Chronicling the ongoing battle between conservative and liberal ideals

For the waywardness of the simple will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them - Proverbs 1:32

E-mail Me |About Me |Home Page |Comment Rules |Ref Desk

Daily Notes :I Moved to MT.

In fact this page will automatically send you to my new page in 4 minutes. Or go there now...Radio Brian Scott


Judge Rules Against The Partial Birth Abortion Ban.

Judicial Activism Continues.

    "A controversial ban on late-term abortions signed into law by President Bush last year was ruled unconstitutional on Tuesday by a judge making the first court decision on the law.”
Care to guess where this judge is from?

    “San Francisco-based U.S. District Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton said the law was unconstitutional because it was vague and posed an "undue burden" on abortion rights. Hamilton also ruled against the law because it lacked an exemption to protect a mother's health.”
The mother’s “health” as described by liberals includes mental health. So if a mother feels a lot of stress over her pregnancy, this would be considered life threatening to the mother. That’s all the reason they need to kill the unborn.

Interesting side note; I’m not sure when this happened, but the argument used to be that there was no way of telling just what was inside the womb. It (the living human baby) was considered by many in the pro-murder community, as being a glob of tissue. In fact, that is what they would tell their pre-abortive patients to help sell the idea. I’m not hearing that argument any longer. Now the argument is: that although this is human life, the murder of the child is necessary either for the health of the mother; over-population reasons; or increases in unwanted children. Give me a break.

Thankfully this decision will be appealed to the Supreme Court and most likely over ruled. The unfortunate part about all this, is that there will be partial birth abortions provided for individuals regardless of what the law states. Why? Because it is nearly impossible to regulate and enforce such laws. Are they going to have law enforcement present for every abortion ever performed from now on? It is highly doubtful. I believe the pro-death doctors are counting on that.

This link proves my point. Warren M. Hern, who wrote the article, recalls a conversation he had with a concerned patient;

    "On the same day I got that call, I received a call from another woman who hoped to become pregnant but wanted to be reassured that, in spite of passage of the "partial-birth" ban, she would still be able to terminate the pregnancy if a serious genetic defect were discovered at, say, 20 weeks of pregnancy. Because of her history, she has an especially high risk of such a scenario. Without reassurance, she would avoid pregnancy entirely. Again, I reassured her that I would be here for her if she needs me."
A society can be judged based on how they treat their poor and those incapable of protecting themselves. What other person on earth is more innocent, and incapable of protecting themselves than the unborn?

posted by: Brian Scott

Get the code for this blogroll.  visit The Blue S tate Conservatives