“If intact D&X is truly necessary in some circumstances, a prior injection to kill the fetus allows a doctor to perform the procedure, given that the Act’s prohibition only applies to the delivery of ‘a living fetus,”’ the ruling said.
What a ludicrous law... so they can still do the procedure, so long as they kill the fetus before it passes through the cervix, but not afterwards.
There is a canny strategy behind this law: Rather than attempt to make abortion illegal in one fell-swoop, eliminate specific procedures of legal abortion one by one. The advantage to this political strategy in our system of government is that it's easier to outlaw a single activity than a group of activities. If other bills can be passed through that make illegal other forms of abortion one by one(i.e. hysterectomy abortion, Saline/Urea/Prostaglandin abortion) it will slowly create a Judicial precedent for making abortion illegal. Given that this issue is one without a strong majority, this type of legal strategy can potentially work as Legislative and Judicial dominoes. It's not a short-term or overnight plan. It is most definitely long-term.
Did you happen to read Justice Kennedy's statements on the Supreme Court ruling of this Law? Regardless of your personal moral views regarding abortion, his words are quite insulting. NYT Article
And Ruth Bader Ginsburg is still my hero and favorite Justice for retaining her steadfastness in appropriate jurisprudence. I admire her very much.
At a risk for setting myself up for insult, I'll actually give a bit of my opinion on partial-birth abortions: I think that in many situations (definitely not all) they are morally wrong. I think that way about a lot of mid to late term abortions, though I consider first trimester abortions appropriate when the potential Mother makes the informed choice to have one. I'm not saying this to debate the morality of these abortions, but rather to illustrate and emphasize that despite my personal feelings on the issue that I recognize the Majority opinion, as expressed in this U.S. Supreme Court document, is based on fallacious arguments, misinformation on health-care, and unjust patriarchal bullshit. The justification presented creates a dangerous and frightening legal precedent.
Most importantly, this legislation does absolutely nothing to prevent a fetus from dying, yet removes a potentially safer and healthier option for a woman obtaining an abortion. It protects nobody and hurts women.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-04-21 03:41 am (UTC)What a ludicrous law... so they can still do the procedure, so long as they kill the fetus before it passes through the cervix, but not afterwards.
There is a canny strategy behind this law: Rather than attempt to make abortion illegal in one fell-swoop, eliminate specific procedures of legal abortion one by one. The advantage to this political strategy in our system of government is that it's easier to outlaw a single activity than a group of activities. If other bills can be passed through that make illegal other forms of abortion one by one(i.e. hysterectomy abortion, Saline/Urea/Prostaglandin abortion) it will slowly create a Judicial precedent for making abortion illegal. Given that this issue is one without a strong majority, this type of legal strategy can potentially work as Legislative and Judicial dominoes. It's not a short-term or overnight plan. It is most definitely long-term.
Did you happen to read Justice Kennedy's statements on the Supreme Court ruling of this Law? Regardless of your personal moral views regarding abortion, his words are quite insulting.
NYT Article
If you want to read the full transcript, here's the Syllabus of Bench Opinions: http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/05-380_All.pdf
And Ruth Bader Ginsburg is still my hero and favorite Justice for retaining her steadfastness in appropriate jurisprudence. I admire her very much.
At a risk for setting myself up for insult, I'll actually give a bit of my opinion on partial-birth abortions: I think that in many situations (definitely not all) they are morally wrong. I think that way about a lot of mid to late term abortions, though I consider first trimester abortions appropriate when the potential Mother makes the informed choice to have one. I'm not saying this to debate the morality of these abortions, but rather to illustrate and emphasize that despite my personal feelings on the issue that I recognize the Majority opinion, as expressed in this U.S. Supreme Court document, is based on fallacious arguments, misinformation on health-care, and unjust patriarchal bullshit. The justification presented creates a dangerous and frightening legal precedent.
Most importantly, this legislation does absolutely nothing to prevent a fetus from dying, yet removes a potentially safer and healthier option for a woman obtaining an abortion. It protects nobody and hurts women.