Do you believe that Partial Birth Abortion should be Legal?

[Navy Pride]

What is partial birth abortion? It's certainly not a medical term. Until you can define what partial birth abortion is, there's nothing to ban.

Long-standing, unchallenged statutes in 40 states and the District of Columbia prohibit third-trimester abortions except when the life or health of the woman is at stake, so what's the problem?

Partial birth abortion, based on the right wings terms, is a procedure that doesn't exist, or at the very least, rarely happens.

That is strange Hoot becasue last year the Congress passed a law banning PBA unless the mother's life is endangered and it was challenged on appeal and will soon be going to the SCOTUS for a decision......

 

[tryreading]

Because if its not performed, the woman has a chance of dying.

If the mother dies, the fetus will certainly most likely die too. If the mother lives, doesn't have an abortion, the fetus could still die, say if her health was in danger because of bad vehicle accident or something. If both the mother and the fetus live, thats great, but the chances of this happening in every situation are not worth the risk.

If you were holding a fetus in your womb, and your life was at serious risk if you continued with the pregnancy, (and you were married), would you rather die with the child than kill it and stay alive? If you answered Yes, would that be fair to your spouse? If you answered yes to that...... your not really in love and don't really care for them.

For someone to say that if a woman goes through a good portion of the pregnancy and then because too unhealthy to continue, that she should just die with the child is absolutely 100% selfish and uncaring for the mother. It is basically like saying that women are only here to re-populate (even though we are in no risk of becomming "endangered") and that if she cannot perform that job she should just die...... Does this make any sense? If it does... your stupid.

Because if its not performed, the mother has a chance of dying? This is part of the question, not the answer. You brought marriage into the issue. The questions don't involve this. Please answer them as asked, in short sentences, if you can. If you want to.

 

[tryreading]

That is strange Hoot becasue last year the Congress passed a law banning PBA unless the mother's life is endangered and it was challenged on appeal and will soon be going to the SCOTUS for a decision......

Navy Pride, I've read some of your posts on this site, and have gathered that you are a Republican who is Conservative on most issues. You are obviously opposed to partial birth abortion. I posted some questions below, and will paste them here, for you to answer if you will. I like to ask them of anyone I'm around, Republican or Democrat, when the subject of abortion comes up. I think your responses would be very interesting. I will answer them too if anybody asks.

1. Almost everyone on this thread, even those 100% opposed to any type of abortion in all other cases, will agree to actual partial birth abortion if the mother's life is in danger due to the pregnancy. Her health being in danger means she could die, but could live. But if the abortion is done, the fetus definitely dies.
A. Why is it acceptable to allow the abortion in these cases?

2. Suppose abortion became completely illegal in this country. A pregnant mother chooses to have one anyway. A doctor performs the procedure.
A. What charge should the woman face when discovered? Would she have committed premeditated murder? What should the penalty be if she is found guilty?
B. What charge should the doctor face? What penalty if he is guilty?

 

[Navy Pride]

Navy Pride, I've read some of your posts on this site, and have gathered that you are a Republican who is Conservative on most issues. You are obviously opposed to partial birth abortion. I posted some questions below, and will paste them here, for you to answer if you will. I like to ask them of anyone I'm around, Republican or Democrat, when the subject of abortion comes up. I think your responses would be very interesting. I will answer them too if anybody asks.

1. Almost everyone on this thread, even those 100% opposed to any type of abortion in all other cases, will agree to actual partial birth abortion if the mother's life is in danger due to the pregnancy. Her health being in danger means she could die, but could live. But if the abortion is done, the fetus definitely dies.
A. Why is it acceptable to allow the abortion in these cases?

2. Suppose abortion became completely illegal in this country. A pregnant mother chooses to have one anyway. A doctor performs the procedure.
A. What charge should the woman face when discovered? Would she have committed premeditated murder? What should the penalty be if she is found guilty?
B. What charge should the doctor face? What penalty if he is guilty?

First of all I belong to no political party and have voted for both democrats and republicans in the past........I do usually vote republican nowadays because I am more inline with them on the politcal issues......

as to your question:

A. You allow and abortion when a mothers life is endangered to save her life.......Of course you would like to carry the baby to term even if her life is endangered but it is understandable that some women would not want to do that.........

