^^I haven't even heard any proponents of 3rd trimester abortion...I think you're speaking out of your *** on this one hella.


Pro-choice, from everyone I've ever met who is pro-choice, means 1st trimester and 2nd if it's neccesary for the mother's health.

 

Liberal democrats have been against limiting late term abortion because of absence of a "health of the mother" clause. It sounds reasonable until you look into the act itself, and see that such a clause is N/A.

I think some in the extremist left wing are hesitant to limit abortion rights at all, for fear that the evil republicans will try to further limit the murder of unborn children.

 

My grandmother was president of planned parenthood of the rocky mountains a while ago, and even she says that 3rd trimester abortions are almost never performed, only in a VERY VERY VERY select few cases (<30 per year) where it has been deemed that the mother has a VERY high likelyhood of severe bleeding during birth.

2nd term are even frowned upon, except for cases once again where the mother's health is at risk.

Here is some info for you:
88% of abortions were performed in the first 12 weeks
http://www.policyalmanac.org/culture...atistics.shtml

A bit more...
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fact2.htm

Plus, 2nd term abortions are still not performed regularly because they ARE RISKY (anybody can tell you that!)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

And a powerpoint from dartmouth on abortion statistics:
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~phil03/han...hil3_22NOV.ppt.

 

Since your use of "full term" was disingenuous sophistry, I agree that "we" should use the term 3rd trimester.

Thank you for the good facts, inprezastifan88.

 

I meant full term as a fully developed baby that would be viable if given birth to at that moment.

Here are some more statistics with some context, and I was mistaken about how the partial-birth procedure was performed. The woman delivers the entire body 1st, then the brain is sucked out, and then the brainless corpse is removed. Whoever thought up this procedure has a special place in hell.

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/index.html
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats.html

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/pba/PBA...hers_Place.htm

By the way, their statistics comes from the CDC and other "reputable" organizations.

 

Based on the 1,300,000 annual figure, 1.4% beyond 20wks (18,200), and 13.4% beyond 12 wks (174,200)... that's a lot.

Just for a frame of reference, at 18 days there is a heart beat, and 6 weeks measurable brain waves.

 

Find the CDC statistics. As you will note, none of my links are "pro-choice" or "pro-life". BTW: NRIC is blocked from my work comp, listed as a "hate group": maybe that is saying something

EDIT: One is, but other than that no

 

You are missing something here hella. Those operations are not performed after 12 weeks in almost all cases if there is not the mother's health at risk. Ask any abortion doc. and most will tell you that they will not perform one after 15wks due to the extreme risks involved. The risk of death during pregnancy has to be GREATER than the risk during abortion by a significant precentage. There are clinics that will perform after 15wks w/o a risk to the mother, but they are rare, and not supported by most pro-choice groups (i.e. planned parenthood) as well as myself.

As far as the brain waves, do you have proof? I'll admit it is a bit biased but here is some:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fetu.htm

Here is a non-biased one:
http://ww4.americanbaby.com/ab/story.../data/9177.xml

 

I don't think that's the case. In this Kansas state summary 182 of the partial birth abortions done in 1999 (most were out of state residents, so no derogatory Kansas Jokes... of course Clinton may have had something to do with it???), all 182 were done to "prevent substantial and irreversible impairment of a major body fuction." Sound reasonable, until you find out that every single one of the 182 procedures was done for mental, rather than physical impairment!!!.

If true, that should make any reasonable person vomit.

See pg 11 for the source:

http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/99itop1.pdf

This is just Kansas... imagine how that scales to the other 49 states.

 

I being the consevative that I am have to cross the line on this. I am pro-choice. I do believe there should be limitations on the time frame in which the abortion is conducted. First tri-mester, anything else aside from serious medical circumstances; TOUGH. Stick it out and give the baby up for adoption. Abortion is a great thing, in terms of reducing crime rate.

 

Damn...you are so full of it.

Here are actual CDC statistics for 1999. Your own sites admit that abortions have decreased since then.

9,958 abortions after 21 weeks gestation reported in 1999

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwr...09a1.htm#tab16

You are, of course, neglecting to mention that many of these abortions are performed because the fetus is malformed or deceased.

As far as your "mental health" argument, it simply doesn't hold water.

There should be complete parity in treatment and attitudes regarding mental and physical health concerns.

 

The site ASSERTS that the # has gone down, which is contrary to the abortion rights activists who claim that # has gone up under GW.

Did you read that ACTUAL Kansas Department of Health document?
Per page 11, every single one was for mental reasons, and NONE for physical reasons.

Thanks for playing!

 

By the way, the book which was the reason for this thread is #6 on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/038...602866-3019223

 

oooh oooh, my blowhards book sells better than your blowhards book.

Actually that book is now number 2 and Jimmy Carters book is number 4, followed by Al Franken's new book at 15. How is this relevant at all?

 

Wow, won't touch this with a 6 foot pole.