotics, better surgery and the establishment of intensive care units in hospitals. This was in the face of a rising population. Between 1967 and 1970 sixteen states legalized abortion. In most it was limited, only for rape, incest and severe fetal handicap (life of mother was legal in all states). There were two big exceptions — California in 1967, and New York in 1970 allowed abortion on demand. Now look at the chart carefully.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Abortion Statistics - Decision to Have an Abortion (U.S.)

· 25.5% of women deciding to have an abortion want to postpone childbearing

· 21.3% of women cannot afford a baby

· 14.1% of women have a relationship issue or their partner does not want a child

· 12.2% of women are too young (their parents or others object to the pregnancy)

· 10.8% of women feel a child will disrupt their education or career

· 7.9% of women want no (more) children

· 3.3% of women have an abortion due to a risk to fetal health

2.8% of women have an abortion due to a risk to maternal health

----------------------------------------------------------------------

So how many women’s lives have been saved by abortion?

Only about 3% of abortions since 1972 were reported to be “due to a risk to maternal health.” A reasonable person would recognize that not all of those cases represent a lethal risk. But let’s say they did. That means that nearly 45 million fetuses were butchered to save the lives of about 1.3 million women. Or put another way; 35 babies are killed to save each woman.

Abortion was legal in all 50 states prior to Roe v. Wade in cases of danger to the life of the woman.

[GeorgiaYankee]

I found an old comedy album with an amazing Pro-Life piece, by actor/comedian Victor Buono

right-click the link to download the audio

http://hometown.aol.com/cfitva/Iam.mp3

[SweetPilotofCanuckistan]

It boggles my mind that there are 150 Rabbis that have no respect for human life.

I went to a jewish school, and we were taught abortion is never right.

I'm sick of these radical leftists who pretend they're religious but twist the teachings to fit their own agenda.

They're probably out being a bleeding heart for the "Palestinians" too. Makes me sick.

[TBP]

Bump for the children.

[socialismisinsidious]

She is grossly out of touch with Catholic teachings and delusional in her belief that giving someone pain killers before killing them is humane.
what a warped, sick, pathetic mind she has.

ping

[Mr. Silverback]

Have the barf bags ready, there are extensive quotes from the "devoutly religious" (devoted to Molech, that is) pro-abort crowd.

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[formercalifornian]

Right. Any unconscious person is then fair game. His death is humane by this standard.

[formercalifornian]

This is one of their trickier methods. Paint anti-abortionists as against "information." Who can reasonably be against "information"? You are suddenly put on the wrong side of the argument. Just as the sneaky introduction of the word "rights" after abortion tried to paint pro-lifers as against "rights." We shouldn't let them get away with these verbal tricks.