[Vision2020] Partial birth abortions, they aren't what you think

[Walter Smith]

I have noticed a number of you seem to be under the impression that a
"partial birth abortion", is the killing of a fetus in the act of becoming
an otherwise viable baby.

I agree that such a thing would be absolutely inexcusable. If the child was
being born, and there would be no serious harm possible to the mother, I can
imagine no reason to terminate. At that point, the doctor could simply
spirit the live baby away, and the mother would (perhaps) be none the wiser.
I can't say that such a thing has never taken place, monstrous as it is, it
probably has happened. That is not what a "partial birth abortion" is,
however. It is a method-dependent definition, not a time-dependent one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intact_dilation_and_extraction

It is still a terrible thing to contemplate, but at it is usually performed
between the 21st and 24th week of gestation, there is no chance the fetus
could survive. At that point, I would say the decision should be solely the
mothers, and that we (we being everyone but the mother) have no right to
interfere.

All this law really says, is that the fetus must be killed entirely within
the womb, it says nothing about timing.

I think the court made a serious mistake, and I think this mis-understanding
is largely to blame.

Disappointed,
Anon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070419/0c43ef72/attachment.html