Liebling:-)))

__________________

*sniffing you*

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

Cheri

The Partial Birth was not banned before the year of 2003, That procedure was used in the second trimester, not only for the health risk of the mother and the unborn. George Bush was the one who signed the Partial-birth abortion ban act in 2003.

__________________

jillio

[quote=Liebling:-)));979345]Yes, that's what I meant.

jillio

Exactly. Second trimester abortions are legal only if the mother's life is at risk, or the fetus has been determined to have a birth defect so severe that they would not survive if the pregnancy was carried to term. In most cases, the child would not survive the birth process. A woman cannot just decide, late in the pregnancy, that she just doesn't want to be pregnant any more, and walk in off the street and demand that a doctor give her an abortion. And, Partial Birth Abortion refers to a specific procedure for doing second trimester abortions. It is not legal. When doctors do a medically therapeutic abortion in the second trimester for medical reasons regarding the life of the woman or the life of the fetus, they have to use a different procedure other than Partial Birth.

Cheri

I did not know the laws back then, So it's too late to prosecuted against the abortionist of what happened 22 years ago.

__________________

Cheri

Again not true, for a long time they allowed the second trimester abortions. It wasn't banned until 2003.

Read for yourself. Partial Birth Abortion

__________________

jillio

Cheri, that simply is not true. Until 1973, all but a few states forbid abortion at any point in the pregnancy unless it was medically indicated. After Roe v Wade, elective abortion was deemed legal, but only to the end of the first trimester. Elective abortion in the 2nd trimester has neve been legal. And Partial Birth refers to a technique, not a time period. Partial Birth technique was banned in 2003. A doctor can still do a medically indicated 2nd trimester abortion if the mother's life is at stake or if the fetus has a birth defect that is so severe it will not be able to live. They just can't do it using the Partial Birth technique.

a form of late-term abortion that the Act calls partial-birth abortion. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the term "partial-birth abortion" in the act pertains to a procedure that is scientifically called intact dilation and extraction.[

The above is directly from your Wiki link.

jillio

We aren't talking about 22 years ago. We are talking about 2nd trimester abortions being performed now. And 22 years ago, a 2nd trimester abortion was still illegal unless it was done for the reasons I have already cited.

Cheri

http://www.priestsforlife.org/testim...birth abortion

How many partial birth abortions did you personally witness?

"Two full-term abortions. They were done at nine months."

What do you know of the circumstances surrounding these abortions? Why were they being done?

"One of the mothers already had three or four and she didn't want any more."

"The other girl was single. She didn't have a husband and had no means of support. I asked, 'Why don't you put the baby up for adoption?' She said, 'I don't know how it would be treated.'


One was a 40 year old woman who had a 19 year old son, and she was getting a divorce so she didn't want the baby. The other was a teenage mom who hid the pregnancy from her parents, and then the parents found out she was pregnant and made her abort the baby. They are typically performed at 20 to 24 weeks, but sometimes later.

Quote Page 3: Partial Birth (D&X) Abortion

__________________

jillio

Your first link doesn't work. And an abortion cannot be performed full term. That is called induced labor.

Why are you beating a dead horse? Partial birth abortion has been banned for 5 years. They don't do that procedure any more. Finsihed. Done with.

All of these quotes are nothing more than hear say.

Cheri

If you don't like how I provide links to prove my point then ignored my post.

__________________

jillio

What exactly are you trying to prove? Your link is from 1993. Partial Birth Technique has been outlawed since 2003. And your quotes are hearsay. There is nothing to prove. Outlawed since 2003. Dead horse. Quit beating it.

Again,directly copied and pasted from your Wiki link in a previous post:

This statute prohibits a method of abortion in the United States that it names "partial birth abortion". The procedure described in the statute is usually used in the second trimester,[3] from 18 to 26 weeks, some of which occur before and some of which occur after viability. The law itself contains no reference to gestational age or viability. The present statute is directed only at a method of abortion, rather than at preventing any woman from obtaining an abortion.[4]

Cheri

You are missing the whole point of why these people had their abortion and under what condition, some of them were not even medical condition to save the life of the mother, It was choose based on not wanted to keep this pregnancy. Isn't it illegal to preformed an abortion above the 1st trimester unless it is use to save a life? I've shown you proof where the law can be broken.

__________________

Reba

Whoa, wait a minute! Just because certain procedures are "banned" or "illegal" does NOT mean they are not performed.

Reba

Yes. If an abortionist gets paid enough money, and thinks that no one will find out, then of course they will break the law.

Just because something is a law, it doesn't mean everyone obeys the law.

Reba

You can "assume" whatever you want.

Liebling:-)))

__________________

*sniffing you*

Reba

Sadly, lots of people do awful illegal things for money.

jillio

Its illegal to drive over the speed limit, too.

And since you do not have access to these people's medical records, you are not qualified to state what the medical condition was prior to the abortion being performed. Therefore, you do not know for certain whether the procedure was legal or illegal, based on the fact that you do not possess knowledge of the medical condition. You ar simply taking a bunch of unrelated, out of context statements and attempting to use them as proof. Further, you are using a procedure that has been outlawed to create an emotional component that is totally unrelated.

jillio

There is absolutely nothing to support the claim that anyone is performing this technique that the anti-abortion crowd has renamed "Partial Birth Abortion." They renamed it that in an attempt to evoke an emotional response from people. It was outlawed in 2003, and a physician who performs it can not only loose his medical license, but he can be put in prison for using this technique. Before 2003, it was a legal medical procedure, but it was only used in abortions past the 1sr trimester, and it had to be supported, through medical records and medical evidence, that the mother's life was at stake, or that the fetus had a birth defect that was so severe that they would not have lived.

When an abortion is performed in the second trimester to save a mother's life, or in the case of a birth defect that is so severe that it is incompatible with life, a different medical technique must be used to accomplish the goal of treatment. That is because the conditions of the pregnancy are different. Just like removing a very small lesion requires a minimally invasive technique. However, if that lesion has developed into a large tumor, the medical procedure to remove it is more invasive.

jillio

And you have no proof that they are performed, either. You are simply attempting to manipulate emotions by the constant referral to such.

jillio

Yes, I can. Just as you are assuming that an illegal act was committed without proof, or even substantial support, that it was.

Cheri

And you have proof Jillio that they are not doing any illegal abortions? No why? because it hasn't happened to you yet.

__________________

Reba

I don't make up these things. If you don't want to believe them, that's your prerogative.

Do you have proof that they did not happen?

jillio

Its entirely uineccessary to disprove that which has not been proven.

Reba

From the court transcript: