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

To: hotpotato
Your argument was that SB 1301 (Reproductive Privacy Act) was active

False. Quoteless, naturally.

326 posted on 08/26/2003 11:40:50 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies ]


To: Roscoe
False. Quoteless, naturally.

Yes, your suggestion that SB 1301 was active and required a signature by the next governor was false.

Your post #36

No, the California legislature acted to preserve abortion on demand under all circumstances. Arnold would happily sign such legislation, wouldn't he?

Both comments are false. California law restricts abortion if the fetus is capable of living outside of the womb (late term - see PPAC) The Bill was signed by Gray a year ago as a political move.

Arnold would happily sign such legislation, wouldn't he?

Based on your claim that this legislation would "preserve abortion on demand under all circumstances" you are wrong again. Today on Hannity, Arnold said he is pro choice but opposes partial birth abortions.

355 posted on 08/27/2003 2:19:35 PM PDT by hotpotato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies ]

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