At 10:44 AM 5/18/2005 -0700, Warren wrote: >Dan, you seem to be of the sense that almost any excuse can be >developed for a late-term abortion; it appears that Gary is of the >opinion that this is not a correct interpretation of current abortion >legislation.
Clarigication: Gary is of the opinion that this is not a correct interpretation of current abortion jurisprudence. Thanks to the activist liberals on the Supreme Court, very little in regards to abortion is governed by legislation. As I cited in my previous message, he is playing fast and loose with the facts by only citing a single SCOTUS abortion case, when in fact the abortion jurisprudence is based upon several cases - including the case Doe vs. Bolton, which was decided concurrently with Roe vs. Wade. We also, of course, have the simple *facts* of the last 30+ years - in that no State has succeed in prohibiting third-trimester abortions. >John -- you seem to be objecting to the possibility of a fetus being >aborted near or at its due date; yet you seem to have overlooked the >stats posted by Gary, which suggest that late-term abortions comprise >one in every 25,000 current abortion procedures (0.004%, which is four >in one hundred thousand, 4:100,000). > >That extreme rarity suggests to *me* that those procedures are >genuinely undertaken in medical necessity, I disagree. Moreover, if the child in such a circumstance has a right to life, then giving legal sanction to even one such violation is one too many. JDG _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
