Your editorial comments notwithstanding, the section you posted is taken out of context. Here is what the section you posted looks like in context
Sec. 1531. Partial-birth abortions prohibited `(a) Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. This subsection takes effect 1 day after the date of enactment of this chapter.
`(b) As used in this section--
`(1) the term `partial-birth abortion' means an abortion in which--
`(A) the person performing the abortion deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head- first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus;
You, Uncle Bill, are a damnable liar and should be banished from this site. Shame on you! The Senate bill says the opposite of what you claim it says.
. . .Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs . . .
If a doctor performs a partial birth abortion, how is it to be proved that that act is in, or affect interstate commerce or not? If the procedure is judged not in, or affects interstate commerce, the doctor walks?
How exactly does that apply?
Regarding section 1531, the definition of partial birth abortion as used in that section, does this mean that any less than the entire head is exposed, or the legs and pelvis only of the child are exposed, the abortion can be performed?
I read it over several times and that's what it says to me. What am I missing?
That seems to be happening a lot
I believe Bill has posted correct information ,. but even if you are right , what you posted is a hole large enough to drive a truck through
Read what you posted, then think about it.
The child's head can be outside the mother up to the chin and the child killed without it being illegal. In the case of breach, the child can be outside the mother's body up to the buttocks, and the child legally killed.
The "Sense of the senate" part is especially bad, as it makes unlikely the possibility of judicial "deactivism."