Please let me know if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
Posted on 09/18/2003 1:25:22 PM PDT by cpforlife.org
WASHINGTON (BP)--The Senate voted unanimously Sept. 17 to send its version of a partial-birth abortion ban to conference, and along the way watched two senators revive a longstanding debate about the merits of Roe v. Wade.
By a vote of 93-0 the Senate sent its version of a partial-birth abortion ban to a conference with the House of Representatives, which had already passed its version and sent it to conference. When the House and Senate pass bills with different language, a conference is called to work out the differences.
"We as a Senate, members of Congress, should listen to the American people, but more importantly ... we need to listen to our own conscience," Sen. Mike DeWine, R.-Ohio, who is for the ban, said on the floor.
The Senate version has an amendment that pro-lifers want to see stripped -- an affirmation of support for the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling. Although it is nonbonding, it is nevertheless offensive to many senators and representatives who oppose abortion.
Pro-life senators said the vote Sept. 17 was a procedural one used simply to get the Senate version to the conference. They promised that the language would be stripped, according to The Washington Times. But pro-choice senators said the vote was a sign that the Senate supports the Roe v. Wade decision.
Partial-birth abortion is a procedure used in the later stage of a pregnancy in which the baby is delivered feet first so that its head stays in the birth canal. Its head is then cut open and its brain sucked out.
Sens. Rick Santorum, R.-Pa., and Barbara Boxer, D.-Calif., provided the day's highlight with a civil yet passionate debate about abortion. The two have tangled before on the Senate floor.
Santorum, one of the staunchest social conservatives in the Senate, said the day will come when Roe v. Wade is viewed in the same light as the 1857 Dred Scott case that ruled slaves were property.
"I refer to Roe v. Wade as Dread Scott II because it is exactly the same principle upon which Dred Scott was decided," he said. "Dred Scott was decided saying that the rights of a human being were subject to the rights of another person."
Santorum then compared the arguments of pro-choicers with those who supported slavery.
"We sort of remove ourselves from having any moral overtones in this debate [by saying,] 'Well, we shouldn't make this decision. Let somebody else make this decision. Well, I personally am opposed to slavery, but who am I to tell a slaveholder they shouldn't have a slave? I personally would never own a slave. I personally would never condone abortion.'
"It's the same issue," he concluded.
Those who say the Senate shouldn't be making moral decisions are on shaky ground, he said.
"Name me one vote that we have here that does not have some moral implication," he said. "Every single one does -- from who we tax to who we regulate. There is a moral component to everything we do here. We can't run from that."
Boxer acknowledged that morality is intertwined in legislation but disagreed with his conclusion. She asserted that if partial-birth abortion is outlawed, women who need the procedure will suffer because there is no health exception. Supporters of the ban say such an exception will render the bill useless because doctors could argue that every pregnancy threatens a woman's health.
"Oh yes, I support laws that are moral," she said. "My colleague is absolutely correct. There is morality in everything we do. ... Abortion is a moral issue, you bet it is. And I felt that the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 took a moral stand."
Banning partial-birth abortion is immoral, Boxer said.
"What I think is immoral is to take your views ... or my views ... and force them on the people of this country," she said. "It is disrespectful, it isn't right and it isn't what America is about."
Santorum said the Roe v. Wade decision was the embodiment of a "me first" generation. He read the preamble of the Constitution, where it states that the Constitution was written, in part, to "promote the general welfare."
"The greatest injustice was Roe v. Wade, where it says, 'I am the law, I decide. ... Me. I come first.' That is not the vision of the miracle at Philadelphia," he said.
The nation's founders did not wish to create "me first rights," he said. "We have lost our way, and there is no better example of how lost we are than this decision."
Senator Boxer:
Don't you think that your unborn constituents would prefer that you NOT force your opinions about them, i.e.: that they are disposable, on the people of this country.
Massacring an entire demographic group that you wrongly see as unwanted and unworthy of life is disrespectful, it isn't right and it isn't what America is about!
http://cpforlife.org/id108.htm
June 10, 2003
In the 30 year war against the homicidal scourge of abortion in America, humanity has plunged into an abyss of death. I was very distraught over the partial birth abortion proceedings in Washington, D.C. this past week and greatly saddened that many pro-life Christians considered this a great victory over the culture of death.
That congressmen and senators would debate over how many inches a baby needs to be out of the womb before they can be protected by law; or the abortionist prosecuted for murder is absolutely ludicrous. Every abortion is an inconceivable act of violence and the killing of a baby in the womb or in this case, out of the womb. Even the abortionists in Louisiana have stated that all 2nd and 3rd trimester abortions could be labeled partial birth abortions. Dr. James Whitmore, III, Dr. James DeGuerce, Delta Women’s Clinic, Causeway Medical Suite, Bossier City Medical Suite, Hope Medical Group for Women and Women’s Health Clinic are all plaintiffs in a law suite to lift the Louisiana law banning partial birth abortions. Whitmore stated in the suit: “Sometimes during the D&E procedure part of the fetus protrudes from or is pulled through the cervical os before the fetus is fully removed. It is possible that in some of these instances, the fetus is “living”…when part of the fetus is within the uterus and part is outside…because it is extremely difficult to know precisely when fetal demise occurs”. The abortionists know full well that if partial birth abortion is made illegal, that would include all second and third trimester abortions and that is why they demonically fight for the right to kill in this most savage fashion.
Why does this madness continue in America? I hear the words of God in Wisdom 3: “For because sentence is not speedily pronounced against evil; the children of men commit evil without any fear”. As the Civil War was God’s judgment on America for the sin of slavery, a greater judgment is on America for the sin of abortion. “Today we see the horrifying work of God’s hand in the signs and judgments already upon us because of the legalized murder of innocent babies in their mother’s wombs. "Because we have not hated bloodshed, bloodshed is now pursuing us”. If we do not heed these warnings, we will read these words on entering the abyss: “Give up all hope all ye who enter here”!
Richard Mahoney, founder
NATIONAL AMERICAN HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL
Please let me know if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
What a goofus dopus. Much of the body of the law in civilized countries has a moral component. You can't get away from it. Therefore legislators, when they act, are in effect "forcing views" (to use that focus-group-tested phrase) on those subject to the laws they are making. And with good reason, because otherwise there'd be precious few laws of any value, something not good for a system based on the rule of law.
Boxer: I would make this statement: That this Constitution, as it currently is - - some of you want to amend it to say that life begins at conception. I think when you bring your baby home, when your baby is born - - and there is no such thing as partial-birth - - the baby belongs to your family and has all the rights. But I am not willing to amend the Constitution to say that a fetus is a person, which I know you would.
And this great tag by Santorum:
Boxer: You mean the baby has been birthed and is now in its mother's arms? That baby is a human being.
Santorum: Well, I don't know if it's necessarily in its mother's arms. Let's say in the obstetrician's hands.
Boxer: It takes a second, it takes a minute. I had two babies, and within seconds of their birth - -
Santorum: We've had six.
Boxer: Well, you didn't have any.
Santorum: My wife and I had babies together. That's the way we do things in our family.
She can't even say that once a baby is completely out of the mother and in the doctor's hands, it's a "person" within the purview of the Constitution.
"The great principle is the right of everyone to judge and decide for himself, whether a thing is right or wrong, whether it would be good or evil for them to adopt it; and the right of free action, the right of free thought, the right of free judgement upon the question is dearer to every true American than any other under a free government. ... It is no answer to this argument to say that [it] is an evil and hence should not be tolerated. You must allow the people to decide for themselves."
Stephen Douglas, 1858 in reponse to a comment that slavery was evil (the comment was made by Abraham Lincoln)
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.