B. In a perfect world I would like all abortion to be illegal with the exception of the mother's life being endangered or possibly in cases of rape and incest..........I don't see that happening though so I would like to see the abortion issue be with the states.............So it is hard for me to answer that question becasue of that reason.....

 

[Caine]

Because if its not performed, the mother has a chance of dying? This is part of the question, not the answer. You brought marriage into the issue. The questions don't involve this. Please answer them as asked, in short sentences, if you can. If you want to.

What? No reply on that one... okay, I won't mention marriage......


If a woman has is incapable of giving birth to a child and requires a type of late term abortion in order to save her own life it should ALWAYS be allowed.

The life of a fully grown woman will always be greater than a creature dependant upon others. The life of a fully grown woman in society will always be greater than the loss of BOTH. The life of BOTH the fully grown woman and the "soon to be" baby is of course, greater than the life of just one. In the case of the woman being too unhealthy to carry out the pregnancy due to signifacant risk of dying, the risk is too high NOT to carry out the pregnancy.

Of course, if you believe that the woman should not have the right to end a pregnancy in order to save her own life, you must see woman as child-bearing slaves. Of course, if the woman is SO against abortion as to want to die with her child if she cannot give birth to it, guess what, thats her decision, nobody is forcing her to get an abortion. But the option should still remain out there for the woman who DOES give a **** about her life.

Fine... how is that.... its basically the same thing I already said, but since you wanted to try to avoid it by throwing the marriage argument out there, ive removed it.....

 

[tryreading]

What? No reply on that one... okay, I won't mention marriage......


If a woman has is incapable of giving birth to a child and requires a type of late term abortion in order to save her own life it should ALWAYS be allowed.

The life of a fully grown woman will always be greater than a creature dependant upon others. The life of a fully grown woman in society will always be greater than the loss of BOTH. The life of BOTH the fully grown woman and the "soon to be" baby is of course, greater than the life of just one. In the case of the woman being too unhealthy to carry out the pregnancy due to signifacant risk of dying, the risk is too high NOT to carry out the pregnancy.

Of course, if you believe that the woman should not have the right to end a pregnancy in order to save her own life, you must see woman as child-bearing slaves. Of course, if the woman is SO against abortion as to want to die with her child if she cannot give birth to it, guess what, thats her decision, nobody is forcing her to get an abortion. But the option should still remain out there for the woman who DOES give a **** about her life.

Fine... how is that.... its basically the same thing I already said, but since you wanted to try to avoid it by throwing the marriage argument out there, ive removed it.....

This is why I love asking these questions. You agitated yourself very badly just trying to answer the first one. They are only questions. You have inferred that I believe the woman shouldn't have the right to end the pregnancy to save her own life. That is not given in any of the questions. I also don't see women as 'slaves'. I believe in equal rights across the board, with no exceptions. I will work for a woman or hire a woman, protect a woman or accept her protection, etc. I believe women should fight in the infantry and command as five star generals. And be Commander In Chief someday.

Why will the life of a fully grown woman always be greater than a creature dependant upon others? I do not ask this in an effort to demean women, but because it is a statement you made that I would like to hear you explain.

I care about the woman's life too. I only posted some questions that seem to be very thought provoking.

 

[Caine]

. You agitated yourself very badly just trying to answer the first one.

Not really..

They are only questions. You have inferred that I believe the woman shouldn't have the right to end the pregnancy to save her own life. That is not given in any of the questions. I also don't see women as 'slaves'. I believe in equal rights across the board, with no exceptions. I will work for a woman or hire a woman, protect a woman or accept her protection, etc. I believe women should fight in the infantry and command as five star generals. And be Commander In Chief someday.

Thats good for you, but I was actually not answering the question just for your sake, but my reply was generated at the people who have voted "No, Never" as an answer to the opinion poll. These people obviously do not care about the life of a woman.

Why will the life of a fully grown woman always be greater than a creature dependant upon others? I do not ask this in an effort to demean women, but because it is a statement you made that I would like to hear you explain.

Its just my opinion. There may be extreme cases where the woman contributes nothing to society, and thus, is less valuable than the mere probability of how sucessful the fetus inside her will grow to become. But in many cases, the woman value is greater than taking a chance on how valuable the child will come to be, especially without its mother to provide for it and teach it.

