Kagan Sought to Twist another Medical Statement on Partial-Birth Abortion: AUL

LifeSiteNews ^ | 7/14/10 | Kathleen Gilbert

[wagglebee]

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 14, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In addition to altering testimony on partial-birth abortion by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, documents suggest U.S. Supreme Court candidate Elena Kagan acted similarly with a policy statement by the American Medical Association, Americans United for Life (AUL) has reported.

LifeSiteNews.com reported June 30 that memos from Kagan's service in the Clinton administration reveal that she authored language that twisted ACOG's original statement, which declared that the group "could identify no circumstances under which this procedure ... would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman.”

Kagan later added a sentence to the ACOG testimony stating that partial-birth abortion "may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.” Last month in Senate Judiciary Committee hearings Kagan admitted her role in adding that language.

In a separate memo, Kagan had admitted that the ACOG's original wording “would be a disaster" for the administration's fight against the ban. AUL notes that Kagan, writing to Bruce Reed, Clinton's Chief Domestic Policy Advisor, later said that the statement "turned out a ton better than expected." Kagan also told Clinton in a 1997 memo that the ACOG statement was the "most reliable opinion" - one that became key testimony in delaying the partial-birth abortion ban for over a decade.

AUL revealed that Kagan also became involved when the American Medical Association issued a policy that stated there were no identified situations in which partial-birth abortion was the only appropriate method of abortion. Kagan indicated in a June 1, 1997 White House email, that she had just come from a meeting which focused "in particular" on "whether the AMA policy can be reversed at its convention on June 23."

"We agreed to do a bit of thinking about whether we (in truth HHS) could contribute to that effort," Kagan concluded.

AUL is urging the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate discrepancies between Kagan's testimony before Congress and written documents pertaining to her "undue influence" on medical organizations while a Clinton advisor.

"[Kagan] was such a devoted pro-abortion advocate that she was willing to deceive the American public and the federal courts about the medical science related to the procedure. She was willing to bend scientific fact to fit her pro-abortion ideology," said Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life.

"The pieces that make up Kagan's abortion record reveal a staunchly pro-abortion ideologue who has devoted her life to serving pro-abortion political candidates, judges, and office-holders," said Yoest.

[wagglebee]

"[Kagan] was such a devoted pro-abortion advocate that she was willing to deceive the American public and the federal courts about the medical science related to the procedure. She was willing to bend scientific fact to fit her pro-abortion ideology," said Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life.

Zero and his ilk are willing to do ANYTHING to kill more babies.

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[BenLurkin]

[therut]

The ONLY reason this brutal procedure is done is to save time for the physician. As a physician, I could NEVER come up with any other reason. Just the quickest way to a dead baby. Of coarse, at this late stage of pregnancy the most safe way for the health of the mother is to induce labor or do a C-section but then whoops you would deliver a live baby and not a dead one.

[Missouri gal]

Wagglebee, can you or somebody, anybody, please explain to me why Kagan hasn't been charged with a crime here? Isn't this fraud? What about conspiracy to obstruct justice? I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me she's committed a crime, and the evidence is plain as day. Don't attorneys presenting arguments before a court have to take an oath? At the very least, she should be disbarred from practicing law, and hence ineligible to be a judge, either. If a conservative had done something like this, there is no chance they would still be a candidate for any position whatever. Remember when Hillary Clinton was involved in manipulating evidence in the Watergate trial? Her Democrat boss dismissed her in a hurry because her action was criminal.

[wagglebee]

You are 100% correct, but nothing is being done because a leftist regime has taken over and is controlling the legal system.

[LadyDoc]

This is a more serious ethical breech for the ACOG.

You see, partial birth abortion is risky for the mom.(risk of cervical tear with hemorrhage and incompetent cervix in future pregnancies, or uterine perforation with emergency hysterectomy needed, or infection and death if the doctor misses it.)

If you want to kill your viable fetus (AKA CHILD) there are safer ways for the mom to do it. But with partial birth abortion you have two advantages: One, you don’t pass the kid at home, but the doc removes it sight unseen.
two: You are guaranteed a dead kid.

[Salvation]

Senators, do not put this _*)%$%$# on the Supreme Court!

U. S. Senate