Posted on 04/21/2015 11:43:07 AM PDT by Zakeet
Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch joined a group of former U.S. attorneys in signing an amicus brief presented to the Supreme Court in 2006 in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart that argued that the federal ban on partial-birth abortion was unconstitutional because its language was too vague.
In their brief, for example, Lynch and the other former U.S. attorneys argued that the term “living fetus” was too vague to be understood by those responsible for following and enforcing the law.
Congress enacted the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act in 2003 with broad bipartisan support. Senators Joe Biden of Delaware, Harry Reid of Nevada, and Patrick Leahy of Vermont all voted for it.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
That is something that has come straight out of Satan’s mouth.
Substitute “Pubert Addams”?
I would say her grasp on reality is “hopelessly vague” as well.
What part of “living fetus” does she not understand?
Her brain is obviously hopelessly vague.
May God help us all.
When Obummer won, it follows that Holder/Lynch will follow.
Blame all those who abstained from voting in 2012. I can only hope the lesson is learned. President Hillary will get to nominate many SCOTUS replacements. Very scary proposition for 30+ years.
Light skinned people will be a minority in not too distant a future. Might as well get used to more tan people running our lives.
When Obummer won, fetuses lost.
I may be mistaken, but I believe the Rove v Wade Ruling was specific to allowing Abortion only when the Fetus was not considered “Viable”.
If that’s the case, how did we end up with Abortion on Demand no matter the Gestation period?
What I never can figure out is why late term abortion is easier on the mother than simply let the birth happen.
When democrats win, fetuses lose.
Watching senate confirmation hearings, my guess is she gets confirmed.
Yes, I agree. Especially since we’re bringing them in from all over the world in swarms.
There might be some rare situations, where a mother’s life could be threatened if pregnancy continues to full term. I am not a medical doctor, but I hear that a lot. If indeed it is true, and let us assume for the sake of discussion it is, whose life should take precedence? Mother or the growing fetus?
I am not a doctor, and I don’t play one on TV.
There is no way for me to answer your question except to say I believe
that a real doctor would do his best to save both patients.
I do not buy the “life of the mother” excuse for murdering a fetus in the
place where he or she should be the safest on Earth, in its mother’s womb.
And I do not believe that there are millions of fetuses in danger of killing
their mothers, thus those fetuses must die.
We, as a nation will pay dearly for this abominable genocide, black, white,
and “other,” of our posterity. We will pay.
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.