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


1 posted on 02/01/2006 8:04:45 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: neverdem

Out of all the partial birth abortions they've done, I'll bet the # where the "mother" was actually in any danger is ZERO.


2 posted on 02/01/2006 8:07:56 PM PST by Slump Tester ( What if I'm pregnant Teddy? Errr-ahh Calm down Mary Jo, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
How is this unconstitutional? I want an esplanaton Lucy. Cite the paragraph in the Constitution that protects crotches. Must be another one of those inferred meanings.
4 posted on 02/01/2006 8:10:25 PM PST by satchmodog9 (Most people stand on the tracks and never even hear the train coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

It is time for a Constitutional Amendment to end abortion. I am so sick of judges basing insane abortion decisions on "settled" abortion law. Roe vs Wade is a farce, it either needs to be overturned or a constitutional amendment.


5 posted on 02/01/2006 8:10:32 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (None genuine without my signature - Jim Beam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
barred by the courts, is unconstitutional because it does not include an exception when the health of a pregnant woman is at risk

It also does not include exceptions for your pet kangaroo's malaria, or if the carburetor on your vintage Chevy SuperSport isn't set to optimize the fuel/air mixture. If you have figured out that none of these has any impact on the health of the mother, you will understand that the caveat is merely a smokescreen.

6 posted on 02/01/2006 8:10:37 PM PST by TruthShallSetYouFree (Abortion is to family planning what bankruptcy is to financial planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
Two federal appeals courts yesterday upheld rulings that the Partial Birth Abortion Act, passed by Congress in 2003 but barred by the courts, is unconstitutional because it does not include an exception when the health of a pregnant woman is at risk.

If these judges want to be legislators so badly, they need to resign from the bench and run for Congress...'cause they're destroying the republic!

9 posted on 02/01/2006 8:13:46 PM PST by EternalVigilance (www.usbordersecurity.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
I will die happy if I know this curse of late-term abortion (and for that matter, all abortion) has been expunged from American society. I'm not very optimistic, since we can't even build a solid fence between the USA @ Mexico. We can build 745 abortion clinics, but no secured border.
11 posted on 02/01/2006 8:15:16 PM PST by Number57 (Badly worded, but heart-felt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
Two federal appeals courts yesterday upheld rulings that the Partial Birth Abortion Act, passed by Congress in 2003 but barred by the courts, is unconstitutional because it does not include an exception when the health of a pregnant woman is at risk.

Ummm .. I thought it did include an exception when the health of a pregnant woman is at risk???

17 posted on 02/01/2006 8:25:13 PM PST by Mo1 (Republicans protect Americans from Terrorists.. Democrats protect Terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

If a guy has a "part" of himself inside a woman, can we kill him? This is the rationale for PBA.


24 posted on 02/01/2006 8:54:57 PM PST by msnimje (SAMMY for SANDY --- THAT IS WHAT I CALL A GOOD TRADE!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Assuming Alito joins the conservative, the law should be upheld by the SCOTUS. Kennedy supports Roe, but I think he also supports reasonable restrictions such as the PBA ban.


25 posted on 02/01/2006 9:03:31 PM PST by Young Scholar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

People want the life of the mother to be protected. The abortionists want a "health" exemption because the word health can be expanded to mean anything, including "mental health" which can include:"I want to abort my child because I feel like it and I'll be happier once it's aborted. Since I'll be happier, I'll be in better mental health!"


35 posted on 02/01/2006 10:52:36 PM PST by winner3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

FR: ALl abortion, all the time!


38 posted on 02/02/2006 12:12:51 AM PST by MonroeDNA (Look for the union label--on the bat crashing through your windshield!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Apply the same logic to death row and you can suck the brains out of them as long as at least 1 foot is within the prison.


42 posted on 02/02/2006 3:53:00 AM PST by pas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
I have a different question. Where does the Constitution empower the Congress to regulate abortions? Did they use the Commerce Clause? If that was the rationale, then the law should be invalidated, but not for the reasons presented by NARAL.
49 posted on 02/02/2006 10:42:14 AM PST by Tarkin (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito...one more to go)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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