 

[Fantasea]

What follows is an excerpt from the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003". In each of the first two paragraphs, mention is made that the procedure is never performed because the mother's life is at risk.

The pro-death crowd objects because any restriction is seen as a weakening of their position causing fear that any cracks in the solid wall whey have built around the issue might lead to its eventual collapse.

That's why they believe that a school nurse who needs parental permission to dispense an over the counter remedy for cramps to a teen-ager should be able to make a confidential abortion referral for the same kid.

Convoluted is an understatement.

AN ACT

To prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, ​

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003"

SEC. 2 FINDINGS

The Congress finds and declares the following:

(1) A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion -- an abortion in which a physician delivers an unborn child's body until only the head remains inside the womb, punctures the back of the child's skull with a Sharp instrument, and sucks the child's brains out before completing delivery of the dead infant -- is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited.

(2) Rather than being an abortion procedure that is embraced by the medical community, particularly among physicians who routinely perform other abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses serious risks to the long-term health of women and in some circumstances, their lives. As a result, at least 27 States banned the procedure as did the United States Congress which voted to ban the procedure during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses.

 

[tryreading]

First of all I belong to no political party and have voted for both democrats and republicans in the past........I do usually vote republican nowadays because I am more inline with them on the politcal issues......

as to your question:

A. You allow and abortion when a mothers life is endangered to save her life.......Of course you would like to carry the baby to term even if her life is endangered but it is understandable that some women would not want to do that.........

B. In a perfect world I would like all abortion to be illegal with the exception of the mother's life being endangered or possibly in cases of rape and incest..........I don't see that happening though so I would like to see the abortion issue be with the states.............So it is hard for me to answer that question becasue of that reason.....

Let's say we rephrase question 'B' and make it slightly more likely to happen some day.

Roe vs Wade is overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The state you live in makes abortion illegal, except in the cases you cite above. A healthy woman with a normal pregnancy decides to have an abortion in her fourth month, in your state. A doctor performs the abortion:

1. What is the charge against the mother? Has she committed premeditated murder? If found guilty, what should her sentence be?

2. What is the doctor's charge? What should his sentence be, if guilty?

 

[tryreading]

What follows is an excerpt from the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003". In each of the first two paragraphs, mention is made that the procedure is never performed because the mother's life is at risk.


It looks like you are anti-abortion. I posed some questions to some of the other posters on this thread, pro and anti, and would like to ask them of you. Please answer them. They are not meant to be biased toward or against you.

1. Almost everyone on this thread, even those 100% opposed to any type of abortion in all other cases, will agree to actual partial birth abortion if the mother's life is in danger due to the pregnancy. Her health being in danger means she could die, but could live. But if the abortion is done, the fetus definitely dies.

A. Why is it acceptable to allow the abortion in these cases?

2. Roe vs Wade is overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The state you live in makes abortion illegal. A healthy woman with a normal pregnancy decides to have an abortion in her fourth month, in your state. A doctor performs the abortion:

1. What is the charge against the mother? Has she committed premeditated murder? If found guilty, what should her sentence be?

2. What is the doctor's charge? What should his sentence be, if guilty?

 

[Fantasea]

Let's say we rephrase question 'B' and make it slightly more likely to happen some day.

Roe vs Wade is overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The state you live in makes abortion illegal, except in the cases you cite above. A healthy woman with a normal pregnancy decides to have an abortion in her fourth month, in your state. A doctor performs the abortion:

1. What is the charge against the mother? Has she committed premeditated murder? If found guilty, what should her sentence be?

2. What is the doctor's charge? What should his sentence be, if guilty?

This is a red herring frequently dragged across the trail.

Prior to "legalizing" abortion, the crime was "performing an illegal abortion". The person, usually a doctor, who performed the abortion was charged and prosecuted. The sentence was usually a revocation of medical license and some jail time.

The mother was never charged.

 

[Fantasea]

my reply was generated at the people who have voted "No, Never" as an answer to the opinion poll. These people obviously do not care about the life of a woman.

That is not so. These days, the number of deaths in childbirth is so small that, statistically, it rounds to zero.

