A Small Victory In The Culture War

[Gauracandra 1]

Senate OKs 'Partial-Birth' Abortion Ban

Senate Votes Overwhelmingly to Ban 'Partial-Birth' Abortion; Bill Heads to the House

 

The Associated Press

 

WASHINGTON March 13 —

The Senate voted overwhelmingly Thursday to ban a procedure that critics call partial birth abortion, a triumph for President Bush and the Republicans who took control of Congress this year.

 

The 64-33 vote sent the legislation to the GOP-controlled House, where passage is expected this spring.

 

"Partial-birth abortion is an abhorrent procedure that offends human dignity, and I commend the Senate for passing legislation to ban it," Bush said in a prepared statement. "Today's action is an important step toward building a culture of life in America."

 

The lopsided roll call was a marked contrast to three days of emotionally-charged debate in which supporters of the bill attacked the controversial procedure as barbaric and opponents said the measure was unconstitutional and the opening salvo of a larger assault on abortion rights.

 

"This is a heinous act. It is immoral. It is wrong. It is simply something a civilized society should not tolerate," Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, said at a news conference after the vote.

 

The bill's supporters turned back a series of challenges over three days of debate, losing only one skirmish. That was a non-binding vote in which the Senate went on record in favor of the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that established abortion rights. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., the leading supporters of the bill that passed, indicated that provision would be deleted from the final bill that goes to the White House for the president's signature.

 

Abortion opponents have been working for eight years to put the ban into law, and with a sympathetic president in the White House, are likely to succeed within a matter of weeks or months.

 

Abortion rights supporters have pledged a court challenge. "This bill is unconstitutional," argued Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., citing the lack of an exemption in cases where the health of the mother is in jeopardy.

 

The bill prohibits doctors from committing an "overt act" designed to kill a partially delivered fetus. Partial birth is described as a case in which the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the event of a breech delivery, if "any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother."

 

The legislation includes an exemption in cases in which the procedure is necessary to save the life of the mother.

 

The debate over the measure reflected hardened political lines on abortion, an issue that Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said was dividing America as deeply as slavery did in the 19th century. The Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that women had the right to an abortion.

 

For much of the time since, abortion rights supporters have had enough support in Congress or the White House to fend off most attempts to restrict the rights the court identified in its 1973 ruling.

 

But beginning in 1995, abortion opponents have focused their efforts on the partial-birth procedure, putting their political foes on the defensive.

 

Congress twice before passed legislation to impose a ban, but former President Clinton vetoed both measures. A third attempt was sidetracked in 2000 when the Supreme Court invalidated a Nebraska state law that closely resembled the measure moving through the House and Senate. Yet a fourth attempt failed last year when Democrats, then in control of the Senate, refused to schedule a vote.

 

Abortion rights advocates scored one victory on Wednesday when the Senate voted 52-46 in support of the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that gave women the right to end their pregnancies.

 

It was the first referendum on the 30-year-old ruling since the new Congress convened in January, and nine of the 11 newcomers to the Senate signaled opposition to the 1973 ruling.

 

That was a nonbinding vote, and on the legislative skirmishes that counted, abortion foes were in command.

 

On a vote of 60-38, the Senate first killed a proposal to ban a range of late-term abortions with exceptions for the health of the mother, exceptions that critics said rendered the prohibition all but meaningless.

 

Moments later, on a vote of 56-42, lawmakers rejected a call to have the bill rewritten in committee to address "constitutional issues raised by the Supreme Court" in a 2000 ruling.

 

Later in the day, in a final triumph for abortion foes, the Senate rejected a second attempt to substitute a ban on abortions after the fetus is viable outside the mother. That proposal included exceptions for the life and health of the mother, and failed, 60-35.

 

Durbin authored the proposal to ban a wider range of late-term abortions, but it drew opposition from abortion foes and abortion rights supporters as well.

 

It would have prohibited abortions after the point that the fetus could survive outside the mother, tempered by an exception in cases that threaten a mother's life or "risk grievous injury to her physical health."

 

"It doesn't ban abortion, which is what some people want. And it doesn't get the government out of the picture, which is what some other people want," he said. "Instead, it tries to draw a line, a good faith line of where we will allow abortions in late term pregnancies."

[Gauracandra 1]

in the White House. This procedure is truly hideous, if you see, even in schematic diagrams how it is done. Abortion may not be eliminated, but atleast they have said there are certain lines that are just too deplorable even for some Democrats to accept. Partial birth abortion is for the demons, and all who didn't support its abolishment should be removed from any position of political power. They have no morality and will only create a culture of death.

[livingentity 0]

to even think that someone would consider doing such a thing. Now they need to get rid of abortion period!

 

What does it take to get through to these people that it is murder?

 

Demons kill their children and think nothing of it.

[Guest guest]

I caught just a snippet of the debate on Cspan. I caught the presentation by Bill Frisk ®, the Senate majority leader. He is also a surgeon. He showed an artists renderings of what a partial birth abortion is.

 

They must turn the child so the head doesn't come out first. That would be a legal birth. Then they take these huge surgical scissors and shove them up and under the skull of the child. Having completed that portion of the crime they then must open the scissors up to produce a larger hole. That makes room for the vacuuming instrument to go in a suck out the brains of the child. F_____g Demons!!!

