Posted on 02/07/2007 1:18:11 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Key Facts on Partial-Birth Abortion
(excerpts)
In a partial-birth abortion, the abortionist pulls a living baby feet-first out of the womb and into the birth canal (vagina), except for the head, which the abortionist purposely keeps lodged just inside the cervix (the opening to the womb). The abortionist punctures the base of the baby’s skull with a surgical instrument, such as a long surgical scissors or a pointed hollow metal tube called a trochar. He then inserts a catheter (tube) into the wound, and removes the baby's brain with a powerful suction machine. This causes the skull to collapse, after which the abortionist completes the delivery of the now-dead baby.
The January 2003 Gallup poll found that 70% favored and 25% opposed “a law that would make it illegal to perform a specific abortion procedure conducted in the last six months of pregnancy known as ‘partial birth abortion,’ except in cases necessary to save the life of the mother.” (margin of error +/- 3%)
The term “partial-birth” is perfectly accurate. Under both federal law and most state laws, a “live birth” occurs when a baby is entirely expelled from the mother and shows any signs of life, however briefly -- regardless of whether the baby is “viable,” i.e., developed enough to be sustained outside the womb with neo-natal medical assistance. Even at 4½ months (20 weeks), perinatologists say that if a baby is expelled or removed completely from the uterus, she will usually gasp for breath and sometimes survive for hours, even though lung development is usually insufficient to permit successful sustained respiration until 23 weeks.
Some prominent defenders of partial-birth abortions, such as NARAL's Kate Michelman and syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman, insisted that anesthesia kills the babies before they are removed from the womb. This myth has been refuted by professional societies of anesthesiologists. In reality, the babies are alive and experience great pain when subjected to a partial-birth abortion. [Documentation on request.]
Thank you for that reminder! This is a bedrock principle for us as conservatives. If we will not stand for defenseless, babies, for whom will we stand?
I'm serious. I would like someone to address this.
The PBA ban was the most significant progress made on the pro-life agenda in the past 30 years. Too bad the courts are still in need of a massive overhaul to let this will of the people be enacted.
You must be one of those "purist" noobie posters the rudybots warned us about.
/sarcasm
Thank you very much Jim!
It is a grotesque and inhumane procedure that shows the true barbarity that unfortunately some medical advances bring.
I make sure to explain the procedure to my BIG LIB friends and relatives during dinner so they can try to choke down their food after having the full knowledge of what their representatives believe in.
My grandmother, God Bless her, was under the belief that the 'Rats represented Catholic morals until I explained such things as this to her.
... the blue bussssss......
-OR-
"I'm a Unite'er not a Divide'er".. (NO VETOS)
Problem being, the ones who claim the "mental health" of the mother, which perverts into "I just don't think I can handle having a baby"
Which also raises the question....how can one be a "mother" to something they don't consider to be a life?
Indeed.
Everyone knows a politician is as good as his word.
It can't. As I've pointed out on other threads, the procedure actually increases the risk to the mother, because the baby has to be in the breach position.
The exceptions claimed by the pro-abortion spokespeople are out-and-out lies.
Now...if the Doctor or the mother were to light up a cigarette after the procedure....well then they'd be in some SERIOUS trouble. /sarc
You betcha.
Whatever possessed democrats that made them think this was okay? Oh... nevermind... I think I know.
I love that photo. Thanks.
The Democrat Party thinks that's a sacred right.
I think it's as great an evil as anything Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, or Hitler ever committed. Worse; it's done voluntarily by private citizens, not on government orders.
We need to end it, not pander to it.
LoL....
The Republican Party has never nominated a pro-abortion candidate as their presidential nominee. We have to make sure that it doesn't start doing so now.
Hehee...
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.