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.
Also, there is a former Republican congressman from IA named Jim Ross Lightfoot who was conceived in a rape and freely discusses this.
Only the unborn child cannot speak for herself. Some zealot must step in to speak for her.
LOL!!!
EXACTLY!!
LOL!
GREAT MOVIE!
Dr. Mengele? Is that you?
I have to admit that I really am shocked at how many people are spouting the feminazi, pro-abortion line on this subject. A reasonable debate can be had. But the following are NOT legitimate arguments:
"You have no right to speak on this. You're a MAN!" (How can a FREEPER lower themselves to such a pathetic argument? I'm a woman, so maybe they'll debate it with me...right)
"Wait until someone you care about is raped!" (Since when do we decide right and wrong based on how it effects us personally? And hey guess what, I've known more than one woman who was raped, two of whom became pregnant and gave birth. So maybe they'll debate it with me...right)
"Only a woman can decide if it is a life or not. If she says it is a life, then it can't be killed. If she says no, then kill it." (This could come straight from Planned Parenthood.)
Thanks : )
I'm sure it does, and yes, it is amazing.
BRAVO!
Very well put....
shame isn't it....
Yes, I agree, but the problem is, he was asked in an interview.
huh? WOW... you put it much better than I did!
:-)
looking at this I think there about 4 camps on this particular issue
1. The "Morally Consistant".(detractors could call them extremist or zealots)
Abortion is wrong no matter what. An innocent baby should be allowed to live no matter what the circumstances.
2. The "Reasonable Exceptionist".(detractors could call them hypocrites or frauds)
Abortion is wrong, except in the extreme cases of Rape, Incest, or when the Mother's life is truly in danger.
3. The Calculators (detractors could call them opportunists)
Abortion is either wrong or right...depending on how it will afffect my parties position or my chances for re-election.
4. The Pro-Abortionist (detractors could call them baby-killers)
Abortion is perfectly fine, in fact, it's actually a good thing.
I see myself in camp 2, understanding fully well that I open myself up to charges of being a fraud on the issue. It's just where I am. I am at peace with it.
Others may find themselves somewhere else on this spectrum...
Think of me after I've been banned.
;O|
I can't help but laugh....
I picture some very angry FReeping women pounding keys to no end,.... thinking if they could just change one mind to justify their stand.. it will somehoe ease the pain.....
I would cry it is so sad... but I have been there done that.... it is a personal battle within that I can do nothing about...
Do you think it's possible that it's no accident that he was asked this question just now and the press decided it was worth reporting...just now? I mean, after all, who can say when Dick Cheney will go hunting again?
LOL!
I will lobby on your behalf... someone had to say it....
Well said.
You're so spirited petronski.
ditto
WE shouldn't rule out that possibility!
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.