I cried when I read this:
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.
[...]
The outcome is likely to spur efforts at the state level to place more restrictions on abortions.The procedure at issue involves partially removing the fetus intact from a woman's uterus, then crushing or cutting its skull to complete the abortion.
Abortion opponents say the law will not reduce the number of abortions performed because an alternate method _ dismembering the fetus in the uterus _ is available and, indeed, much more common.
Now we need a law against that procedure. Dismembering the baby is more humane then crushing it's skull? How sick is that?
It also demonstrates that those of us on the pro-life side need to make sure that we elect men and women who hold the sanctity of human life as precious and in need of protection whether it is a baby in the womb or the elderly being denied care by doctors or family members. We have to work diligently to make sure our candidates get elected in 2008 so that the Congress can be returned to the Republicans to complete the task of banning all late-term abortions. We've gotten the nose in the tent, let's get the rest of the body in there as well.
BTW, to forestall objections, you are only talking about 10 percent of the abortions, according to the article. Since they are so rare, then banning them isn't a hardship and it goes a long way to saying that we find infanticide abhorrent as a society.
Tags:
