[MHGinTN]

The answer to your second question is a sad yes. However, to bring the alive child to such a position before that child naturally 'drops' in uterine position is no easy task. PBA was thought up in order to make the serial killing easier for the aborticutionists. To manipulate the child to a head-first position at the cervical os, then insert scissors then cannula for suctioning the baby's brains is a far more dangerous methodology than the serial killers want to risk, for obvious reasons. But that begs the issue of why these posters like Sir Gawain are trying to continue the distrust; this is a lesson in political attack much more than a discussion regarding partial birth abortion.

[Sir Gawain]

But that begs the issue of why these posters like Sir Gawain are trying to continue the distrust

You're the one with the initial distrust of me. .30Carbine graciously answered my simple question in post #180, and also see my reply in #184. You can drop the political enemy crap. We're on the same side.

[Jim Robinson]

Yup. It's obviously a political attack and it's the usual suspects involved. Amazing how willing they are to join forces with the abortionists.

[Sabertooth]

The answer to your second question is a sad yes. However, to bring the alive child to such a position before that child naturally 'drops' in uterine position is no easy task. PBA was thought up in order to make the serial killing easier for the aborticutionists. To manipulate the child to a head-first position at the cervical os, then insert scissors then cannula for suctioning the baby's brains is a far more dangerous methodology than the serial killers want to risk, for obvious reasons. But that begs the issue of why these posters like Sir Gawain are trying to continue the distrust; this is a lesson in political attack much more than a discussion regarding partial birth abortion.

First, medical techniques advance all the time. Necessity being what it is to invention, I'm certain the abortionists will come up with ways around the language of this bill. Tragically. Doesn't mean the bill's no good, I confess I'm not really up to speed on the various nuances.

Second, I think you're giving Gawain a bad rap, frankly. He's asking some questions about the medical procedures involved, and not many among us are qualified to answer those questions without equivocation. That's why I flagged a couple of medical pros to my own post.

Let's say, hypothetically, that the net effect of this bill on the annual number of PBAs was zero. Would that necessarily call into question the integrity of well-intentioned legislator who voted in favor of it? Definitely not.

I'm not predicting that will be the net effect, to that I plead ignorance. I'm just suggesting that one can't presume to know Gawain's motives simply because he raised a valid question about the medical procedures involved, about which many of us are ignorant.

Fair enough?

[.30Carbine]

Bummer that you beat me. TigersEye and I were 'having a discussion' about the keyboard!!!

Saber, think about what you are asking. If an abortionist wanted to get around this PBA ban, could he/she REALLY deliver just the rounded top of the baby's skull, puncture and suction it out?

Picture it. How would the abortionist prevent the pounding of the spike in the top of the head from driving the baby back up inside the mother's body?

How would the abortionist get the suction to the hole before the contents of the baby's skull started leaking back into the mother, causing serious complications, infection?

To what would the abortionist attach forceps so that once the baby's brains are out and the baby is dead he/she could extract the body?

I think you are really stretching it.

I hope that you will come to celebrate the success of the Right to Life movement with this legislation. It is a good start.