Sports Central Message Boards

Sports Central Message Boards (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/index.php)
-   Politics & Religion (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   SC: Partial Abortion Ban Act is OK (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/showthread.php?t=16930)

buckeyefan78 04-18-2007 01:17 PM

SC: Partial Abortion Ban Act is OK
 
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long-awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.

The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman's constitutional right to an abortion.

The opponents of the act "have not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.

The decision pitted the court's conservatives against its liberals, with President Bush's two appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, siding with the majority.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia also were in the majority.

It was the first time the court banned a specific procedure in a case over how — not whether — to perform an abortion.

Abortion rights groups have said the procedure sometimes is the safest for a woman. They also said that such a ruling could threaten most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy, although government lawyers and others who favor the ban said there are alternate, more widely used procedures that remain legal.

The outcome is likely to spur efforts at the state level to place more restrictions on abortions.

More than 1 million abortions are performed in the United States each year, according to recent statistics. Nearly 90 percent of those occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, and are not affected by Wednesday's ruling.

Six federal courts have said the law that was in focus Wednesday is an impermissible restriction on a woman's constitutional right to an abortion.

The law bans a method of ending a pregnancy, rather than limiting when an abortion can be performed.

"Today's decision is alarming," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in dissent. She said the ruling "refuses to take ... seriously" previous Supreme Court decisions on abortion.

Ginsburg said the latest decision "tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists."

She was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens.

The procedure at issue involves partially removing the fetus intact from a woman's uterus, then crushing or cutting its skull to complete the abortion.

Abortion opponents say the law will not reduce the number of abortions performed because an alternate method — dismembering the fetus in the uterus — is available and, indeed, much more common.

In 2000, the court with key differences in its membership struck down a state ban on partial-birth abortions. Writing for a 5-4 majority at that time, Justice Breyer said the law imposed an undue burden on a woman's right to make an abortion decision.

The Republican-controlled Congress responded in 2003 by passing a federal law that asserted the procedure is gruesome, inhumane and never medically necessary to preserve a woman's health. That statement was designed to overcome the health exception to restrictions that the court has demanded in abortion cases.

But federal judges in California, Nebraska and New York said the law was unconstitutional, and three appellate courts agreed. The Supreme Court accepted appeals from California and Nebraska, setting up Wednesday's ruling.

Kennedy's dissent in 2000 was so strong that few court watchers expected him to take a different view of the current case.

Associated Press

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266724,00.html

**********************************************************

Good decision?

catman 04-18-2007 01:35 PM

Yes, in my opinion it is.
The reason for a late term abortion is seldom medical. If the mother undergoes proper pre-natal care and follows the advice and orders of her Dr., these abomonations will not be necessary. The only time I agree with aborting a fetus is when the mother's life is in danger, or when the fetus is determined by testing to be inviable. Neither is the case in these procedures, as c-section is far less dangerous to a mother's health and severe problems with the baby should be determined before it reaches the 3rd trimester.
I disagree with Ms Ginsberg's opinion. This is not "alarming".

CKFresh 04-18-2007 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catman (Post 243826)
Yes, in my opinion it is.
The reason for a late term abortion is seldom medical. If the mother undergoes proper pre-natal care and follows the advice and orders of her Dr., these abomonations will not be necessary. The only time I agree with aborting a fetus is when the mother's life is in danger, or when the fetus is determined by testing to be inviable. Neither is the case in these procedures, as c-section is far less dangerous to a mother's health and severe problems with the baby should be determined before it reaches the 3rd trimester.
I disagree with Ms Ginsberg's opinion. This is not "alarming".

I'm with Catman.

I know some people may find this to be impossible but I will say it anyway. I am AGAINST abortion, yet still pro-choice. The thought of abortion is sickening to me, and I think abortion is almost always the wrong decision. However I think the decision should ultimately be made by the mother.

On this issue I really see no conflict. I know some of the "super pro-choice" people will be opposed to such measures, but in my opinion, it is ultimately a good thing.