The cry, "To save the mother's life!", has no validity; especially when compared to the more than three thousand unborn children who actually die as a result of abortions every day.

 

[Fantasea]

Originally posted by Fantasea
What follows is an excerpt from the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003". In each of the first two paragraphs, mention is made that the procedure is never performed because the mother's life is at risk.

It looks like you are anti-abortion. I posed some questions to some of the other posters on this thread, pro and anti, and would like to ask them of you. Please answer them. They are not meant to be biased toward or against you.

1. Almost everyone on this thread, even those 100% opposed to any type of abortion in all other cases, will agree to actual partial birth abortion if the mother's life is in danger due to the pregnancy. Her health being in danger means she could die, but could live. But if the abortion is done, the fetus definitely dies.

A. Why is it acceptable to allow the abortion in these cases?

If we can agree that the word "ignorant" can mean not knowing the facts, then I would say that these folks fall into two groups. The pro-death crowd who won't give an inch, and those who are simply ignorant of the facts as highlighted in the legislation I quoted.

2. Roe vs Wade is overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The state you live in makes abortion illegal. A healthy woman with a normal pregnancy decides to have an abortion in her fourth month, in your state. A doctor performs the abortion:

1. What is the charge against the mother? Has she committed premeditated murder? If found guilty, what should her sentence be?

2. What is the doctor's charge? What should his sentence be, if guilty?

Prior to "legalizing" abortion, the crime was "performing an illegal abortion". The person, usually a doctor, who performed the abortion was charged and prosecuted. The sentence was usually a revocation of medical license and some jail time.

The mother was never charged.

The mother is also a victim in an abortion. Rather than punishment, she needs compassion, support, and whatever comfort it takes to help her recover from a horrible experience which will bring her misery and grief throughout her life.

The mental health industry treats many of these women for a variety of ailments related to their decision to abort a child.

 

[tryreading]

Prior to "legalizing" abortion, the crime was "performing an illegal abortion". The person, usually a doctor, who performed the abortion was charged and prosecuted. The sentence was usually a revocation of medical license and some jail time.

The mother was never charged.

The mother is also a victim in an abortion. Rather than punishment, she needs compassion, support, and whatever comfort it takes to help her recover from a horrible experience which will bring her misery and grief throughout her life.

The mental health industry treats many of these women for a variety of ailments related to their decision to abort a child.

These questions polarize some people so badly, like you, that they won't answer them. I have had one person answer these questions honestly in the 10 years since I started asking them. I ask them with an open mind, seriously wanting a sincere response.

You did list a precedent for an abortion doctor above, for some time and place.But you say the mother is a victim in the abortion. What if she performs the procedure herself? (With Roe vs Wade overturned, during a normal, healthy pregnancy, in a state where abortion is illegal).

I don't submit this as a red herring. I want to know what you think.

 

[Fantasea]

These questions polarize some people so badly, like you, that they won't answer them. I have had one person answer these questions honestly in the 10 years since I started asking them. I ask them with an open mind, seriously wanting a sincere response.

You did list a precedent for an abortion doctor above, for some time and place.But you say the mother is a victim in the abortion. What if she performs the procedure herself? (With Roe vs Wade overturned, during a normal, healthy pregnancy, in a state where abortion is illegal).

I don't submit this as a red herring. I want to know what you think.

I believe that I have answered your questions. I don't believe that persecuting a relative handful of miserable victims serves any useful purpose.

 

[The Mark]

What follows is an excerpt from the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003". In each of the first two paragraphs, mention is made that the procedure is never performed because the mother's life is at risk.

The pro-death crowd objects because any restriction is seen as a weakening of their position causing fear that any cracks in the solid wall whey have built around the issue might lead to its eventual collapse.

That's why they believe that a school nurse who needs parental permission to dispense an over the counter remedy for cramps to a teen-ager should be able to make a confidential abortion referral for the same kid.

Convoluted is an understatement.

AN ACT

To prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, ​

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003"

SEC. 2 FINDINGS

The Congress finds and declares the following:

(1) A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion -- an abortion in which a physician delivers an unborn child's body until only the head remains inside the womb, punctures the back of the child's skull with a Sharp instrument, and sucks the child's brains out before completing delivery of the dead infant -- is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited.

