Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 07-02-2003, 06:26 PM

Judge Blocks Va. 'Partial-Birth' Abortion Ban

Quote:

The Center for Reproductive Rights had challenged the constitutionality of the ban, which was to take effect today. Lawyers for Attorney General Jerry W. Kilgore (R) defended the law in a brief hearing today and argued that it should take effect immediately.

U.S. District Judge Richard L. Williams granted the center's request that the law be put on hold. And he denied a motion by Kilgore's office for a 120-day delay before trial.

"I don't know why you need 120 days for a no-brain case like this," Williams said, alluding to previous reviews of the issue. In 1998, a similar Virginia law was struck down as unconstitutional by another judge in the same court.

Vylo · 07-03-2003, 08:57 AM

I found any support for the abortion child that is healthy and not concieved from rape to be a horrible thing, a support for the murder of innocent lives.

Jewel · 07-03-2003, 09:22 AM

Good! I'm glad that the law was struck down. Medical decisions should be made by doctors and their patients -- not the government.

CJD · 07-03-2003, 09:56 AM

While I sympathize with you, Jewel, on this, my convictions regarding standing up for those who cannot themselves, outweigh my disdain for the government getting involved where it does not belong. If it is a question between the liberty of a woman and the liberty of her unborn child, which is more defensible?

I understand that partial birth abortions are rare and mostly performed when the mother's life is in danger. For this reason, we should be case-specific regarding this issue.

CJD

Toto · 07-03-2003, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CJD
While I sympathize with you, Jewel, on this, my convictions regarding standing up for those who cannot themselves, outweigh my disdain for the government getting involved where it does not belong. If it is a question between the liberty of a woman and the liberty of her unborn child, which is more defensible?

I understand that partial birth abortions are rare and mostly performed when the mother's life is in danger. For this reason, we should be case-specific regarding this issue.

CJD

The liberty and health of a woman are much more defensible than the potential life of a fetus, especially at the time most abortions are performed.

The law will be struck down because it is not "case-specific". It is a grandstanding propagandistic attempt to impose some kind of limit on abortion, with no regard for the health and welfare of the mother.

Jewel · 07-03-2003, 11:29 AM

It is still a medical decision -- and it isn't one that is made lightly. Late term abortions are risky. However, I still feel that no one should be making those decisions except the woman & her doctor (and possibly the father). I do not think you (or anyone else) could adaquately make that decision for me.

dangin · 07-03-2003, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by CJD
my convictions regarding standing up for those who cannot themselves,

Does this extend to all creatures of the natural world, or only humans? If it is only for humans, why do you make a distinction?

The world has always been a brutish place and more often than not life is short, brutal, and then erased.

Vylo · 07-03-2003, 12:20 PM

If the mother's life is at risk, then that is a different matter, but in cases where the abortion is done because the child is an "inconvience" the mother it is simply murder. Murder should not be legal.

Toto · 07-03-2003, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vylo
If the mother's life is at risk, then that is a different matter, but in cases where the abortion is done because the child is an "inconvience" the mother it is simply murder. Murder should not be legal.

That's your opinion, but that's not the law - because most people don't share your opinion. The fetus is not a child until it is born, or at least viable, so the charge of murder in inappropriate.

In fact, every pregnancy has some risk to the pregnant woman. Most women take this risk on willingly, but who are you to force that choice on the woman? Who are you to trivialize her reasons as merely "inconvenience?"

Vylo · 07-03-2003, 12:31 PM

She should be held responsible for her act. She voluntarily participated in actions by which she became pregant. If she didn't want that chance, she shouldn't have taken the risk. To kill another human for your negligence is irresponsible and incredibly detestable.

Sorry I use strong emotion in this but I am highly against abortion in most cases (health and rape not included).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-03-2003, 08:57 AM	#2
Vylo Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: washington, NJ 07882 Posts: 253	I found any support for the abortion child that is healthy and not concieved from rape to be a horrible thing, a support for the murder of innocent lives.

07-03-2003, 09:22 AM	#3
Jewel Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Northern Virginia, USA Posts: 1,112	Good! I'm glad that the law was struck down. Medical decisions should be made by doctors and their patients -- not the government.

07-03-2003, 09:56 AM	#4
CJD Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: greater Orlando area Posts: 832	While I sympathize with you, Jewel, on this, my convictions regarding standing up for those who cannot themselves, outweigh my disdain for the government getting involved where it does not belong. If it is a question between the liberty of a woman and the liberty of her unborn child, which is more defensible? I understand that partial birth abortions are rare and mostly performed when the mother's life is in danger. For this reason, we should be case-specific regarding this issue. CJD

07-03-2003, 11:29 AM	#6
Jewel Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Northern Virginia, USA Posts: 1,112	It is still a medical decision -- and it isn't one that is made lightly. Late term abortions are risky. However, I still feel that no one should be making those decisions except the woman & her doctor (and possibly the father). I do not think you (or anyone else) could adaquately make that decision for me.

07-03-2003, 12:20 PM	#8
Vylo Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: washington, NJ 07882 Posts: 253	If the mother's life is at risk, then that is a different matter, but in cases where the abortion is done because the child is an "inconvience" the mother it is simply murder. Murder should not be legal.

07-03-2003, 12:31 PM	#10
Vylo Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: washington, NJ 07882 Posts: 253	She should be held responsible for her act. She voluntarily participated in actions by which she became pregant. If she didn't want that chance, she shouldn't have taken the risk. To kill another human for your negligence is irresponsible and incredibly detestable. Sorry I use strong emotion in this but I am highly against abortion in most cases (health and rape not included).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.