Skip to comments.New rhetoric in SCOTUS abortion ruling (Ginsgerg: Stop calling a 2nd trimester "fetus" a "baby")
Posted on 04/19/2007 9:56:32 AM PDT by presidio9
Ever since Roe v. Wade in 1973, graphic descriptions of abortion have been staples of abortion opponents. Abortion rights advocates have preferred more scientific terms. Neither is by accident.
The Supreme Court adopted the more graphic approach Wednesday as a conservative majority of justices upheld a nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure.
"The way in which the fetus will be killed ... is of legitimate concern" to the government, the majority said.
In opinions after Roe v. Wade, the decision saying a woman has a constitutional right to abortion, clinical terminology has been the order of the day at the court.
All that changed in 2000, when Justice Anthony Kennedy described abortion procedures in painstaking detail. He did so as a dissenter in Stenberg v. Carhart, the ruling striking down Nebraska's ban on what opponents call partial-birth abortions.
"Repeated references to sources understandable only to a trained physician may obscure matters for persons not trained in medical terminology," Kennedy wrote in 2000. "Thus it seems necessary at the outset to set forth what may happen during an abortion."
Kennedy then explained abortion procedures in explicit terms that hadn't been seen previously at the court. The break with tradition prompted Justice John Paul Stevens to note in a concurring opinion, "Much ink is spilled today describing the gruesome nature of late-term abortion procedures."
Kennedy returned to form Wednesday when he wrote the decision of the court.
"It is self-evident that a mother who comes to regret her choice to abort must struggle with grief more anguished and sorrow more profound when she learns ... what she once did not know: that she allowed a doctor to pierce the skull and vacuum the fast-developing brain of her unborn child," Kennedy wrote.
In a forceful dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested that Kennedy's word-choice goes too far.
"Throughout, the opinion refers to obstetrician-gynecologists and surgeons who perform abortions not by the titles of their medical specialties, but by the pejorative label `abortion doctor,'" wrote Ginsburg. "A fetus is described as an 'unborn child,' and as a 'baby;' second-trimester, previability abortions are referred to as 'late-term.'"
Has anyone ever actually seen Ginsberg with anything but a scowl on her face, under any circumstances?
She seems to be a rather miserable human being.
So Ruth, abortion is all about terminology. Does it make you feel all warm and cozy inside to promote killing a “fetus” instead of a “baby”?
It interesting that the Court's self-appointed expert justice on medical technology and terminology is unaware that second trimester abortions are previability abortions no longer.
I also wonder: if Ginsburg's granddaughter Clara had been born at 35 weeks of gestation, would Ginsburg have told her friends: "My daughter just gave birth! I'm on my way to vist her and the new fetus!"
I’d say that SCOTUS should endeavor to use clear, common language as much as possible, so that the people its ruling affects have a hope of understand them.
Give the following common phrases:
“When is the baby due?”
“What sex is the baby?”
“What are you going to name the baby?”
“The baby just kicked!”
“The baby is pressing on my bladder.”
...then referring to the third trimester viable fetus as a baby is most clear and correct.
I thought I saw Ginsberg sitting behind home plate at the Red Sox - Blue Jays game Tuesday night. But it was Geddy Lee from RUSH. If you look like Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg are you still really a Rock Star?
The way this is worded by the majority seems to imply there is a right/approved way of killing a fetus.
Those are those times she is falling asleep.
Ginsburg is an unviable tissue mass.
“She seems to be a rather miserable human being.”
She’s hated life since Foghorn Leghorn dropped her.
Buzzy didn’t have problem when the Court played “scientist” on the CO2 ruling fiasco.
“If you look like Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg are you still really a Rock Star?”
See any member of the Rolling Stones, draw your own conclusion.
It just occured to me that nobody has ever seen Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Geddy Lee in the same place at the same time.
But then I remembered that Ginsburg wears glasses, and Geddy does not, so they can’t possibly be the same person.
“The way this is worded by the majority seems to imply there is a right/approved way of killing a fetus.”
I agree. Additionally, they also imply, by use of the word “killed” that a living organism’s life is terminated.
If a fetus can be “killed” than obviously, it is a living person.
“Has anyone ever actually seen Ginsberg with anything but a scowl on her face, under any circumstances?”
