Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Congress to ban one type of abortion

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
bspence Donating Member (406 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:00 AM
Original message
Congress to ban one type of abortion
http://www.msnbc.com/news/983016.asp?0cv=CB10

WASHINGTON, Oct. 21 Congress on Tuesday was expected to ban a specific late-term abortion procedure, a legislative landmark that could lead to a fierce legal fight affecting a womans right to end a pregnancy.

THE BAN on what opponents call partial birth abortion is likely to pass by a wide margin when it comes up for a vote scheduled in the Senate on Tuesday. Three weeks ago, the House passed the bill with a 281-142 vote, and Senate action would send it to President Bush, who strongly supports the ban.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bspence Donating Member (406 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. Serious question:
What happens if the life of the mother is in jeopardy? The doctor's supposed to say,"Too bad?"

Honestly, will a doctor go to jail for saving the life of the mother during labor???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trogdor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. No problemo!
They'll just take it by C-section. Hey, they didn't use the procedure, so they can't go to jail, but the woman is on her back for a few weeks. Nice one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cally Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
17. My understanding
is that C-sections are not always possible. I'm not a doctor and I'm basing this on personal experience from 10 plus years ago. Sometimes the ONLY way to save the mother's life is a late term abortion. These are not done lightly, but when a woman and her baby will likely die.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissMarple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. A C- section is not exactly minor surgery.
They can be far more life threatening than an abortion. Nature provides spontaneous abortions or miscarriages if a pregnancy if not developing, modern medicine has refined that thus saving the lives and preserving the health of many more women and young girls.

While I,personally, believe abortion should never be used for primary birth control unless there are extenuating circumstances, I don't think government can define all the extenuating circumstances.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. Yes.
These men are fanatics. They don't give a crap if a woman dies. They don't give a crap if they kid dies with her. They want CONTROL, and they want to dictate terms, taking the place of the god they all claim to believe in and serve. That they're all medically ignorant enough to call it a "partial birth abortion" just adds insult to injury.

It makes all religious men look like they have a hardon to kill women.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
2. Isn't it interesting...
that the same party who screeches against "big government" when it comes to suggesting we move towards national health care is perfectly comfortable with Congress making medical decisions for individuals?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asjr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. abortion
This should never have been brought up in the House and Senate. It is only the business of a woman and her physician. It makes me very angry that government can make laws that are contrary to a woman's right to choose. I don't like abortion; I would never have had one, but I can't tell my next-door neighbor she can't have one if it is needed. If the government wants sway over life and limb let them pass universal health coverage. This government is not for the "people"--it is a matter of having power over us. The Repubs don't like "big government." So what is this except big government? Do certain people have some rights but not all? I am surprised it wasn't included in the Patriot Act. Rant over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WindRavenX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
3. Chip, chip
As horrible as these procedures are, they are needed. They rarely occur, but some woman might need them.
Slowly, abortion rights are being taken away from us...designating fetuses as people...banning third trimester abortion..banning second..banning first...
Then we are left with nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radwriter0555 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
5. LET them. It's a paper victory, since the procedure isn't even used..
it makes the lawmakers look good on paper to the ult-conservative side, but in actuality, affects NO one.

Let em have it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BikeDeck Donating Member (94 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Never used
Where do you get your information that the procedure in question is "never used".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bspence Donating Member (406 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. i'm a little skeptical though
They're trying to give rights to the fetus, basically. They're trying to make it look like murder (which at that point, I guess it is. But if it's down to the life of the mother or the child, the parents should be allowed to choose what should happen!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Girlfriday Donating Member (570 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. .04% of abortions performed are PBA
That translates to about 2000 a year, from what I've read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spinbaby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
15. It is used
Edited on Tue Oct-21-03 11:17 AM by spinbaby
Primarily in the case of rare genetic defects such as Trisomy 18 and Triploidy which are usually not diagnosed until mid pregnancy. These are fatal defects and most fetuses with these syndromes die well before birth. In those cases where the pregnancy does progress into the third trimester, the mother is at extreme risk of toxemia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Malva Zebrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
11. this procedure is used to protect the mother
in order that her reproductive organs, or her own body and health
may not be damaged and she may go on in confidence to another pregnancy if she wishes.

