Abortion ban

Posted Apr 18, 2007 in Politics, Religion, Science.

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has voted to uphold the ban on so-called “partial-birth abortions” (some forms of intact dilation and extraction) with a majority of five votes to four. All five of the votes in favor of the ban came from the justices who identify themselves as Catholic. The full text of the ruling (PDF) includes the dissenting opinion, which features a strenuous objection from Justice Ginsburg in which she says the court “deprives women of the right to make an autonomous choice, even at the expense of their safety.”

This gives our first real taste of what it is like to have cases decided by the “morality” dictated by the Vatican, rather than by a correct interpretation of The Constitution. Expect to see further erosion of the rights of women, homosexuals, atheists and any other non-Catholic Americans.


  1. Gravatar

    Hi Simon,

    I agree with you, it’s a scandal to take away the freedom of choice from anyone. ‘Religion’ is man made and in my opinion, was enforced on the poor and less well educated as a powerful tool of control.

    It appears that even the Constitution is not safe from manipulation to those in positions of power. Don't you think that an amendment should be seriously considered, to curb the freedom or right of anyone to ‘the right to bear arms’? I’m sure that intention was not to give people the right to slaughter innocents…

    Posted by Mum on Apr 20, 2007.

  2. Gravatar

    Be careful in calling the anti-abortion movement Catholic, Simon: There are plenty of Protestant Christian groups—such as the Southern Baptist Convention—that oppose abortion as well. And George Bush is a Methodist, after all; rest assured that Catholics do not have a monopoly on conservative religious politics.

    Posted by Emufarmers on Apr 21, 2007.

  3. Gravatar

    "Be careful in calling the anti-abortion movement Catholic, Simon"

    Indeed. I am aware that anti-abortionists come from all kinds of unreasonable folks. I was merely pointing out that the catholicism of the Justice's in question may have played a major part in the decision.

    Posted by Simon Jessey on Apr 22, 2007.

  4. Gravatar

    I really enjoyed reading all of your posts. It’s interesting to read ideas, and observations from someone else’s point of view… makes you think more. Keep up the good work. Greetings

    Posted by Tomek on Apr 23, 2007.

  5. Gravatar

    Preface: I am athiest. To me its totally obvious Global Warming is a religion. Thus I partake neither of wafers of carbohydrate nor chicken little scams for the intent of being anti-capitalist. That being said..........

    Partial birth abortion is nuts. You have to draw the line. I am perfectly in favor of liberals having more abortions and in the case of Ted Kennedy a retroactive one. Its sure to lower the liberal turnout at the poles 18 years hence. However at some point between the first trimester and the point where the little SOB has made it except for the infants head it becomes murder. Ok maybe there really is no such thing as life. Maybe we're all chemical/nanotech robots made of carbon but it seems to be very ungenerous to kill an infant when its gotten all the way out cepting the cranium is still in the vagina. Liberals are fond of passing themselves off as generous but to me they seem singularly not so. How about just not being a total wanker and planning your schedule around your abortion such that the little fudger isn't fully developed when you kill him. Only a sappy headed liberal would not see that as murder. That from me a totally skeptical atheist.

    Posted by Ferd on May 05, 2007.

  6. Gravatar

    What if we look at it from a doctor's point of view and religion out of it?

    Doctor's are charged to "do no harm" and a partial birth abortion does harm. The only valid argument I have heard for partial birth abortion (at which point there is a heart beat, brain, etc. and they basically crush the skull) is medical complications. Those complications are extremely rare and from the statistics I have seen they only constitute a 1-2% of all abortions.

    I am sorry, but if a woman gets seven months into her pregnancy and decides she is having second thoughts, it is, in my opinion, a little too late. I guess I do not understand how or why folks see it differently.

    Posted by Stephan on May 17, 2007.

  7. Gravatar

    Almost none of these so-called "partial-birth abortions" are done by choice. Once it gets to 7 months plus, we are talking about medical complications almost exclusively. The issue here is that people who aren't doctors/experts are making it illegal to perform medical procedures that may be required to save the life of a mother. I agree that partial-birth abortions are pretty gross, but there are times (though rare) when they may be necessary. Decisions like that should not be left to politicians or judges - and especially not politicians or judges with their own agendas.

    Posted by Simon Jessey on May 18, 2007.