(2) Rather than being an abortion procedure that is embraced by the medical community, particularly among physicians who routinely perform other abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses serious risks to the long-term health of women and in some circumstances, their lives. As a result, at least 27 States banned the procedure as did the United States Congress which voted to ban the procedure during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses.

This is interesting. If, in fact, this excerpt from a document is real, then I would be inclined to say that PBA should almost NEVER be performed.

I say this because, using logic, and while I have almost no medical knowledge, I think that the following thought process makes sense.

1. If PBA is performed as described above (I'd rather not re-type it, it's too wrong), then the infant is killed while most of it is outside of the mother.

2. If this is the case, why does it make sense to kill it? It's already mostly born, so why not finish the job?

3. If, in fact, most of the infant is outside the mother at the time of the abortion (actually, can you really call it an abortion at this point?), the only cases that I can think it would need to be performed would be if the mother would be killed by removing the rest of the infants head from her.................which it seems would only occur in VERY rare cases.

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
What follows is an excerpt from the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003". In each of the first two paragraphs, mention is made that the procedure is never performed because the mother's life is at risk.

The pro-death crowd objects because any restriction is seen as a weakening of their position causing fear that any cracks in the solid wall whey have built around the issue might lead to its eventual collapse.

That's why they believe that a school nurse who needs parental permission to dispense an over the counter remedy for cramps to a teen-ager should be able to make a confidential abortion referral for the same kid.

Convoluted is an understatement.

AN ACT

To prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, ​

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003"

SEC. 2 FINDINGS

The Congress finds and declares the following:

(1) A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion -- an abortion in which a physician delivers an unborn child's body until only the head remains inside the womb, punctures the back of the child's skull with a Sharp instrument, and sucks the child's brains out before completing delivery of the dead infant -- is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited.

(2) Rather than being an abortion procedure that is embraced by the medical community, particularly among physicians who routinely perform other abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses serious risks to the long-term health of women and in some circumstances, their lives. As a result, at least 27 States banned the procedure as did the United States Congress which voted to ban the procedure during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses.

This is interesting. If, in fact, this excerpt from a document is real,

This document is a federal law, passed by Congress and signed by the president. Read it in its entirety here:

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/abortion/2003s3.html

then I would be inclined to say that PBA should almost NEVER be performed.

I say this because, using logic, and while I have almost no medical knowledge, I think that the following thought process makes sense.

1. If PBA is performed as described above (I'd rather not re-type it, it's too wrong), then the infant is killed while most of it is outside of the mother.

2. If this is the case, why does it make sense to kill it? It's already mostly born, so why not finish the job?

3. If, in fact, most of the infant is outside the mother at the time of the abortion (actually, can you really call it an abortion at this point?), the only cases that I can think it would need to be performed would be if the mother would be killed by removing the rest of the infants head from her.................which it seems would only occur in VERY rare cases.

You, Congress, and the president all concur. The Pro-Death crowd, however, disagrees.

 

[The Mark]

Thanks for the link, I don't have time to read it all now, but it seems to be mostly giving multiple reasons why there is no reason to use PBA, except in vary rare extremely extreme cases.

 

[tryreading]

I believe that I have answered your questions. I don't believe that persecuting a relative handful of miserable victims serves any useful purpose.

If a woman did what was given in the scenario, by herself, of her own free will, she is not a victim, is she?

 

[Fantasea]

Thanks for the link, I don't have time to read it all now, but it seems to be mostly giving multiple reasons why there is no reason to use PBA, except in vary rare extremely extreme cases.

Read this one, too. The source may draw fire, but consider that the information contained therein is direct quotes from reliable sources, the AMA, for instance.

Here's an excerpt:

ARE THE BABIES ALIVE DURING THE ABORTION?

Yes! On July 11, 1995, American Medical News (AMA’s official journal) submitted the transcript of a tape-recorded interview with abortionist Dr. Martin Haskell to the House Judiciary Committee in which he admitted: “...the majority of fetuses aborted this way (partial birth abortion) are alive until the end of the procedure.”

Source: http://www.abortionfacts.com/literature/literature_9313pb.asp

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
I believe that I have answered your questions. I don't believe that persecuting a relative handful of miserable victims serves any useful purpose.

