Posted on 01/27/2006 1:41:06 PM PST by marshmallow
Jan. 27 (Culture of Life Foundation/CWNews.com) - A legislative task force in South Dakota has issued a report outlining a legal challenge that could result in the overturning of the Roe v. Wade decision, the Culture of Life Foundation reports The South Dakota report enumerates six assumptions of fact made by the US Supreme Court in the 1973 decision, and concludes that "it is clear that the most essential assumptions made by the Roe court are incorrect."
The 71-page document was prepared at the request of the South Dakota legislature, which set up the task force to study a number of issues surrounding abortion including the practice of abortion since its legalization, what current science can tell us about the characteristics of the unborn child, the degree to which women who undergo abortions are truly informed about the procedure, and any adverse health affects on women having abortions.
The task force spent considerable time hearing testimony from embryologists and other scientists in order to answer whether "the human being, from the moment of conception, [is] a whole separate living member of the species Homo sapiens in the biological sense." In deciding Roe, the Supreme Court said that at this "point in the development of man's knowledge" it was unclear whether or not a fetus was a human being.
One doctor, Dr. David Fu-Chi Mark, "explained that the new recombinant DNA technologies that have developed over the past twenty years provide scientific evidence about the unborn child's existence and early development and her ability to react to the environment and feel pain prior to birth." Dr. Bruce Carlson testified, "The wholeness (or completeness) of the human being during the embryonic ages cannot be fully appreciated without an understanding of how the genetic information is packaged, and how the information becomes unfolded and cascades into visible structures."
Regarding whether or not the fetus is human life, the report took special note of the testimony of those who support legal abortion. "No credible evidence was presented that challenged these scientific facts," the report says. "In fact, when witnesses supporting abortion were asked when life begins, not one would answer the question, stating that it would only be their personal opinion."
The report also concluded that a South Dakota Planned Parenthood facility which provides a significant portion of that state's abortions did not provide sufficient information to the mothers who received abortions there. "Based on their testimony, it is admitted that the Planned Parenthood facility in Sioux Falls does not disclose any information about the unborn child and that it does not disclose to the pregnant mother in any way that the child, the second patient, is already in existence." Of particular concern to the task force is "that the women who come to Planned Parenthood sign a 'consent' to have an abortion without first speaking to the doctor. These consent forms are filled out before the doctor sees the patient."
In its final section the report states that the "state, the mother, and the child all have interests that justify changing the laws of the state of South Dakota to protect the child's life, first and foremost, to protect the mother-child relationship, and to protect the mother's health."
I expect Lefties who complain about all the "innocent people" dying at the hands of our fighting personnel around the world to be 100% against this legislation.
And they'll still insist they care about people.
Ping!
Thanks for the ping DG. This one didn't see much activity. I would agree with the opinion answer by those pro aborts. We do not know the point when the breath of life enters the soul, and the child becomes a living soul in the Adamic and biblical sense. That is why I believe it a giant stretch to call these people murderers. I think this is one reason they are so willing to sacrifice any principles they might have, on the alter of abortion.
In announcing their inability or unwillingness to opinionize, they only do so, not in the interest of the unborn, but to vacillated and equivocate on an issue that people need to take a stand on. That being said, the whole issue is on shaky ground, and the difference between killing and murdering is a difference that no human before the judgment bar of the Great God of Heaven is going to want to split hairs about.
Far better to stay a huge distance from involvement in such issues. To the normal person, common sense alone dictates that sticking things up your birth canal for the purpose of doing in what you know is growing up there, and could cause your death if things go just a little bit wrong, not to mention the death you are attempting to cause in the first place, is a giant step away from normality, reality, not to mention righteous living.
My big issue relating to the Supreme Court decision, is this, Roe herself has recanted the testimony she gave before the court that led the justices to make the decisions they did. That alone should have caused the court to reconvene and either vacate the decision they made on the lying testimony of the witness in the case, or confirmed forever that manufactured rights of privacy and it's my body I can do what I want to it, will remain the law of the land despite the sandy foundation upon which they were invented.
If we leave it to the states. The Liberal States will have Abortion (thus diminshing their populations) and the Red States will rise in population.
I like this plan!
Well said and I completely agree. This battle is the between good and evil.
That's assuming women won't travel over state lines to get an abortion - a very large and very questionable assumption.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.