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

Skip to comments.

New rhetoric in SCOTUS abortion ruling (Ginsgerg: Stop calling a 2nd trimester "fetus" a "baby")
Associated Press ^ | 04/19/07 | PETE YOST

Posted on 04/19/2007 9:56:32 AM PDT by presidio9

Ever since Roe v. Wade in 1973, graphic descriptions of abortion have been staples of abortion opponents. Abortion rights advocates have preferred more scientific terms. Neither is by accident.

The Supreme Court adopted the more graphic approach Wednesday as a conservative majority of justices upheld a nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure.

"The way in which the fetus will be killed ... is of legitimate concern" to the government, the majority said.

In opinions after Roe v. Wade, the decision saying a woman has a constitutional right to abortion, clinical terminology has been the order of the day at the court.

All that changed in 2000, when Justice Anthony Kennedy described abortion procedures in painstaking detail. He did so as a dissenter in Stenberg v. Carhart, the ruling striking down Nebraska's ban on what opponents call partial-birth abortions.

"Repeated references to sources understandable only to a trained physician may obscure matters for persons not trained in medical terminology," Kennedy wrote in 2000. "Thus it seems necessary at the outset to set forth what may happen during an abortion."

Kennedy then explained abortion procedures in explicit terms that hadn't been seen previously at the court. The break with tradition prompted Justice John Paul Stevens to note in a concurring opinion, "Much ink is spilled today describing the gruesome nature of late-term abortion procedures."

Kennedy returned to form Wednesday when he wrote the decision of the court.

"It is self-evident that a mother who comes to regret her choice to abort must struggle with grief more anguished and sorrow more profound when she learns ... what she once did not know: that she allowed a doctor to pierce the skull and vacuum the fast-developing brain of her unborn child," Kennedy wrote.

In a forceful dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested that Kennedy's word-choice goes too far.

"Throughout, the opinion refers to obstetrician-gynecologists and surgeons who perform abortions not by the titles of their medical specialties, but by the pejorative label `abortion doctor,'" wrote Ginsburg. "A fetus is described as an 'unborn child,' and as a 'baby;' second-trimester, previability abortions are referred to as 'late-term.'"


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; partialbirthabortion; prolife; ruthbaderginsburg
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-139 next last
To: IL Republican

She is, in most states in the US. The fact that Scott Peterson was charged with the murder of his unborn son was essentially unprecedented.

We tried to pass a law to fix that here in New Hampshire a couple of years ago, but the pro-abortion crowd screamed that it was a “slippery slope.”


61 posted on 04/19/2007 10:43:16 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: IL Republican
Who is right?

You are. Illinois: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is intentional homicide, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter or reckless homicide. Ill. Comp. Stat. ch. 720, ''5/9-1.2, 5/9-2.1, 5/9-3.2 (1993).

Should preface that law by saying: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development (outside of an abortion clinic) is intentional homicide, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter or reckless homicide.

As an aside, when my sister-in-law was eight months pregnant with twins, she was hospitalized with high blood pressure. Every time I went to visit her, the doctor always reffered to "the fetus" instead of "the baby." It really creeped me out.

62 posted on 04/19/2007 10:44:54 AM PDT by presidio9 (Suspended for posting an article about Scalia and Arthur Miller arguing at SCOTUS. Seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: pennboricua

Damn know-it-alls... thinking Clark Kent is Superman! I mean, come on!


63 posted on 04/19/2007 10:45:51 AM PDT by presidio9 (Suspended for posting an article about Scalia and Arthur Miller arguing at SCOTUS. Seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Abortion Rights Activists prefer more scientific terms? Remember the Penn and Teller scam last week where they got Environmental Activists to sign a petition to ban Di-Hydrogen Monoxide?


64 posted on 04/19/2007 10:45:57 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

Shucks, I hate admitting that I’m wrong.


65 posted on 04/19/2007 10:46:34 AM PDT by IL Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: IL Republican

Wait, I may be behind the times here...

