Quote:
The law does not provide an exception for the health of the mother, but it appears to provide some exception if her life is endangered by the pregnancy.
The form of abortion is not banned if it is "necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself," according to the text of the law.
|
I fail to see how the judges can say the health of the mother isn't taken into account. I mean, maybe she can't have the partial-birth abortion if she's got a headache about it, or if it will add unwanted inches to her waistling, but come on, what exact "health" effects do these judges want taken into account.
As I recall, Roe v. Wade left room for the possibility that at some point during the pregnancy, the baby's rights began to supercede the mother's.
This is the kind of judicial legislating-from-the-bench that turns folks against the judiciary. It's completely bogus. Except where the mother can suffer serious injury or death, this should be banned -- Americans want it.
"Oh, but, Timber, what about cases of rape or incest?"
Well, other abortion rights still exist. Sorry to point this out, but in my admittedly callous opinion, if a woman is 6 mos. into her pregnancy before deciding she doesn't want her baby, she can't be trusted to think for herself -- or her baby.