Supreme Court Gets Abortion Case Right

Court Backs Ban on Abortion Procedure

The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long- awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.

Finally! Partial birth abortion is a brutal procedure and deserves to be banned.

LA Times - Offering Abortion, Rebirth

Los Angeles Times: Offering Abortion, Rebirth

See some of my comments on the article below:

Offering Abortion, Rebirth
Yes, an Arkansas doctor says, he destroys life. But he believes the thousands of women who have relied on him have been 'born again.'
By Stephanie Simon
Times Staff Writer

November 29, 2005

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. — Dr. William F. Harrison has forgotten how many children the woman had. He remembers she was poor and, most vividly, he remembers her response when a physician diagnosed her distended stomach as pregnancy.

"Oh, God, doctor," the woman said. "I was hoping it was cancer."

This was in 1967. Harrison was a medical student and his wife was expecting their third child. It had never occurred to him that a woman would be anything but happy to learn she was pregnant.

The next year, he trained on a maternity ward. In a 24-hour shift, it was not unusual, he said, for four or five women to come in feverish or hemorrhaging from botched abortions.

Harrison opened an obstetrics and gynecology practice, but after the Supreme Court established abortion as a constitutional right in 1973, he decided to take on an additional specialty. Now 70, Harrison estimates he's terminated at least 20,000 pregnancies.

Isn't it amazing that one person is responsible for killing 20,000 unborn babies?

His clinic has not been picketed for years, but Harrison feels very much on the front lines these days.

Debate over President Bush's nominee for the Supreme Court, Samuel A. Alito Jr., has centered on abortion. Activists on both sides warn — or pray — that if Alito is confirmed, the court may one day reverse Roe vs. Wade.

At least a dozen states, and perhaps as many as 30, would probably continue to allow most abortions. But abortion rights activists predict that terminating a pregnancy would become a criminal act across much of the South, the Midwest and the Rocky Mountain region.

In Arkansas, for instance, the state constitution sets out "to protect the life of every unborn child from conception until birth." At least 10 other states — including Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Utah — have similar language in their constitutions or legal codes.

Harrison warns every patient he sees that abortion may be illegal one day. He wants to stir them to activism, but most women respond mildly.

"I can't imagine the country coming to that," says Kim, 35, in for her second abortion in two years.

2 abortions for one lady in 2 years!

A high school senior says the issue won't weigh heavily when she evaluates candidates. "There's other issues I see as more important," she says, "like whether they'll raise taxes."

Patients asked to be identified only by their first names or, in some cases, by their ages to protect their privacy.

Harrison is beyond such concerns. For several years in the 1980s, his clinic was picketed, vandalized and once firebombed. Protesters marched outside his home and death threats became routine. Harrison responded by making his case.

I don't endorse any of the above except for peaceful protests.

He answered every phone call, replied to every letter in the newspaper and appeared at public forums to defend abortion rights. Eventually, the protesters in this college town left him alone. (Arkansas Right to Life focuses instead on educating women about alternatives to abortion, Executive Director Rose Mimms said.)

Rose Mimms has the right idea.

In the years since, Harrison has become more outspoken.

He calls himself an "abortionist" and says, "I am destroying life."

At least he admits it.

But he also feels he's giving life: He calls his patients "born again."

Now they are trying to wrap themselves in religious language. Nice!

"When you end what the woman considers a disastrous pregnancy, she has literally been given her life back," he says.

What about the pain that many women have about the killing of their child?

Before giving up obstetrics in 1991, Harrison delivered 6,000 babies. Childbirth, he says, should be joyous; a woman should never consider it a punishment or an obligation.

"We try to make sure she doesn't ever feel guilty," he says, "for what she feels she has to do."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is a few minutes before 11 a.m. when Harrison raps on the door of his operating room and walks in.

His Fayetteville Women's Clinic occupies a once-elegant home dating to the 1940s; the first-floor surgery looks like it was a parlor. Thick blue curtains block the windows and paintings of butterflies and flowers hang on the walls. The radio is tuned to an easy-listening station.

