U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Life

    On Wednesday, April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban passed by Congress in 2003 and signed into law by President George W. Bush.  In a 5-4 decision, the Justices chose to error on the side of life in a huge victory for pre-born children of our fine country. 

            Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice in his statement said, "This is a significant victory.  One of the main thrusts of the arguments we made in the trial courts, in the courts of appeals and ultimately to the Supreme Court was that the government has a compelling interest in protecting the life of the unborn."  His nonprofit legal advocacy group filed amicus briefs in the case in support of the ban.

            The National Abortion Federation was quick to tout their usual rhetoric about this decision making references to this setting us back to the “dark ages” before the infamous Roe vs. Wade was passed into law.  Vicki Saporta of NAF added, "[This] decision has placed politics above protecting women's health."

            If this is truly a battle for my health and safety as a child bearing woman, I’m a little confused.  Research shows that partial birth abortions are done beginning at 20 weeks gestation and continuing as late as 7 to 8 months gestation.  Yet with the continued leaps and bounds in modern medicine, the survival rate of premature babies is surprisingly high.  With children as young as 20 weeks gestation living to prove the resilience of the human race and the complete lack of necessity for this distasteful procedure. 

        In 1992, while presenting his paper on this procedure at a Risk Management Seminar of the National Abortion Federation, Dr. Martin Haskell, who claims to have done over 700 Partial Birth Abortions himself (Interview with Dr. Martin Haskell, AMA News, 1993) points out that some 80% are "purely elective."

        In a personal conversation with Fr. Frank Pavone, he goes on to explain that "elective" does not mean that the woman chooses the procedure out of medical necessity, but rather because she wants an abortion. He freely admits to Fr. Frank that there does not seem to be any medical reason for this procedure. There are in fact absolutely no obstetrical situations encountered in this country which require a partially delivered human fetus to be destroyed to preserve the life or health of the mother (Dr. Pamela Smith, Senate Hearing Record, p.82: Partial Birth Abortion Ban Medical Testimony). 

            So before you allow the unmitigated, political idioms spouted by the Left-wing activists holding our media outlets hostage, consider the facts which are so obviously on the side of the “Christian Right” or “Moral Majority” as our friend Devin Barber so fondly calls us.