Abortion
Pro/Con
Should Congress ban so-called partial-birth abortions?
Pro
Rep. Christopher H. Smith, R-N.J.
Chairman, Bipartisan Congressional Pro-life Caucus. Written for The CQ Researcher, March 2003
A society is measured by how well — or poorly — it treats the most vulnerable in its midst, and partial-birth abortion, like all abortions, is horrific violence against women and children.
Justice Clarence Thomas accurately described the procedure in his Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) dissent: “After dilating the cervix, the physician will grab the fetus by its feet and pull the fetal body out of the uterus into the vaginal cavity. At this stage of development, the head is the largest part of the body. . . . the head will be held inside the uterus by the woman's cervix. While the fetus is stuck in this position, dangling partly out of the woman's body, and just a few inches from a completed birth, the physician uses an instrument such as a pair of scissors to tear or perforate the skull. The physician will then either crush the skull or will use a vacuum to remove the brain and other intracranial contents from the fetal skull, collapse the fetus' head, and pull the fetus from the uterus.”
Most partial-birth abortions are committed between the 20th and 26th week of pregnancy. At this stage, a prematurely delivered infant is usually born alive. These are babies who are extremely sensitive to pain — whether inside the womb, fully born or anywhere in-between.
An overwhelming majority of Americans are outraged that this procedure is legal in our country. A January Gallup Poll found that 70 percent favored and 25 percent opposed “a law that would make it illegal to perform a specific abortion procedure conducted in the last six months of pregnancy known as 'partial birth abortion,' except in cases necessary to save the life of the mother.”
In a January speech, President Bush agreed: “Partial-birth abortion is an abhorrent procedure that offends human dignity.”
I have written two
Should Congress ban so-called partial-birth abortions?
Pro
Rep. Christopher H. Smith, R-N.J.
Chairman, Bipartisan Congressional Pro-life Caucus. Written for The CQ Researcher, March 2003
A society is measured by how well — or poorly — it treats the most vulnerable in its midst, and partial-birth abortion, like all abortions, is horrific violence against women and children.
Justice Clarence Thomas accurately described the procedure in his Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) dissent: “After dilating the cervix, the physician will grab the fetus by its feet and pull the fetal body out of the uterus into the vaginal cavity. At this stage of development, the head is the largest part of the body. . . . the head will be held inside the uterus by the woman's cervix. While the fetus is stuck in this position, dangling partly out of the woman's body, and just a few inches from a completed birth, the physician uses an instrument such as a pair of scissors to tear or perforate the skull. The physician will then either crush the skull or will use a vacuum to remove the brain and other intracranial contents from the fetal skull, collapse the fetus' head, and pull the fetus from the uterus.”
Most partial-birth abortions are committed between the 20th and 26th week of pregnancy. At this stage, a prematurely delivered infant is usually born alive. These are babies who are extremely sensitive to pain — whether inside the womb, fully born or anywhere in-between.
An overwhelming majority of Americans are outraged that this procedure is legal in our country. A January Gallup Poll found that 70 percent favored and 25 percent opposed “a law that would make it illegal to perform a specific abortion procedure conducted in the last six months of pregnancy known as 'partial birth abortion,' except in cases necessary to save the life of the mother.”
In a January speech, President Bush agreed: “Partial-birth abortion is an abhorrent procedure that offends human dignity.”
I have written two