An 18-year-old with braces on her teeth is on the operating table, her head on a plaid pillow, her feet up in stirrups, her arms strapped down at her sides. A pink blanket is draped over her stomach. She's 13 weeks pregnant, at the very end of the first trimester. She hasn't told her parents.

A nurse has already given her a local anesthetic, Valium and a drug to dilate her cervix; Harrison prepares to inject Versed, a sedative, in her intravenous line. The drug will wipe out her memory of everything that happens during the 20 minutes she's in the operating room. It's so effective that patients who return for a follow-up exam often don't recognize Harrison.

The doctor is wearing a black turtleneck, brown slacks and tennis shoes. He snaps his gum as he checks the monitors displaying the patient's pulse rate and oxygen count.

"This is not going to be nearly as hard as you anticipate," he tells her.

She smiles wanly. Keeping up a constant patter — he asks about her brothers, her future birth control plans, whether she's good at tongue twisters — Harrison pulls on sterile gloves.

"How're you doing up there?" he asks.

"Doing OK."

"Good girl."

Harrison glances at an ultrasound screen frozen with an image of the fetus taken moments before. Against the fuzzy black-and-white screen, he sees the curve of a head, the bend of an elbow, the ball of a fist.

This sounds like a baby doesn't it?

"You may feel some cramping while we suction everything out," Harrison tells the patient.

A moment later, he says: "You're going to hear a sucking sound."

The abortion takes two minutes. The patient lies still and quiet, her eyes closed, a few tears rolling down her cheeks. The friend who has accompanied her stands at her side, mutely stroking her arm.

Death has occurred and tears are appropriate.

When he's done, Harrison performs another ultrasound. The screen this time is blank but for the contours of the uterus. "We've gotten everything out of there," he says.

Another legal killing for the doctor.

As the nurse drops the instruments in the sink with a clatter, the teenager looks around, woozy.

"It was a lot easier than I thought it would be," she says. "I thought it would be horrible, but it wasn't. The procedure, that is."

She is not yet sure, she says, how she is doing emotionally. She feels guilty, sad and relieved, all in a jumble.

This pain won't go away easily.

"There's things wrong with abortion," she says. "But I want to have a good life. And provide a good life for my child." To keep this baby now, she says, when she's single, broke and about to start college, "would be unfair."

How sad. Let's kill the baby, that's fair. Give me a break! How cold-hearted have we become that a person thinks that it's better to kill a baby than have them not have the "good life".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Politicians on both sides of the abortion debate often talk up adoption as a better alternative. Harrison's patients do not consider it an option.

A high school volleyball player says she doesn't want to give up her body for nine months. "I realize just from the first three months how it changes everything," she says.

So, kill it instead.

Kim, a single mother of three, says she couldn't bear to give away a child and have to wonder every day if he were loved. Ending the pregnancy seemed easier, she says — as long as she doesn't let herself think about "what could have been."

Instead she had it killed, legally of course.

By law, Harrison's staff must offer patients two pamphlets from the state. One lists adoption services and groups that provide free diapers, day-care subsidies and other aid. The second contains photos of the fetus at various stages of development.

Patients don't have to accept either pamphlet. Most wave them away, their minds made up.

For the few women who arrive ambivalent or beset by guilt, Harrison's nurse has posted statistics on the exam-room mirror: One out of every four pregnant women in the U.S. chooses abortion. A third of all women in this country will have at least one abortion by the time they're 45.

Everyone does it so don't feel guilty.

"You think there's room in hell for all those women?" the nurse will ask.

I'm not as concerned about the women that have the abortions, but the doctor and nurses know exactly what they are doing. They will be held accountable.

If the woman remains troubled, the nurse tells her to go home and think it over.

"If they truly feel they're killing a baby, we're not going to do an abortion for them," says the nurse, who asked not to be identified for fear protesters would target her.

The 17-year-old in for a consultation this morning assures the nurse that she does not consider the embryo inside her a baby.

"Not until it's developed," she says. "That would be about three months?"

