Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal Chacham's Journal: Partial-Birth Abortion back for the ban 10

Journal by Chacham

Fox News has an article on the Republicans desire to pass the ban on Partial-Birth Abortion. For those who don't remember, Congress passed this twice, and Clinton vetoed it both times. The override of the veto failed by one vote in the Senate.

This is a Republican issue, but many Democrats are for it as well. The House easily passed it (and overrode the veto). The main backup is the Senate. Even then, it passed twice in the Senate. It came up a third time, but the Democratic Leadership didn't allow it to come to the floor. However, with both a Republican House and Senate, it should pass. I'd assume that there are enough votes in the Senate to cloture any filibusters.

This is wonderful. Partial-Bith abortion is very bad. Even reading about the procedure makes me want to puke. When congress first took it up, one person wanted to bring in drawn images of the procedure, yet the feminists amongst the Democrats refused to allow it. Apparently, they realized what the drawn images would show.

We'll hide the worst part. Gur cebprqher vaibyirf chapghevat gur onol'f urnq naq fhpxvat uvf oenvaf bhg fb gur fxhyy pbyyncfrf. Va zbfg pnfrf gur onol unf nyernql orra xvyyrq (jvgu qehtf) guvf vf abg nyjnlf gur pnfr.

I just hope they get this ban through.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Partial-Birth Abortion back for the ban More

Partial-Birth Abortion back for the ban

Comments Filter:
  • "I think we'll hear a great deal of hyperbole about Roe being at risk from the abortion side. I hope they're right," said Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J. "From our side, we're going to assert even more, with compassion but with earnestness, that the Holocaust of the unborn has to stop."

    I love the rhetoric that conservative, christian, politicians spew about abortion. Honestly, if these "god-fearing" folks would spend 10% of the time and energy they spend on picketing and preaching; instead on dealing with the living children in this country, we wouldn't have half the problems we currently have.

    But, that's too easy and not as "sexy" as fighting a holy war...
    • instead on dealing with the living children in this country,

      They do. However, it always gets demonized by Democrats. For example, Newt Gingrich had some wonderful ideas about schools, including giving away free prizes for good work. Instead, the Democrats focused on how he wanted to not let the school lunch program grow as quickly. Also, when Bush pushed for standardized testing, he got a lot of resistence from Democrats. The Republicans want schools to be competitive, because competition seems to help, so they asked for vouchers. Again, Democrats vehemently opposed it.

      The Republicans have great ideas. It is a okay not to agree with the ideas, but it is not okay to deny that they have them. And, instead of having a rational debate over ideas, Democrats make inflammatory remarks about Republican ideas.

      • The Republicans have great ideas.

        I don't deny that Republicans have good ideas (generally just as many as Democrats). That was not point.

        My one and only point is simply this: if christians the world over would donate 10% of the time they spend "fighting" the "baby holocaust, then a great many living children would be better off.

        My only complaint poised was simply I am tired of the fiery rhetoric that christian conservative republicans spew in regards to Abortion.

        At the same time, I acknoledge that "bleeding-heart" liberal democrats tend to spew the same fiery rhetoric in regards to different issues.

        On a side note: don't kid yourself about President Bush's "No Child Left Behind" education plan. It is and never will be an answer to this country's education woes. Standardized testing does not do a damn thing for schools. For example, a local Orange County High School reported that their Asian students raised their test scores by 9 points, Latino students raised their test scores by 12 points, and "White" students lowered their test scores by 19 points. What does that say? How do we correct that issue?

        We don't need standardized tests or Washington politicians' rhetoric to fix education in this country. We need:
        1. Everyday parent involvement

        2. Real discipline with real punishments:
        For example, if a student is caught with drugs (on campus) then they are brought before a city judge and sentenced to 6 months school probation. In which the student reports to an on-campus police officer twice a day and has a "time card" signed off by his teachers. If the student does not comply then he/she is transferred to a "secondary" school.

        3. Less administration, more teachers/
        Cut a specific % of school administrators across the board (to be determined by individual districts based on need) and hire a specific number of teachers to reduce class size.

        4. Introduce 2 teacher classrooms.

        5. Eliminate Summer vacation. Introduce year round school schedules.

        6. Mandate all school libraries and labs remain open until 7PM and open on weekends.

        7. Design and introduce high school trade schools for those students who wish to learn programming, auto repair, or any other specialized technical trade.

        Whew... you got me going on education. I'll stop there. Have way too much work to get done today to continue. :)
  • where as DaytonCIM had intelligent things to say, my intention is to lower the IQ of every poor soul who happens upon this post.

    I don't give a rat's ass about abortion. I mean, I think its a womans right, and that outkawing it simply opens the door to chop shops... ( I guess that makes me liberal? Nah, middle of the road, prolly...)

    But when I come upon people who care sooooo much about the issue it doesn't just turn me off to them because they are trolling for votes, it makes me reflect on what this means to me. And I don't give two craps about it.

    Side Note: the kids in my all-boys Catholic high school went to those anti-abortion marches in DC for one reason: to meet girls. No, make that two reasons: a day off from school AND a chance to meet girls.
  • Okay, now it's your turn to 'splain yourself. Other than feeling queasy at the description of the procedure, what is your problem with partial birth (or any form, if that is your true problem) abortions? Let's have something concrete and agreeable, rather than baseless platitudes concerning ephemeral matters with little or no consensus.

    • I, personally, am against abortions simply because I believe that the fetus is alive.

      But, even tohose who would argue it, should take another look at the brutal act of partial-birth abortions. Here, let's talk about one fine point. The babies that are aborted here are viable outside the womb. In fact, the reason the abortion is done in the womb, is because if the head leaves the uterus first, the doctor would be charged with murder. The doctor must hold the child's legs during the procedure. So, if the head starts to come out first, the child is pushed back in the womb and turned around. Again, because if the head comes out, the abortion would be murder.

      How the place of the head can change the classification of the very same act on the very same child is puzzling.
      • Its about respiration: at least on the show and at least in NY the baby is considered "ALive" when it draws its first breath on its own.

        Kinda makes sense, until that point, it's kinda like a parasite.

        See- watching TV can teach you things!
        • Its about respiration: at least on the show and at least in NY the baby is considered "ALive" when it draws its first breath on its own.

          So, if a child is birthed, and then smothered before a first breath can take place, it isn't considered murder?
          • IANAL, nor am I familiar with actual "laws" in actual "states"-

            with that out of the way- yes, that was the gist of the episode. It wasn't "murder" unless they could prove that the baby took a breath on its own.
            • I'd like to see more on that.

              During the original debate on Partial-Birth abortions, noone (to my knowledge) mentioned that. The only mention was that if the head leaves the uterus. IANAD, but the killing takes only a moment to do, which is much less time than it takes a kid to take his frst breath. So, why not just take him out an chop his head off? That would be much more an efficient way to discard useless tissue. And, I am not sure that it is any more disgusting than the current method. Less disturbing though. Chopping off the head shocks me. The current method makes me want to puke.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."

Close