 

Any questions as to why this world is plagued by constant war? We ain't seen nothing yet. Can we even imagine the stock of reactions that are coming due for this and the animal slaughter?

 

42 million abortions in the USA since 1972

[livingentity 0]

I had a neighbor in California that used abortion as her birth control choice. Every time she got pregant she would run off and get an abortion. She did this so many times that her regular doctor said no more so she would find other doctors to do it for her. I lost count of how many children she murdered.

 

Talk about chalking up the negative karma!

[livingentity 0]

and people wanted to be allowed to do that!! Demons - all of them! I feel physically ill just reading about it - how can anyone actually do it.

[Guest guest]

"It's MY bodyit's MY rightit's MY choice"

 

OK and then it's also their karma. Next time they get to be scraped and sucked out of a womb. What a horrendous cycle.

 

This is tracable to not understanding the distinction between the self and the body and the repurcusions for our actions. Our leaders are blind to this. Our teachers don't know it to teach it. So people are left rudderless. Eugenicists like Margret Sanger come along and start Planned Parenthood and people look to her as a saint.

 

No Brahmins= no knowledge or direction

No Ksatriyas=no protection, mass exploitation

[livingentity 0]

I remember when abortion became legalized. The excuse was it would save so many women who were dying from illegal kitchen table abortions. And also to decrease the number of unwanted babies.

 

Now the children that are being murdered far outnumber the number of women dying from botched illegal abortions. That was their problem of their own making. The children have not choice.

 

What goes around comes around.

 

Planned Parenthood!

[Gauracandra 1]

I'm so glad you mentioned this connection between the Eugenics movement and abortion. People don't know but Planned Parenthood was founded for the expressed purpose of killing black unborn children and other undesirables. This is a FACT. And this is the liberal left that supports this??? This abortion movement was born when people like Hitler were philosophizing about how to create a super race. The holocaust was Hitler's solution, abortion was the other side of it. I also believe there is a connection between Darwinian evolution, which came around the same time period, which helped give a base to such philosophies.

 

Also, another point most feminists don't like to admit, but the founder of the women's movement in the U.S. Susan B. Anthony, was 100% pro-life. They hate it. Thats why there is relatively little mention of her. I'll see if I can find some of her statements about how abortion degrades women and allows irresponsible men to exploit women.

[livingentity 0]

The planned parenthood clinic opened in Montgomery Alabama in an old victorian house in the early 70's.

 

It was discovered that the old doctor that worked there would find out if the black women were illiterate and if so would tell them that they needed some sort of surgery - that something was wrong with them. He would have them sign or mark the form giving him permission to perform the surgery.

 

Well, what the authorities discovered was that he was actually performing sterizations on these young women. Some of them were so young that their parents had to sign or mark the permission forms.

 

If they were pregnant then something was always wrong and he told them they needed some sort of surgery - but he was doing abortions and sterilizations.

 

 

[Gauracandra 1]

The American Baby Code

 

Article 1. The purpose of the American Baby Code shall be to provide for a better distribution of babies. To assist couples who wish to prevent overproduction of offspring and thus to reduce the burden of charity and taxation for public relief and to protect society against the propagation and increase of the unfit.

 

Article 2. Birth control clinics shall be permitted to function as services of government health departments or under the support of charity, or as non-profit, self-sustaining agencies subject to inspection and control by public authorities.

 

Article 3. A marriage license shall in itself give husband and wife only the right to a common household and not the right to parenthood.

 

Article 4. No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit for parenthood.

 

Article 5. Permits for parenthood shall be issued by government authorities to married couples upon application, providing the parents are financially able to support the expected child, have the qualifications needed for proper rearing of the child, have no transmissible diseases, and on the woman's part no indication that maternity is likely to result in death or permanent injury to health.

 

Article 6. No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.

 

Article 7. Every county shall be assisted administratively by the states in the effort to maintain a direct ratio between county birth rate and its index of child welfare. When the county records show an unfavorable variation from this ratio the county shall be taxed by the State…. The revenues thus obtained shall be expended by the State within the given county in giving financial support to birth control…..

 

Article 8. Feeble-minded persons, habitual congenital criminals, those afflicted with inheritable diseases, and others found biologically unfit should be sterilized or in cases of doubt should be isolated as to prevent the perpetuation of their afflictions by breeding.

[Gauracandra 1]

 

Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives.

 

 

 

"more children from the fit, less from the unfit; that is the chief aim of birth control."

 

 

 

“birth control, to create a race of thoroughbreds."

 

 

[stonehearted 0]

We're waiting for the Anthony antidote.

[Gauracandra 1]

 

Abortion was referred to as "child murder."

 

 

 

I deplore the horrible crime of child murder

 

 

 

We want prevention, not merely punishment. We must reach the root of the evil...It is practiced by those whose inmost souls revolt from the dreadful deed.

 

 

 

All the articles on this subject that I have read have been from men. They denounce women as alone guilty, and never include man in any plans for the remedy.

 

 

 

Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; But oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!

 

 

 

The work of woman is not to lessen the severity or certainty of the penalty for the violation of the moral law, but to prevent this violation by the removal of the causes which lead to it.

 

 

Anthony’s newspaper, The Revolution, made this claim:

 

“When a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is a sign that, by education or circumstances, she has been greatly wronged.”

 

 

[stonehearted 0]

These are really nice! Thanks.

 

Babhru