Yes, I am a bit - Bush signed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in 2004. But that only applies to crimes having federal jurisdiction. According to the Wikipedia article (I know, I know...) 34 states have similar laws for state-jurisdiction crimes.


66 posted on 04/19/2007 10:48:29 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: devolve
This is just too funny, but frightening also. Every time I see this bitch getting wound up, it reminds me of Hitler, at one of his mass rallies.

Besides Adolf’s bulging eyes, she has the same manic obsession with power and lack of conscience. If she had to murder 6 million Jews to rule the world, no problem. Don’t forget, when it comes to a sociopath, the end always justifies the means.

67 posted on 04/19/2007 10:48:50 AM PDT by Beatthedrum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

Penn Jillette is best left to another thread. He is rabidly pro-abortion.


68 posted on 04/19/2007 10:49:19 AM PDT by presidio9 (Suspended for posting an article about Scalia and Arthur Miller arguing at SCOTUS. Seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

She may be a lawyer but she has no clue about medicine and especially pregnancy. This slug is clueless and unable to understand reality.


69 posted on 04/19/2007 10:49:59 AM PDT by lawdude (The First Amendment is there so we CAN offend people with our words.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxesareforever

To the fast approaching non-viable Ruthie Ginsberg, the debate is about not exposing the dehumanizing rhetoric her allies in evil have promoted. She, like all liberal pukes, cannot stand truth to invade the mountain of lies upon which her world view rests ... she is the exhibiting the ‘zeitgeist’ of liberalism, shape the debate by capturing the language and spit upon any who would shine truth to ‘power’, the power of evil to twist and lie for empowerment.


70 posted on 04/19/2007 10:50:22 AM PDT by MHGinTN (You've had life support. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Thank you, I’m glad to see that my very liberal state got one thing right!


71 posted on 04/19/2007 10:50:30 AM PDT by IL Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

Looks like she just bit the head off a Bat!


72 posted on 04/19/2007 10:52:00 AM PDT by lawdude (The First Amendment is there so we CAN offend people with our words.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: IamConservative
The way this is worded by the majority seems to imply there is a right/approved way of killing a fetus.

Coulter is right, it's a religous sacrifice. {Someone please help with the pictures}

73 posted on 04/19/2007 10:53:33 AM PDT by fella (Respect does not equal fear unless your a tyrant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dan(9698)

The truth will set us free! It’s like some people in this country are under some kind of evil spell and would kill for the right to an abortion.


74 posted on 04/19/2007 10:57:00 AM PDT by red irish (Gods Children in the womb are to be loved too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Ruth Bader is only the tip of the Ginsberg. Thank God that five members of the court recognized the murderous, lethal bulk of the Ginsberg below the skinny, harmless looking tip.
75 posted on 04/19/2007 10:58:44 AM PDT by F.J. Mitchell (Well armed intended victims will leave little DNA to identify the perp. But that's as it should be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IL Republican

You are right!


76 posted on 04/19/2007 11:00:40 AM PDT by red irish (Gods Children in the womb are to be loved too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Hell... fetus isn’t even specific, it’s a generic term used mainly for mammals in the womb. So what specifically is it they are aborting? They’ve already established “it” is alive. Could it possibly be a human being? Gasp! It’s a baby human!

JW


77 posted on 04/19/2007 11:01:42 AM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

You should have corrected the doctor!


78 posted on 04/19/2007 11:01:59 AM PDT by red irish (Gods Children in the womb are to be loved too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: potlatch; PhilDragoo; ntnychik; MeekOneGOP; dixiechick2000; Grampa Dave; Interesting Times; ...


79 posted on 04/19/2007 11:04:21 AM PDT by devolve ( ........upload images free & fast at tinypic.com or Photobucket or Imagecave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
;-) Anyone caught changing clothes in a telephone booth should be charged with indecent exposure! Except for Super Girl.
80 posted on 04/19/2007 11:08:26 AM PDT by F.J. Mitchell (Well armed intended victims will leave little DNA to identify the perp. But that is as it should be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-139 next last

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.

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