"It's completely formed about nine weeks," the nurse tells her. "Yours is more like a chicken yolk."

The girl, who is five weeks pregnant, looks relieved. "Then no," she says, "it's not a baby." Her mother sits in the corner wiping her tears.

Again, the tears are justified. The mother will now see her grandchild killed, legally of course.

Harrison draws his own moral line at the end of the second trimester, or 26 weeks since the first day of the woman's last menstrual period. Until that point, he will abort for any reason.

Wow, even a killer of 20,000 babies knows there should be some type of limit.

"It's not a baby to me until the mother tells me it's a baby," he says.

Relativism at its' worst.

But Harrison refuses to end third-trimester pregnancies, even if the fetus is severely disabled. Some premature infants born at that stage, or even a few weeks earlier, can survive. Harrison believes they may be developed enough to feel pain in utero. Just a handful of doctors around the nation will abort a fetus at this stage.

"I just don't think it should be done," says Harrison, who calls the practice infanticide.

The doctor has this one right.

Most women seek abortions much earlier in pregnancy; nearly 90% are in their first trimester. As long as Roe vs. Wade stands, states cannot ban abortions that early but legislatures can impose a variety of conditions.

At least 28 states, including Arkansas, require patients to receive counseling before the day of their abortion. Arkansas is also one of 26 states to require underage girls to get parental consent.

Abortion rights activists say such laws burden women unnecessarily, forcing them to miss work, find child care and pay for transportation to make two trips to the clinic, which may be hundreds of miles away. There's one abortion clinic in Mississippi and one in South Dakota. There are two in Missouri and two in Arkansas.

Amanda, a 20-year-old administrative assistant, says it's not the obstacles that surprise her — it's how normal and unashamed she feels as she prepares to end her first pregnancy.

"It's an everyday occurrence," she says as she waits for her 2:30 p.m. abortion. "It's not like this is a rare thing."

Amanda hasn't told her ex-boyfriend that she's 15 weeks pregnant with his child. She hasn't told her parents, either, though she lives with them.

"I figured it was my responsibility," she says.

She regrets having to pay $750 for the abortion, but Amanda says she does not doubt her decision. "It's not like it's illegal. It's not like I'm doing anything wrong," she says.

Just because it's legal doesn't make it morally right. Slavery used to be legal but it was never right.

"I've been praying a lot and that's been a real source of strength for me. I really believe God has a plan for us all. I have a choice, and that's part of my plan."

She might want to make sure she prays without her mind made up already.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Before, after and even during an abortion, Harrison lectures his patients on birth control. He urges them to get on the pill and to insist their partners use condoms.

They promise. But Harrison knows many will be back.

His first patient of the day, Sarah, 23, says it never occurred to her to use birth control, though she has been sexually active for six years. When she became pregnant this fall, Sarah, who works in real estate, was in the midst of planning her wedding. "I don't think my dress would have fit with a baby in there," she says.

One lady's stupidity means another unborn baby is to be killed, legally of course.

The last patient of the day, a 32-year-old college student named Stephanie, has had four abortions in the last 12 years. She keeps forgetting to take her birth control pills. Abortion "is a bummer," she says, "but no big stress."

That's one cold heart.

Harrison does not get frustrated with such patients.

He has learned to focus on the facts he considers most important: This woman does not want to be pregnant. He can give her back control of her life and keep a child from coming into the world unwanted. He believes in this so strongly, he waives his fees for women who can't come up with the money.

Last February, Harrison injured his head in a fall. He underwent three surgeries and spent months in rehabilitation. His wife urged him to retire.

"There's no one to take my place," he told her.

As soon as he felt strong enough, Harrison was back in surgery.

He'll keep at it as long as his stamina holds, or as long as it is legal.

Three abortions before lunch and three more after: The appointment book is always full.

It's so sad to see the wasted lives; the more than 20,000 babies that this doctor has legally killed, the sadness of many women, the stupidity of some and the talents of a doctor who would rather kill (legally of course) than truly heal. There aren't easy solutions to unwanted pregnancies but the legal killing is the morally incorrect one, even though it is legal.

