To: nunya bidness
"Specifically the implied loophole for abortion doctors."If the abortionist does perform a PBA, under this law, he would have to prove that the procedure was essential to save the mother's life. If that provision was not inserted in the bill, the arguments against it would have been monumental, similar to what I argued with FRed, with it, the bill was passed.
436 posted on
08/05/2003 10:09:30 PM PDT by
Luis Gonzalez
(LP is bragging that they got over 100 new members this month...they were all me guys :-))
To: Luis Gonzalez
In-cre-men-tal-is-m.
And this is a HUGE increment that was written to make sure it has the BEST possible opportunity to NOT be overturned.
I don't know WHY this is so hard for some folks to grasp.
459 posted on
08/05/2003 10:22:55 PM PDT by
justshe
(Educate....not Denigrate !)
To: Luis Gonzalez
If the abortionist does perform a PBA, under this law, he would have to prove that the procedure was essential to save the mother's life.Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. How does the state enforce circumstances as you describe?
After all, with restrictions on a doctor's activity defined to the degree that this bill specifies there would have to be a judge sitting behind every abortion doctor's shoulder like an umpire. Do you see that happening?
464 posted on
08/05/2003 10:26:21 PM PDT by
nunya bidness
(sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson