There are many news reports regarding the Supreme Court's ruling to uphold the ban of "partial birth abortions." The anti-choice ("Pro-life"... pro-death penalty hypocrites) are referring to this as a tremendous victory.
Good for you. Ignoring the fact that "Partial Birth Abortion" is not actually a medical term, according to the New York Times, of 1.3 million abortions last year, 2,200 involved the procedure the ban refers to. Congratulations! You managed a victory that bans .1% of all abortions! That's like, the biggest accomplishment ever! Wow!!!
(note: it is still legal to have this procedure if the mother's life is in danger, which could account for nearly all of the 2,200).
Dipshits.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Anti-Choice Wins Something
Posted by
Librocrat
at
2:32 PM
6
comments
Labels: partial birth abortions
Monday, December 11, 2006
A Look Back, at a Republican Controlled Congress
Saturday marked the end of a Republican majority in congress. I think we should take a moment to look back at what has been accomplished over these last 12 years.
Um... Anyone? Something Accomplished? Oh, there was that flag burning amendm..... no, wait, that didn't pass. They banned gay... no, no they didn't do that. They reduced the deficit - no. Well, at least they gave tax cuts to the wealthiest 1%, which although I am firmly against, I do hope to be one someday, so that will be a nice perk.
For those of you that don't know, under the new Bush tax cut, if I make $1,000,000, I save $30,210! That's a little over 3%!!!! Or, if you're one of those poor saps who makes only 45,000 a year, you save a whopping 226 dollars! 0.50% of your total income! Fantastic! Don't even get me started on how much you save if you make only 18,000 a year (hint: 50 male deers).
Wow, totally worth ruining the entire country. Do your own math here.
But let's really do a run-down of the things the Republican majority has accomplished. They pass the prescription drug plan, which I hear the elderly have finally begun to understand the choices. They also banned partial birth abortions. Which, again, are not things. They "Canned Spam" - tell that to my yahoo account.
There was "No child left behind." Although plenty of children do have no health care, but at least they're not left behind. Instead they are "held back." Totally different.
And last, but certainly least: The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act. Thank God, about freakin' time.
I can't wait until January 4th.
Posted by
Librocrat
at
1:14 AM
7
comments
Labels: congress, partial birth abortions, Republicans, Taxes
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Dispelling Myths Part 1
Originally I planned to start a blog I could use as a reference to dispell anti-liberal myths. But since Democrats took control of both the house and senate, I have slightly less anger. Still, I will post them here as the first posts in this brand new website:
What is the Partial Birth Abortion?
Partial Birth Abortions
There is actually no such thing as a partial birth abortion. There is no medical term, and it is not the name of a type of abortion procedure. It is, however, Republican propaganda that refers to abortions that occur in a later (unspecified) trimester. This often comes as a shock to some people who believe that there is such thing as a Partial Birth Abortion because it is used so commonly in politics, but there is, in fact, not. In general, it refers to abortions that take place during the 3rd trimester of pregnancy.
What may be more surprising to people easily influenced by this propaganda is that almost all supporters of abortion rights (democrats and liberals included) actually ARE against 3rd trimester abortions because in general it is possible for the fetus to survive outside the mother during the 7th and 8th months.
But why do Democrats still vote against partial birth abortions (aka 3rd trimester abortions) even if they don’t believe they should be performed? This is actually a valid question and it has multiple answers.
First, any legislation that refers to a “partial birth abortion” is, as we have established, referring to an arbitrary term that doesn’t actually mean anything. Therefore, hypothetically if a measure passed in congress banning “partial birth abortions” there is no specified medical or scientific time period that corresponds to that bill, and Republican and anti-abortion politicians can challenge what constitutes a “partial birth abortion” and begin limiting abortions to a 5 month period, then a 4 month, than a 3 ½ month until eventually they ban them altogether. If you don’t believe this is possible, during the confirmation hearings of Samuel Alito, one of the Republican Senators referred to the embryo (not even a fetus yet) as fully alive – “scientifically” according to him – after only 18 days.
Second, similar to the logic above, Democrats and liberals believe (rightfully so) that banning any part of abortion rights will also allow religious conservatives open forum to shorten the time period until they abolish abortion rights altogether. Until religion no longer governs the country, democrats and liberals can’t support religious based propositions.
And 3rd, it is still scientifically a fetus. People who are pro-choice still and will always support a women’s right to choose. Only religion supports the conceived child being a baby upon conception, and not even all religions. Judaism only calls the fetus alive once half of its body has exited the mother’s womb. http://www.jewfaq.org/sex.htm
Until that point it is called a “potential human life.”
Posted by
Librocrat
at
7:34 PM
2
comments
Labels: dispelling myths, partial birth abortions, pro-choice