If a woman did what was given in the scenario, by herself, of her own free will, she is not a victim, is she?

You cited a woman performing an abortion on herself.

Think about that for a moment. Free will? What must be the mental state of that woman, or girl, for that matter, which would drive her to such an extreme.

After the event, the mental images of what transpired will haunt her for the rest of her life. That will be more punishment than anyone should have to suffer.

I believe she is a victim in every sense of the word. Do you wish to be compassionate? Or to cast the first stone?

 

[Caine]

What follows is an excerpt from the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003". In each of the first two paragraphs, mention is made that the procedure is never performed because the mother's life is at risk.

The pro-death crowd objects because any restriction is seen as a weakening of their position causing fear that any cracks in the solid wall whey have built around the issue might lead to its eventual collapse.

That's why they believe that a school nurse who needs parental permission to dispense an over the counter remedy for cramps to a teen-ager should be able to make a confidential abortion referral for the same kid.

Convoluted is an understatement.

AN ACT

To prohibit the procedure commonly known as partial-birth abortion.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States of America in Congress assembled, ​

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003"

SEC. 2 FINDINGS

The Congress finds and declares the following:

(1) A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion -- an abortion in which a physician delivers an unborn child's body until only the head remains inside the womb, punctures the back of the child's skull with a Sharp instrument, and sucks the child's brains out before completing delivery of the dead infant -- is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited.

(2) Rather than being an abortion procedure that is embraced by the medical community, particularly among physicians who routinely perform other abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses serious risks to the long-term health of women and in some circumstances, their lives. As a result, at least 27 States banned the procedure as did the United States Congress which voted to ban the procedure during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses.

You failed to mention the fact that it was still allowed for health concerns..
Check out the text again.. Its in there.

 

[Caine]

This section is also a part of the bill, the link is the same one as provided by Fantasea. The bold emphasis placed here is my own.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTIONS.

The Congress finds and declares the following:

(a) IN GENERAL. -- Title 18 United States Code, is amended by inserting after chapter 73 the following:

CHAPTER 74 -- PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTIONS
"Sec.
"1531. Partial-birth abortions prohibited

§1531. Partial-birth abortions prohibited

(a) Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. This subsection takes effect 1 day after the date of enactment of this chapter.

(b) As used in this section --

(1) the term 'partial-birth abortion' means an abortion in which --

(A) the person performing the abortion deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and

(B) performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus; and

(2) the term 'physician' means a doctor of medicine or osteopathy legally authorized to practice medicine and surgery by the State in which the doctor performs such activity, or any other individual legally authorized by the State to perform abortions: Provided, however, That any individual who is not a physician or not otherwise legally authorized by the State to perform abortions, but who nevertheless directly performs a partial-birth abortion, shall be subject to the provisions of this section.

(c)(1) The father, if married to the mother at the time she receives a partial-birth abortion procedure, and if the mother has not attained the age of 18 years at the time of the abortion, the maternal grandparents of the fetus, may in a civil action obtain appropriate relief, unless the pregnancy resulted from the plaintiff's criminal conduct or the plaintiff consented to the abortion.

(2) Such relief shall include

(A) money damages for all injuries, psychological and physical, occasioned by the violation of this section; and

(B) statutory damages equal to three times the cost of the partial-birth abortion.

(d)(1) A defendant accused of an offense under this section may seek a hearing before the State Medical Board on whether the physician's conduct was necessary to save the life of the mother whose life was endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.

(2) The findings on that issue are admissible on that issue at the trial of the defendant. Upon a motion of the defendant, the court shall delay the beginning of the trial for not more than 30 days to permit such a hearing to take place.

(e) A woman upon whom a partial-birth abortion is performed may not be prosecuted under this section, for a conspiracy to violate this section, or for an offense under section 2, 3, or 4 of this title based on a violation of this section.".

 

[Fantasea]

You failed to mention the fact that it was still allowed for health concerns..
Check out the text again.. Its in there.

That's the sop required to make it fit Roe v. Wade. However, the spirit, as shown in the first two paragraphs is clear.

 

[Caine]

That's the sop required to make it fit Roe v. Wade. However, the spirit, as shown in the first two paragraphs is clear.

The part about roe v wade is below this, this is the chapter added in order to amend the act.