“Those are those times she is falling asleep.”
Thats gas, my friend.
Ginsgerg should know that nobody likes legalese and we're going to keep possession of the language regardless of opinions of how far syntax is bent to the needs of the day.
Oh Geddy has some big old frames. I’ve seen RUSH many times.
When is the unviable tissue mass due?
What sex is the unviable tissue mass?
What are you going to name the unviable tissue mass
The unviable tissue mass just kicked!
The unviable tissue mass is pressing on my bladder.
I thought that was normal. Was I wrong?
< /sarcasm >
Republicans who voted for her should be lined up and shot.
That is how Superman maintained his secret identity.
Last time I saw teeth that ugly, the Brits were visiting...(chuckle)
There you go again, confusing the liberals with facts! /sarcasm
The next time a pro life lawyer argues in front of RBG he/she should ask the learned jurist what “her” understanding of a fetus is.
OK Ruthie- enlighten us- when does a fetus become a baby?
If a fetus is pulled or expelled out of the womb during an abortion (excuse the pejorative term) ... and draws breath or tries to as they do in mid 2d trimester and beyond- does it become a “baby”? Or does it retain the term “fetus” because it was not chosen by the “mother” (another potentially pejorative term if it violates the principle of maternal choice) to be a “baby”?
I think we taxpayers who pay for these abortions deserve the details.
Three years ago, my youngest was expecting her first. She started having problems, and had uremic poisoning.
It got to the point that another day would probably kill her.
The baby was three months early, and it was so critical that he was born Cesarean section on Christmas day.
He had to be in the ICU for three weeks, but both did fine.
The solution to a late term problem that endangers the mother's life is to deliver the baby.
There have been further advances in the last three years.
Sorry Ruth high-and-mighty Ginsburg...but the truth hurts doesn't it?
The fact that you have ruled in favor of this gruesome, barbaric, middle ages and/or Nazi-like horror for years is something you simply cannot allow your own mind to accept...but it is nonetheless true.
At the end of the day, I don’t give a crap what that inhuman freak Ruth thinks.
WE WON THE DAY!
You and your murderous buddies LOST Ruth. Take that and eat it raw!
Well now, we can't have that can we? Imagine the gall of someone referring to an unborn child as ... well ... an unborn child.
Thanks, Ms. Ginsburg, for admitting that the whole pro-death superstructure in America rests on the carefully crafted use of deceptive, sanitized, obscurantist terminology.
It seems pretty apparent that (at least to the Dhimmis) they aren’t humans until ruthie SAYS they’re humans.
What an evil woman!
The fact they said... how the “fetus” was “killed” should mean that at least they consider it alive. You can’t “kill” tissue.
I thought it was very provoking they admitted that in official documentation.
Smile Ruth, your mother didn’t abort you.
Confirmed 96-3 in the US Senate. Republicans who voted “Yes” included John McCain.
What the heck are you talking about?
Out damn spot, out!
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
Here, let me make your list a little more Pro-Choice:
When is the unviable-tissue-mass due?
What sex is the parasitic-organism?
What are you going to name the fetus?
The unviable-product-of-conception just kicked!
The disposable-unwanted-pregnancy is pressing on my bladder.
Here is the complete text of this soul-less hags opinion:
Just joking to your post.
“It just occured to me that nobody has ever seen Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Geddy Lee in the same place at the same time.
But then I remembered that Ginsburg wears glasses, and Geddy does not, so they cant possibly be the same person.”
Every pregnant woman I know has always called the baby “the baby” from almost the day they found out they were pregnant let alone in the second or third trimester.
Even those that weren’t happy to be pregnant.
Which proves that they're all liars. Anyway, why does anyone get an abortion? Because they don't want a fetus? Or because they don't want a baby?
That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. But I suppose it's what you can expect from Ruth Bader Ginsberg and AP.
Abortion lovers are famous for their shifty use of language. They will not admit that a fetus is ALIVE. They will not admit that abortion KILLS a human being in the earliest stages of life. They will not admit that a fetus is HUMAN. They will not even speak the word "abortion" unless they are cornered, because "choice" sounds better. But their so-called "choice" only allows one answer.
I like that cartoon.