Care to provide some citation for this assertion which makes it clear it is in reference to terminating the CHILD and not mere termination of the PREGNANCY (which can be done without killing the baby)

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

From the amicus brief filed by ACOG

ACOG has thus concluded that an intact D&E "may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of the woman, and only the doctor in consultation with the patient, based on the woman's particular circumstances can make that decision." [ACOG Statement of Policy on Abortion (reaffirmed 2004)]"

__________________
The most important political office is that of private citizen.
Louis D. Brandeis - First Jewish Supreme Court Justice

Sounds good....so good in fact I think I will read more!
http://www.sdhealthyfamilies.org/med...tionPolicy.pdf

Could not identify any circumstances underwhich this procedure would be the only option to save the life or preserve the health of the woman. Go figure.

Furthermore, it is pretty clear from the context of the full document, that it is limiting this assessment of D&X as "may be[ing]" the most appropriate as opposed to other methods of aborting a pregnancy, and not the option of completing delivery and having a live birth.


This interpretation is given even greater weight by ACOG press release:

Notice that the text in bold considers ONLY other methods of ABORTION, and not full live-birth. This language makes it absolutely clear that the superiority of the D&X is being attributed within the context of other methods of ABORTION, and does not include full delivery which would not, by definition, be an abortion.

So, let me be more precise this time, please provide a citation where an expert is unequivocable in saying that there is ever an advantage to the woman in doing a D&X compared to the option of completing the nearly completed delivery as opposed to other forms of abortion.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Your citations only qualify and do not contradict the statement I quoted. So your original statement is a misrepresentation just like i said.

__________________
The most important political office is that of private citizen.
Louis D. Brandeis - First Jewish Supreme Court Justice

My citations make it clear that what I originally indicated was absolutely correct, that PBA is NEVER medically neccesary given the alternative of allowing the live birth to go to completion, an option clearly and disingenuously excluded from the position of the ACOG.

They specifically say they could find no instance in which it was "neccesary" and even when citing the POSSIBILITY that it could be the "most appropriate" method, it is comparing it ONLY to other methods of ABORTING the baby, and not to the excluded option of live birth.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Wichita Eagle 4/11/98, Dr. Tiller testified in an effort to prevent a ban on late term abortions bringing "statistics and photos of catastrophic pregnancies he had aborted" including fetus missing skulls and spinal cords, twins which had fused into a single body, all instances in which the problem was not diagnosed earlier and there was no chance of survival outside of the womb.

Which brings us back to what is the purpose of specifically banning partial birth abortions as opposed to "late term" abortions. It is the stage of the fetus growth and not the manner of discharge which repulses us. We don't hold a funeral every time we flush a full condem or a woman has an unusually heavy period after unprotected sex (possible miscarriage). No one seems to mind throwing out unused embryo's at fertility clinics...

My grandmother and mother experienced and barely survived a pregnancy of toxemia in which both lives were at risk. I don't know what the solution to that is in this day and age and I'm sure there is one. The point is, our failure of imagination in coming up with a scenario in which a late term or partial birth abortion is necessary, is guaranteed to be trumped by Gods'/Natures' unlimited possibilities for disaster or success.

So I must conclude that the specific ban on "partial birth abortions" is NOT what it appears to be but a wedge driven to overturn RvW

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

Guess you skipped class during Sex Ed in high school, huh? You seem to think a rubber sack containing human sperm is a human being. It's not, even if people like you THINK it is.

Let's hope you're right, and let's hope RvW IS overturned!

A brilliant retort. I bow to you superior intellect.
XXOO

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

Actually, it IS a brilliant retort. Roe was a misread of the Constitution, and it was also a suit brought by a woman who now OPPOSES the hideous slaughter of live human beings known as "abortion". Abortion is an issue which should be decided by the individual states and by the LEGISLATURE, not by fiat of 9 people dressed in black robes.

And clearly my intellect IS superior to yours, since you actually attempted to equate sperm in a rubber bag to a live human being. How utterly foolish and scientifically ignorant of you, JHC.

Why, then, would the Church be against contraception? Why do they view masturbation as a sin?

I know plenty of whacked out "Christians" who hold those views...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":

Simple - because God (not man) is the Author of life.

Simple - because masturbation is self-centered, as opposed to other-centered. It is Love of Self, rather than Love of Others. It is selfishness.

So? I know self-proclaimed Atheists who are scientifically ignorant A-holes. What is your point?

You have merely added credence to my theory which I didn't need actually. Thanks anyway.

The evolution of a human life begins with a separate sperm and egg, fertilization and various stages through to birth and the perversity of abortion is that we can not apparently decide at what point we intend to take a stand. This is the point which you failed to see.

Glad you understood the comment about intellect as it was intended. If you caught that but you didn't understand my point about the importance of our tolerance level for aborted life being dependent on the stage of that life, it is possibly not merely your limited intellect that is causing your difficulty in reason and logic.

You see, part of the problem with our current "pro life" culture is that we have difficulty defining "life". The case of Terry Schaivo, debate about embryonic stem cell research, our prior ban on birth control and our current blind eye to fertility clinics disposal of unused fertilized eggs, all point to this obvious issue that you so casually dismiss.

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

Sal,

I hope your having fun. I do so enjoy playing like a little kid again on occassion.

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn

Incorrect, and another scientifically-ignorant assertion by you.

Human life begins at the JOINING of sperm and egg.

Which is why (contrary to your earlier ignorant suggestion) human sperm in a rubber bag is NOT a live human being.

It's bad enough that pro-abortionists exhibit a blatant disregard for the sanctity of human life. It's even worse when they exhibit a profound lack of scientific understanding of what CONSTITUTES human life.

Whatever darling.

I will however mention that I am not a pro abortionist. My argument is not about the legality of abortion, it is to do with the recent ruling and title of this thread. It is a wolf in sheeps clothing, a disguise, a hidden agenda, and I note with a degree of irony that you do not argue that.

All you have accomplished here Sal, is to reinforce my argument in an effort to ascend your own soap box. Be my guest and carry on.

__________________
...the government...is caving in...with their specious arguments couched in the...language of civil rights law, and that the churches ... likewise crumbling to...rhetoric which is nothing but heretical sophistry -- ~F Phelps
Platitudes like the one you offer are no different - and no less incorrect - than the jackass part-time Christian who says, "I'm going to heaven because I'm nice to people." It so misses the point.~Impugn