Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 04/08/2010 3:26:38 PM PDT by NYer
OMAHA, Nebraska, April 8, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Nebraska legislature is getting ready for its second vote on a measure that would ban abortion after 20 weeks gestation on the basis of fetal pain. If passed and signed into law, the legislation could pose a direct challenge to the 1973 Roe v. Wade case, because it applies a different standard for restricting abortion than the one used by the Supreme Court.
The “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” (LB 1103), authored by Speaker Mike Flood, has already won its first round of approval in the Unicameral, Nebraska’s legislative body, by a vote of 38 - 5. A second reading on the bill is expected to take place soon as there are only six days remaining before the legislature concludes its work for the 2010 legislative year.
Julie Schmit-Albin, Executive Director of Nebraska Right to Life, told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) that Nebraska Right to Life “strongly supports” the passage of LB 1103. She added that in Nebraska “livestock or the family pets” get far better treatment than unborn children, “especially those in LeRoy Carhart’s Bellevue abortion facility.”
Carhart is known for performing abortions through 24 weeks in Nebraska.
“Nebraska has a right in protecting unborn children who feel pain and who are subjected to excruciatingly horrible deaths at the hands of abortionists,” said Schmit-Albin.
She also expressed confidence that Gov. Dave Heineman would sign LB 1103 into law, saying “He has stated his support for this legislation."
The prospective law bans abortions after 20 weeks of post-fertilization age and has only two exceptions: first, where the mother’s life is in danger of death or she faces “substantial and irreversible” physical harm to a major bodily function. A recent amendment to the bill also allows an abortionist to perform abortions – such as “selective reduction” of multiples or the abortion of a conjoined twin – only for the sake of increasing the probability of a live birth, or to preserve an unborn child’s life and health after a live birth.
Although the topic of fetal pain is still under much discussion (and controversy, owing to its implications to the abortion debate) a growing consensus of medical knowledge has pointed to the fact that unborn infants experience pain.
Work in the area of fetal pain pioneered by medical doctors like Kanwaljeet “Sunny” Anand, now a professor at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, indicates that the unborn child responds to painful stimuli by 20 weeks and possibly earlier. Anand was called as an expert witness to testify in 2004 on the federal partial birth abortion ban, and said that after 20 weeks gestation, an unborn child would experience “severe and excruciating pain” from an abortion.
The measure under consideration by the Unicameral says that Nebraska has a “compelling state interest” in protecting the lives of unborn children at this age of gestation owing to the “substantial medical evidence [which] indicates that they are capable of feeling pain.”
It notes that unborn children have been observed to “seek to evade certain stimuli” in a manner that “would be interpreted as a response to pain.” Additionally, the bill says that they were also observed to show “hormonal stress responses to painful stimuli” that were reduced with the application of pain medication.
Abortionists who break the law would face a Class IV felony charge, which carries a penalty of a five year maximum prison sentence, $10,000 fine, or both.
The bill would allow women and even the fathers of aborted unborn children to sue and seek damages from abortionists who violate the law.
The law, if passed and signed into law, would become operative on October 15, 2010.
See related article discussing various perspectives on fetal pain in the New York Times magazine: “The First Ache”
Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Meanwhile San Diego Schools are one step closer to becoming abortion clinics. No parental notification, its not like peircing ears or something important.
Interesting... this has a lot more promise than those “personhood” amendments...
Agreed. Thanks for the post and ping.
WOW
Interesting, I thought this was going to be on the fall ballot. Instead it looks like it will pass in the legislature, and by a confortable margin.
This reflects the changing attitudes towards abortion.
Like the changes in gun laws, this is ‘bottom up’ effort which finally has reached the legislative level.
It’s only a matter of time before the Supreme Court will hear a new Roe v Wade case, and as Justice Roberts has said, they’re ready.
The prospective law bans abortions after 20 weeks of post-fertilization age and has only two exceptions: first, where the mother’s life is in danger of death
or she faces “substantial and irreversible” physical harm to a major bodily function.
_____________________________________________
Just what do they think abortion does or doesnt do to her ??
its not exactly like drinking a glass of water...
Novel theory - fetal cruel and unusual punishment ???
Good for them!
The liberals/socialists/democrats and anti-human animal rights Nazis go beserk if a cow or pig experiences even the slightest discomfort.
Yet they have no problem with the brutal torture and murder of human babies.
Oh YES!!!!!!
Now just how the hell are they gonna do THAT???
There are medical circumstances where it is necessary to abort the baby to save the mother's life. I read about one where a woman, about 5 months pregnant, got an infection that went septic. It came to a point where the doctors didn't think she'd make it if they didn't abort the baby, which is what they did (and she survived).
However, if the pregnancy is far enough along, I don't see why every effort shouldn't be made to save the baby, even if the pregnancy can't be continued.
Thats not what I was referring to...
It was the second part “or she faces “substantial and irreversible” physical harm to a major bodily function.”
The possibilities for permanent damage to the woman’s body are several...
something perferated...a bowel etc...
You mentioned “septic” yeah that can be caused by an abortion...
bleeding to death...
infertility...
low birth weight in subsequent pregnancies...
miscarriages and still borns ...in subsequent pregnancies..
ansd so on...
you wanna talk about danger to the “mother”
The abortion causes more than it would ever cure...
and then theres the biggy...
death to the unborn child...
more babies die through abortion than through full term pregnancy...
Isnt that astouding ???
PING
However, if the pregnancy is far enough along, I don’t see why every effort shouldn’t be made to save the baby, even if the pregnancy can’t be continued.
__________________________________________
This I agree with...
We dont live in the UK...
One dear friend explained in these words: "the only way to embrace an unborn baby is to embrace the woman whose body already embraces him."
In the way-on-the-edge extreme cases like the one you described, exDemMom, they rightly deliver the baby early even if the baby's likelihood of survival is under 50/50.
They do everyting possible to save them both; but if the baby is lost because of its immaturity, despite your best efforts, accepting that --- with sadness --- is NOT the same as deliberately targeting, attacking and killing the baby.
As pro-life doctors say: "Some babies die by chance; no baby should die by choice."
I’ve heard that the newly aborted children are deep in remorse when they meet their Maker. They don’t understand why their own mothers had them assassinated. So maybe they can work on the emotional pain of the fetus after they decide exactly when a fetus feels nerve pain being sucked out or ripped apart. (It’s ridiculous to me that a baby can feel no pain at a certain hour, but a few hours later it might. We are a gruesome group of cold-hearted individuals.) Still and all, it’s, of course, good news, whenever a child (and its mother) is saved.
Oh, I know about the dangers of abortion.
I doubt that women going in for a birth control abortion are ever told that the abortion, performed for pure convenience purposes, endangers the lives of future babies as much as smoking during pregnancy does. And unlike smoking, which can be stopped, the reproductive system damage caused by an abortion cannot be undone.
Furthermore, there are the psychological aspects of abortion. The abortion industry wants people to believe that there are no psychological sequelae to having an abortion—which only serves to make a woman suffering guilt feel even more like a pariah. Suppressed guilt comes out all kinds of ways—obesity, excessive or inadequate parental involvement with surviving children, etc. It’s pretty significant that there are many post-abortion support groups, but not a single post- “didn’t get pregnant in the first place” group.
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.