Pro-Life Politics | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: Let me add a few things after taking a look at Comosy's usual. My original post stands just fine, including th cravenness of the pro-life movement. On the four bills Charlile puts up, two should not be bills at all (fetal pain, self selective abortion) but should be projects to get ACOG to agree - I am actually in favor of the fetal pain change but as a practice standard, not a law - and not because the fetus feels pain at that point but because it reacts to negative stimulus in a defensive manner. That is enough, but convince the doctors before you pass a law and then you need not worry about enforcement mechanisms. If passed, by the way, Obama would gladly veto some or all of them - but won't have to because Reid and Durbin will never allow them to be brought to the floor, and if so, never voted on.
What will come in is what Obama promised in his second debate with John McCain - that we would take another look at Partial Birth Abortion - expanding it to all late term abortions (I am sure there will be exceptions) but probably also perfecting the law by giving it a floor, say sometime in the second trimester, where such laws regulating procedure do not apply (again, go to ACOG for a total ban - but you won't get it). Of course, I don't believe for one minute that the pro-life establishment would ever allow something to be submitted that Obama would sign (maybe Clinton) - although mentioning her is going to start a whole new smear campaign from NRLC and certain Catholic bishops.
No comments:
Post a Comment