Can anyone explain why they support partial-birth abortions?

ballz2wallz · 04-18-2007, 02:41 PM

Since the ban was upheld today, I can't figure out why Obama and Edwards are coming out saying they disagree with the ban. It's a pretty sick procedure and highly unnecessary.

Can anyone enlighten me?

nbiggershaft · 04-18-2007, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Since the ban was upheld today, I can't figure out why Obama and Edwards are coming out saying they disagree with the ban. It's a pretty sick procedure and highly unnecessary.

Can anyone enlighten me?

Because it is stupid to ban medical procedures instead of just banning late term abortions.

Phantom · 04-18-2007, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

Because it is stupid to ban medical procedures instead of just banning late term abortions.

misread the question? I don't think this is an argument to allow the procedure.

I'm curious as to why anyone would want to allow this procedure as well.

nbiggershaft · 04-18-2007, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by Phantom

misread the question? I don't think this is an argument to allow the procedure.

I'm curious as to why anyone would want to allow this procedure as well.

What did I misread? I think partial birth abortion ban's are an irresponsible and underhanded method of pursuing a larger, currently unpopular, agenda to ban abortion (or atleast for some, late term abortion). The idea that we should ban specific procedures for accomplishing the same thing because it disagrees with our stomachs is laughable but people buy it when some prick shows them a picture of a fetus being pulled out of the womb.

nbiggershaft · 04-18-2007, 03:05 PM

What do you people honestly have against the quick death of the fetus? That you don't like the pictures? You'd rather it be slow and possibly more painful, but just where you can't see it?

thomez · 04-18-2007, 03:06 PM

because to be consistent with a pro-choice view, I believe that until a baby is born and is completely outside of the womb, it is a piece of the mother's body that she can do with what she pleases. Any other way of determining the "correct" timetable to abort a fetus is too arbitrary.

7960 · 04-18-2007, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

It's a pretty sick procedure and highly unnecessary.

The key here is why are politicians banning the procedure? They're not banning late-term abortions, they're banning that specific procedure. Why? It causes no more (or less) harm than another procedure used during that same week of pregnancy..... why ban this one?

And why is it highly unnecessary? You said it is but didn't say why.

ballz2wallz · 04-18-2007, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by thomez

because to be consistent with a pro-choice view, I believe that until a baby is born and is completely outside of the womb, it is a piece of the mother's body that she can do with what she pleases. Any other way of determining the "correct" timetable to abort a fetus is too arbitrary.

Yeah but these babies are often past the age at which they can survive out of the womb. They are essentially babies dude. They suck their brains out. It's sick.

ballz2wallz · 04-18-2007, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

The key here is why are politicians banning the procedure? They're not banning late-term abortions, they're banning that specific procedure. Why? It causes no more (or less) harm than another procedure used during that same week of pregnancy..... why ban this one?

And why is it highly unnecessary? You said it is but didn't say why.

But isn't this procedure used mostly on late-term pregnancies?

nbiggershaft · 04-18-2007, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

But isn't this procedure used mostly on late-term pregnancies?

So?

Lethal injections are most commonly used for death penalties, should we ban lethal injection to stop death penalties?

Phantom · 04-18-2007, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

The key here is why are politicians banning the procedure? They're not banning late-term abortions, they're banning that specific procedure. Why? It causes no more (or less) harm than another procedure used during that same week of pregnancy..... why ban this one?

And why is it highly unnecessary? You said it is but didn't say why.

The procedure seems barbaric, I think that's more enough reason to ban the procedure. I agree some might have more of an agenda, but that fact doesn't make the procedure any less barbaric. I can't imagine any civilized human carrying out this procedure...

7960 · 04-18-2007, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

But isn't this procedure used mostly on late-term pregnancies?

Yes. So? They're not making late-term abortions illegal so why are they banning just this one procedure? Shouldn't a doctor be the best judge of which procedure would be best?

Originally Posted by Phantom

The procedure seems barbaric, I think that's more enough reason to ban the procedure.

Do you know the alternate procedure? It's to take a scalpel and go in and cut the baby to pieces and then manually remove it.

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.

Supreme Court OKs Abortion Procedure Ban

That's better?

Roonie · 04-18-2007, 03:36 PM

I agree completely barbaric...... No doubt in my mind that a baby later term is fully a human. My kids after week 21 could respond to touches and sounds.

They can't ban the abortion because there might be legitimate reasons for this procedure like the mothers life in danger. I think that is the only reason I can think to have a late term abortion.

I think IMO they should ban late term abortions except when mothers life is in danger.

Phantom · 04-18-2007, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

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.

Supreme Court OKs Abortion Procedure Ban

That's better?

You might be entirely right, but I don't think that is an argument for not banning another barbaric procedure.

Stylerod · 04-18-2007, 03:43 PM

The left sees any kind of limitation on abortions as bad because they feel it's a stepping stone to turn over Roe vs Wade. Just as the right is against "most" gun limitations as that might be a stepping stone to making guns completely illegal.

This isn't that common a procedure and there aren't a lot of doctors that will perform it. I think it's good that this stood up in the supreme court.

ballz2wallz · 04-18-2007, 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by Roonie

I think IMO they should ban late term abortions except when mothers life is in danger.

I agree.

This ban is a step in the right direction at least.

7960 · 04-18-2007, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by Roonie

I think IMO they should ban late term abortions except when mothers life is in danger.

They pretty much have. Only 10% of abortions happen after the 12th week.

7960 · 04-18-2007, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I agree.

This ban is a step in the right direction at least.

So you're against abortion?

ballz2wallz · 04-18-2007, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

So you're against abortion?

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Originally Posted by Roonie

I think IMO they should ban late term abortions except when mothers life is in danger.

I agree.

This ban is a step in the right direction at least.

While this ban is not banning late-term abortions, banning this procedure, most often used in later-term abortions, is a step in the right direction...that direction being the banning of late-term abortions.

7960 · 04-18-2007, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

... is a step in the right direction...that direction being the banning of late-term abortions.

Women who get late term abortions get them (for the most part) because of their health of the baby's. IMO banning late term abortions wouldn't be a good idea. These are women who decided to have a baby and (again, for the most part) can't continue the pregnancy.