Science, Politics, & Abortion

Interesting opinion on Fox News.com by Wendy McElroy on how the pace of science may make the abortion debate obsolete. The issue has to do with ectogenesis - ie, the ability to conceive, nurture, and give birth to a baby completely outside the womb. According to McElroy, we're closer to this reality than we think. At the minimum, viability is key to this discussion.

Science has sped past the current state of debate, and those stuck behind in the rut of discussing Roe v. Wade may find themselves obsolete. Whether or not ectogenesis is ever able to sustain a nine-month human pregnancy, one thing is clear: key issues like viability are being redefined by science. The abortion debate must move into the 21st century. . . .

Now I'm not advocating what has become the default technological maxim: If it can be done it should be done. Think of nuclear energy, for example. Great benefits. Powerful technology. But we rushed into the nuclear era without a clear understanding of the dangerous implications, viz waste byproducts, that would have to be disposed of.

What are the "waste byproducts" and dangerous implications of ectogenesis? More fertilized eggs to toss? Genetic engineering and mail-order, designer babies? Population explosion? These issues will require intense discussion. And soon. Science waits for no man...or woman...or fetus.

Yet, while there are inherent dangers to scientific advancement, maybe a positive result will be the end of abortion.

But the extent of the problem may well be diminished by science, by new reproductive technologies that sustain the viability of fetuses removed from women who do not wish to become mothers. Like heart transplants or intrauterine operations to correct birth defects, ectogenesis may taken for granted some day. The most optimistic scenario is that a not-too-future generation will look back on abortion as a barbaric procedure, and learn the terms 'pro-choice' and 'pro-life' from a history text.

Reflecting on Proverbs 24:10-12
GT

Justice Dies, Judges Recuse, What To Do

Chief Justice William Rehnquist dies at 80 . . .

You've seen the headlines. You know the impact.
Rehnquist's distinguished 33-year Supreme Court career has come to an end.

"And while historians will debate whether he helped lead change
or simply reflected it, Rehnquist's path indisputably traced a larger
transformation in society - from a time of burgeoning progressive
legislation and expanding federal power to the modern era of
judicial and political conservatism."

So writes Stephen Henderson for Knight Ridder.
(Article: Rehnquist journeyed from firebrand to measured leader. Sun, Sept 4, 2005.)

And so a questions arises. Has this 'modern era of judicial and political conservatism' come to an end as well? Or will we see an escalation of conservativism? It won't be long before professional pundits and blogdits weigh in on the matter. Especially now that two seats are vacant, a rare situation indeed. And an alarming one for many liberals.

For at issue is what hermeneutical key will the next two Bush-nominated justices use to interpret and reference the constitution. This is no small matter. It means applying the law as originally intended (or as literally written) or dynamically executing the law according to the modern cultural context (legislating from the bench?).

How important is this distinction? Without embellishment, it has meant the loss of more than 35 million lives.

Read on for more.

What bench legislation has caused the death of millions? Roe v Wade. The cultural question? Abortion.

Correspondent Stephen Henderson states:
"When the Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling permitting
abortion in 1973, it was William H. Rehnquist, the newest member
writing in his first major case, who penned the most provocative
dissent. He said the court was out of line recognizing a right that
wasn't enshrined in the Constitution and arrogant for deciding an
issue that should be left to the democratic process. The court's
rationale, he said, 'is far more appropriate to a legislative judgment
than to a judicial one.' " (ibid)

Which leads me to discuss an attendant topic pulsing along the current news wires.

Here's the headline: Judges decline abortion cases.
(Source: New York Times News Service. Sun, Sept 4, 2005.)

Here's the story: Due to their moral and religious convictions regarding 'taking the life of an innocent human being' (to quote Judge John R. McCarroll of Shelby County Circuit Court in Tennesee) some judges are recusing themselves from decisions over allowing pregnant teens to proceed with an abortion.