If we really want to slow down and ultimately stop abortion in this country we need to work on educating the youth about safe sex. If enough people start practicing safe sex, abortion clinics will close their doors, due to lack of business.

DETMURDS 04-18-2007 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CKFresh (Post 243827)
I'm with Catman.

I know some people may find this to be impossible but I will say it anyway. I am AGAINST abortion, yet still pro-choice. The thought of abortion is sickening to me, and I think abortion is almost always the wrong decision. However I think the decision should ultimately be made by the mother.

On this issue I really see no conflict. I know some of the "super pro-choice" people will be opposed to such measures, but in my opinion, it is ultimately a good thing.

If we really want to slow down and ultimately stop abortion in this country we need to work on educating the youth about safe sex. If enough people start practicing safe sex, abortion clinics will close their doors, due to lack of business.

Good post CKFresh, however I still feel that the best time for pro-choice is before two start "bumping uglies".

Today's society is one that has people wanting to escape from the outcome of the choices they made in the first place. I just wish more would show that they are more responsible.

CKFresh 04-18-2007 03:11 PM

Quote:

Good post CKFresh, however I still feel that the best time for pro-choice is before two start "bumping uglies".
Couldn't agree more. Unfortunately too many people make bad decisions, and I don't see that changing.

Quote:

Today's society is one that has people wanting to escape from the outcome of the choices they made in the first place. I just wish more would show that they are more responsible.
Yeah, this is a problem in all aspects of life.

Maybe the best way would be to offer incentives for those who are considering abortion, but chose not to have one. The only problem is, I can see that system getting abused, just like any other.

HibachiDG 04-18-2007 09:16 PM

Politics and stances on abortion aside, did they really have to do this 2 weeks before my con law 2 final?

catman 04-19-2007 01:27 AM

Timing is everything, Doug.

CKFresh 04-19-2007 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HibachiDG (Post 243866)
Politics and stances on abortion aside, did they really have to do this 2 weeks before my con law 2 final?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

That should make things interesting...

grizzle_810 04-26-2007 06:56 PM

this was a nice victory for the pro-life side. unfortunately, "normal" abortion will remain routine. but, it's a step in the right direction.

bama4256 04-27-2007 10:40 AM

Thank God for the new conservative Supreme Court.:thumbup:

CKFresh 04-27-2007 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grizzle_810 (Post 244242)
this was a nice victory for the pro-life side. unfortunately, "normal" abortion will remain routine. but, it's a step in the right direction.

I think this is a step in the right direction for everyone, pro-life and pro-choice. Let me explain. I think MOST pro-choice people, such as myself, find abortion disgusting. It is not that we WANT abortion, or approve of the practice. It is simply a necessary evil in a free society. The type of practice that was eliminated accounts for less that 1% of all abortions. It was a gruesome pracitce that should be illegal.

It is important that we continue to grant women the right to choose in terms of medical decision. It is not the place of the US government to make medical decisions for individuals. At the same time, we need to work to make abortion THE LAST option, and more difficult to obtain. In addition, we need to work to make unwanted pregnancies less likely. This includes teaching safe sex and abstinence to all students in highschool to empower the students to make the safest decisions.

catman 04-27-2007 01:12 PM

Very nice post. I couldn't have said it better myself.

DETMURDS 06-14-2008 08:11 PM

Here is an abortion for all you on the "pro-abortion" side. It was conducted in the USA. It is MURDER! Please,...explain to me how this is not a human in the left-minded opinion?


I will probably get banned for showing the truth, or this picture won't stay long? Hell, I can't even have an avatar!

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/140/3...f78c259d_m.jpg

themush 06-14-2008 08:26 PM

You and I have never knocked heads before MURDS but, that **** you posted is tasteless, classless, and just plain wrong. Please remove it before I get pissed off.

And honestly I think you should be banned for posting that you sick SOB.

Tarkus 06-14-2008 08:46 PM

I'll just say that post should have stayed in words & not used 'visual effects' which I think deserves a lot more than just a rebuke.

Not necessary...


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.