The procedure is to benefit the woman, of course, but look, congress does not want to admit that women are more important than a monster she will birth, who is likely to die three hours later.


may be true that it is a paper victory, but it does bring to the forefront and establishes a precedent--ie that congress can regulate the family of a woman at will--this should not even be an issue in congress at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Girlfriday Donating Member (570 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
12. I am a staunch Pro Rights advocate
Edited on Tue Oct-21-03 10:48 AM by Girlfriday
and I am a little squeamish about the procedure I will admit. However it is never used indiscriminately from all I have read.

Does anyone remember when Rick Santorum's wife was having difficulties with her last pregnancy? For a time it looked as though they might have to abort and Rickie was in a quandry. Thankfully, (and I'm sure he attributes it to all the prayers), her health improved and abortion never became an issue. I often wonder what old Rick would have done.

My father was totally against abortion except for incest, rape and protecting mother's health. I used an argument on him that I have never heard anyone else use; I contend that disallowing a woman's right is a punitive measure. Why? Can someone please explain why a baby developed as a result of rape, should have less right to be born than one conceived between two people who enjoy each other? Forbidding abortion is a way to "punish" women who enjoy sex!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Malva Zebrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. well, that is why that argument is inconsistent and can be pointed to
as such. This procedure is rarely done and I think that many states, if not all, have prohibitions and rather strict regulations re the third term abortion. Your 0.4% sounds right, but I do not have actual statistics either. It rankles me when I read Bush is favorable toward this--he has done more to injure, even kill, women than he has done to support them and their particular health needs. He is using, perhaps even gloating, that he will benefit politically off the women he has on the other hand, put into jeopardy or caused their deaths by his barbaric attitudes toward their health needs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Voltaire99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. Postpartum humans over fetuses
Hey, even needles make me squeamish.

But I stand here: all abortion, all the time, on demand, for anyone who wants one, free of charge.

That's liberty, anything less is a sop to the sentimental, the superstitious, and the stingy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eileen Donating Member (150 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
14. IT CAN NOT BAN WHAT DOES NOT EXIST!!!
And the Phantom Procedure which has been named "PBA" by the Anti Abortion Propaganda Industry (AAPI) does not now and never has existed.

The term is an attempt to describe both a medical abortion procedure and a time in gestation when the abortion is performed using a single emotion laden acronym.

There is not one member of the governing bodies of Congress or the Senate capable of providing answers to the very simple challenge at the top of - this page -.

The current attempt to 'ban' this Phantom Procedure, Bill S3 is in many ways even more dangerous to women than previous versions although it still contains the poison pill that all such legislation contained - that being that the description of this supposed "PBA" is so broad that it may even be legally used to ban first trimester abortions. For those concerned about this latest misogynist attack on women's rights I have a short analysis of the current bill - here - including it's inherent 'poison pill' effect on women and physicians who provide their services for them.

If I may be so bold I would like to suggest that those who are as appaled as I am by the success of this propaganda term on the rights of women no longer ever refer to the phantom procedure using the propaganda term "PBA" without also using and equating it with the term "Phantom Procedure". If we must adopt the language of the enemies of freedom let us at least make it clear that we recognize the propaganda for what it is.

Eileen
-Eileen's Always In Process Web Page
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissMarple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Thanks for the information. Perhaps we should forward it to "Dr." Bush.
This is just another way to divide the American people and obfuscate the real issues we should be addressing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Welcome to DU, Eileen
:hi:

And I agree with your post! Thanks for sharing it with us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. Hi Eileen!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Jul 24th 2014, 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC