FOX NEWS: SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION BAN

Fox News Channel ^ | 18 April 2007 | Fox News Channel

[Spiff]

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long-awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.

The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman's constitutional right to an abortion.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. Liberals of course deny the humanity of the unborn child. That is the only rational means to defend abortion. Once you concede the child is human, then the defense for abortion collapses - and its a defense based on legal sophistry, not on any coherent philosophical or moral underpinning. The closest liberals come to defending abortion on philosophical grounds is to assert the woman has control over her body and that what happens to it should be her personal decision - except that even liberals concede we do and have never had absolute control over our bodies anywhere at and at any time in history. In sum the real issue is: is there a positive argument to be made on behalf of abortion? I don't see and acknowledge one.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Verax]

Thank you for this victory Lord!! We are sooo grateful. Praise be to God!

[pillut48]

"Today's decision is alarming," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in dissent. She said the ruling "refuses to take ... seriously" previous Supreme Court decisions on abortion. Ginsburg said the latest decision "tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists." She was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070418/D8OJ2NI80.html

[RebekahT]

Kennedy voted the same way the last time this issue was before the Court - only this time, the difference was made by Alito’s vote replacing (and differing from) O’Connor’s.

[avacado]

EXCELLENT POST! And I'll add:

GWB supports America and the right to life! He has never abandoned you but many have abandoned him. I respect no one who can abandon a friend in times of need!

[jveritas]

Great post my fellow freeper.

[Founding Father]

Kennedy did not change his opinion. Previously he had written a very strongly worded dissent in a decision that caused the republicans to pass the partial birth ban.

The difference was O’Connor retired and was replaced by Alito, that was the change in vote from 5-4 then to 4-5 now (the latter number being in favor of the ban). Roberts for Rhenquest cancelled out.

[Hydroshock]

I do admit he got one right, but on many others, immigration to just mention one he is worng.

[sola_fide]

AntiGuv, I was thinking just like you a few minutes ago, but read Justice Thomas’s concurrence (I posted a couple of sentences from it earlier on this thread.) He clearly states that the federalism issue was never raised in this case.

[jrooney]

AMEN!!!!! God Bless GW!!!

[jrooney]

Give the man his due. This will protect the unborn!

[Julliardsux]

Here is the opinion if not posted already:
http://10.10.10.167/764037764/866391536T070418112007.txt.binXMysM0dapplication/pdfXsysM0dhttp://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/archives/05-380_All.pdf

[dforest]

This is a victory for life. Great news. More work to do.

It is also proof of the folly of Rudy supporters.

Maybe they will shut up when they tell us that nothing can be done.

They lose more credibility daily.

[jrooney]

Amen my friend.

[Kay]

BEAUTIFUL!! Yes, Thank God.

[garv]

Don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled with the decision. Any chipping away at the "right" to abortion is a step in the right direction. I was simply responding to a poster who seemed to be under the impression that states could restrict second and third trimester abortions, which is not the case.

Yet.

[Just A Nobody]

Amen!

Glad you had the chance to see this before (or after) class.

[stockstrader]

JulieAnnie will make sure that this is reversed with ‘HIS DEFINITION’ of strict constructionist judges.

[Hydroshock]

I did.

[RebekahT]

Roberts didn’t “bring Kennedy over.” Kennedy voted the same way (only then in the minority) before Roberts was even on the Court.