It can’t get any clearer: “The re-election of George W. Bush in 2004 begat the nomination to the United States Supreme Court of Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. and Justice Alito’s ascenion to the High Court last year begat today a landmark abortion ruling that anti-abortion advocates have pushed to get for years.”
A vote for Republicans is a vote against women’s health.
Does anyone actually bother to read the Supreme Court’s Opinion or the Act it upholds?
All of the mindless robots running around yelling that there is no health exception are wrong, including the source blog for this posting, which states:
“doctors in this country now may be sent to federal prison for performing a type of abortion procedure even if those doctors believe that a woman’s health would be jeopardized by not having the procedure” and “The woman’s “health exception,” which until today had survived all sorts of legal scrutiny, now is effectively gone.”
The Act states:
“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.” 18 USC 1531(a).
A vote for Republicans is a vote against women’s health.
I can’t even respond to that because it is so dumb that it’s funny.
But it’s much more than just women’s health. It’s about privacy, torture, overrsight, and a whole raft of Right Wing douchebaggery. The bullied, extremely partisan U.S. Attorneys of today are the potential SCOTUS’s of tomorrow. (For fuck’s sake, Harrite Miers and Dumbass Gonzolez were nominated and considered for the job.)
yea, torture! Thats what this is all about!
The supreme court banned a medical procedure that isn’t taught in medical school, has had no scholarly article published demonstrating its ability to save anyones life AND has a section that specifically says that a doctor can use the technique if they feel it necessary….
Libtards: The sky is falling, the sky is falling! Its all about the Toooorture I tell you!
LOL
The Left has been using the SCOTUS for a “Legislature of Last Resort” for more than 50 years, and they’re complaining about one decision going against them?
It’s not hard to see how liberals feel about sharing power…
Duh.. It’s not the “Supreme Court’s Opinion” there were 9 separate opinions, and 5 v. 4 of them ruled in favor of upholding Bush’s law. There was a 5-majority SUMMARY opinion, and a 4-minority SUMMARY opinion.
“…Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority in the first-ever decision by the Court to uphold a total ban on a specific abortion procedure — prompting the dissenters to argue that the Court was walking away from the defense of abortion rights that it had made since the original Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 recognized a constitutional right to end pregnancy medically. Roe v. Wade was not overturned by the new ruling, as some filings before the Court had urged….
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, speaking in the courtroom for the dissenters, called the ruling “an alarming decision” that refuses “to take seriously” the Court’s 1992 decisions reaffirming most of Roe v. Wade and its 2000 decision in Stenberg v. Carhart striking down a state partial-birth abortion law.
Ginsburg, in a lengthy statement, said “the Court’s opinion tolerates, indeed applauds, federal intervention to ban nationwide a procedure found necessary and proper in certain cases by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. For the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception protecting a woman’s health.” She said the federal ban “and the Court’s defense of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court — and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women’s lives. A decision of the character the Court makes today should not have staying power.”
There’s no question this decision is an attack on choice; there’s no question it DOES impinge on Roe v Wade, let’s be clear.
There’s also no question that the enemies of Roe v Wade see this as a major victory in their continuing commitment to the overthrow of that decision.
There are questions, however, as to the future implications of this ruling, which leaves as many questions unanswered as it opens the door to a further assault on Roe v Wade.
And it does not imply that, with a Democratic government, there may not be legislative recourse here to make sure that a woman’s right to make an informed personal choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy within the legal boundaries set by Roe v Wade is championed and preserved.
In a way, I am happy with this decision.
Those Dems, like NARAL, who backed Lieberman and who really believed that Alito and Roberts would not bring an extreme right-wing shift to the Supreme Court have received a disappointing lesson.
Those Dems (and Moderate Republicans) who are already alarmed at the right-wing’s force and power in this country, and the anti-American (by all the polls) direction they have moved our policies have to sit up and take more notice and help to make sure that ‘08 is a banner year for Dem candidates.
I cannot think of a better motivational tool, a louder call to action and involvement for American women than this decision.
Sure, it will help the GOP and the Right regain some Fundie and Conservative support. But I think alarm is a stronger motivator than a handshake, and I have to think it helps the lethargic Left more.
Why? The Right have been in a frenzy about this issue already foir years; there’s a few college girls waking up now to the fact that for them and their daughters, the power to choose what happens to their bodies, their lives may soon be gone.
And that they now should realize that unless they do something to change it, back alleys and coat hangers will be a part of many wome’s lives again.
back alleys and coat hangers
You should have issued a beverage alert with that one.
What hyperbolic nonsense.
If only it was.
Pedro: “The supreme court banned a medical procedure that isn’t taught in medical school…”
Gee, Pedro, did you read the opinion?
“The testimony in the District Courts, however, demonstrated intact D&E is taught at medical schools.”
That’s from Section IV.B. of the opinion.
Further, this from the dissenting opinion:
“And, for the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception safeguarding a woman’s health.” (emphasis added.)
While the wingnuts will sing the praises of providing an exception protecting the life of the woman, they have no problem disregarding her health. Hypothetically, if a doctor is faced with the choice of using an intact D&E or performing a hysterectomy, by this law, he must choose the latter, because while it will cause great harm to the woman and pose considerably more risk to her, that is of no concern. As long as the wingers have their political victory, everything is A-OK.
OW: “A vote for Republicans is a vote against women’s health.”
Jay: “I can’t even respond to that because it is so dumb that it’s funny.”
You should have said “I can’t even respond to that because it is so true that it’s sad.”