Posted on 02/28/2006 6:36:43 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
US President George W. Bush signalled his opposition to a South Dakota abortion ban that forbids the procedure even in cases of rape or incest, saying he favors such exceptions.
But Bush declined to predict the outcome of any legal challenges to the legislation, which would make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy except in rare cases when it may be necessary to save the life of the mother.
"That, of course, is a state law, but my position has always been three exceptions: Rape, incest, and the life of the mother," the US president told ABC news in an interview.
Asked whether he would include "health" of the mother, Bush replied: "I said life of the mother, and health is a very vague term, but my position has been clear on that ever since I started running for office."
The bill, which recently gained final approval from South Dakota's House of Representatives, directly contradicts the precedent set in 1973 when the US Supreme Court ruled that bans on abortion violate a woman's constitutional right to privacy.
The bill grants no allowances for women who have been raped or are victims of incest. Doctors who perform abortion would be charged with a crime. It also prohibits the sale of emergency contraception and asserts that life begins at fertilization.
The governor of South Dakota has indicated he is likely to sign the bill.
A leading pro-choice advocacy group has already vowed to challenge the ban in federal court. But that seems to be exactly what many promoters of the legislation seek.
Advocates of the ban do not deny they aim much higher than South Dakota, a rural and socially conservative state, which even today has only one abortion clinic.
Instead, they are hoping the bill will offer a full frontal assault on legal abortions now that the balance of power in the Supreme Court appears to have shifted with the confirmation of conservative jurists John Roberts and Samuel Alito, both of whom are seen as pro-life.
Because it wasn't free will. God gave us free will and any child born of this is not a child born of love. That child would be forever ostracized and never be loved the way he/she should be. The rape/incest victim should be made whole immediately by removing the spawn of evil. Rape/incest spawn are losing propositions.
I realize that. Don't get me wrong, SD has the right to regulate abortion in any manner it sees fit, and if this will help get that abomination called Roe V. Wade overturned, I'm all for it. But the thread digressed into an argument over principle, and I had to jump into the fray.
DANG! SOmeone stole my car last week...you mean I don't have to accept that? I can just snap my fingers and get my car back?
WOW!
Who knew?
"Spawn of evil"?
I reserver that saying for regular and reserve Army and AF zero's.
You got me. What with bird flue and all, I just don't feel comfortable sinking my fangs into critters of the animal sort anymore, and alas, I must resort to human flesh.
The president's position hasn't change on this. Yet you make it sound like his position has changed.
Interesting post, especially considering Bush has stated over and over again that all children should be wanted and loved.
Somebody tell Bush that if those are the "exceptions" the liberals want, they've had 40 years to write the law that way. So far, nobody's been interested in establishing those limits!
I guess there's a lot I didn't know about Jack Nicholson! Wow
Then perhaps you should retract your comment about my "lack of ability to draw distinctions [being] a bit amusing"?
yes- it is frustrating... but trust me... it is even MORE frustrating for THEM!
how bad can it be when the only thing they can base any response on is that you are a man and they are a woman.....what was it that Jack said in that movie....
As Good as it Gets....
"I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability."
Consider it retracted.
The President "jumped" into this?
No, the president was asked in an interview.
THAT IS A LIE!
A BOLD FACED LIE.....you may need to tell yourself that to justify killing a child.. somehow turn the innocent child into something evil-- but that is YOUR doing.. NO ONE ELSE'S!
I'm not saying the President's position has changed.
With all the heat he's feeling over the ports, I just thought it might have been smarter not to reignite the "exceptions" argument.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.