Tennessee is among 18 states that require minors to seek parental permission before terminating their pregnancy. However, some states like Tennesee also allow for an alternative process. Teens can request a go-ahead from a judge.

This puts the judge in a pretty predicament. If he or she refuses to take such cases on moral grounds, then he or she is accused of an unwillingness to follow the law. And aren't conservative judges suppose to simply apply the law as originally intended or literally written?

On the other hand, "If you requre judges to hear these cases when they are morally and, maybe, religiously opposed to abortion," says Helena Silverstein, who teaches law and government at Lafayette College in Easton, PA, "they are likely to impose their views on the minor." Meaning, the judge will refuse to allow the teen to abort.

And that could lead to an accusation of legislating from the bench. The very thing some conservatives fear might happen if the two new justices to the Supreme Court end up moving us away from a Rehnquist-shaped 'modern era of judicial and political conservatism.'

So what does all this mean for interested parties?

First, we should not too forcefully plant our flag on either constitutional interpretive ideology since both have flaws when tested by practical application. The pot calls the kettle black in far too many instances.

Second, we need not worry about what era we are moving into with regards to judicial and political climes. Our system of government has worked for over 200 years and the checks and balances, while sometimes swinging with the wind, do maintain an overall - and divinely guided? - balance.

Third, and not least, we should continue to pray for God's wisdom in the review, interpretation, judgment, application, and execution of the law. Yes, let's work to place men and women of integrity in places of leadership. But let's not place our trust in the mechanism of democracy - no matter who might serve as Supreme Court Justices in the future.

Reflecting on Romans 13.1,
GT

Me Too Says Hillary

The New York Times > Washington > Senator Clinton Speaks of 'Common Ground' on Abortion

In addition to her description of abortion as a "tragic choice" for many," Mrs. Clinton said that faith and organized religion were the "primary" reasons that teenagers abstain from sexual relations, and reminded the audience that during the 1990's, she promoted "teen celibacy" as a way to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.

Anyone sensing a bit of political calculation? Look for more of this type of rhetoric from Presidential Wannabe HRC.

Malkin - Democrats For Life

Michelle Malkin: DEMOCRATS FOR LIFE

Who'd have thunk it? The way the Democratic party chooses to portray itself you'd think there was no such thing as a pro-life Democrat. This is good to see.

Bad Choices

The American Spectator - Choice Uber Alles

When looking at the sonogram, her boyfriend, Peter, thought: "Oh my gosh, there are three heartbeats. I can't believe we're about to make two disappear."

Can we just ponder this for a bit? What are we doing?

12 Week-Old in the Womb

Courtesy of Drudge.

BBC NEWS | Health | Scans uncover secrets of the womb

The above is a baby who's only been in the womb for 12 weeks. About abortion, a picture speaks a 1000 words. Check out more pictures here.

Shawn Macomber - Unsilent Scream

The American Spectator - Unsilent Scream

Shawn Macomber discusses a very key point about how society judges whether a life is worth protecting or not. Brilliant.

CNN - Fetuses feel pain, doctor testifies (duh!)

CNN.com - Fetuses feel pain, doctor testifies - Apr 6, 2004

We've known this for years. Anyone remember "Silent Scream"?

Good Man

Major props to Chris Danze.

Paul Hill is not a Martyr

For murdering an abortion doctor and his bodyguard, Paul Hill will be executed in Florida on Wednesday. Speaking as a pro-life advocate, I find the actions of Hill no better than any other murderer. He deserves his execution. Paul Hill is the most dangerous type of person, he feels it was his duty to execute judgement on the abortion provider. That is not Hill's job but God's and the governments. Who elected Paul Hill as judge, jury and executioner? The man is totally unrepentent and says he'd do it again.

We just cannot get so wrapped up in an issue that it literally consumes us. Paul Hill claims to be a Christian and it's not my job to say that he is or isn't. I can say he's totally deceived. It was the love of Christ and of Christians that helped bring Jane Roe (Norma McCorvey) to faith in Christ, not the hate.

Hey, let's be pro-life but any Christian must first be loving to even our perceived enemies.