Spokane7
65°
April 7, 2011 in Opinion
Editorial: Ideological abortion law has shaky foundations
The Idaho Legislature has passed a bill that bans abortions after 20 weeks based on the nebulous concept of fetal pain, but it isn’t really about that. If it were, lawmakers would have been stopped by the uncertainty surrounding that claim. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says there is “no legitimate scientific information that supports the statement that a fetus experiences pain.” Nonetheless, the bill’s sponsor brought in his own experts who said otherwise.
What this bill really represents is an effort to circumvent the standard of fetus viability established in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which is generally around 22 to 24 weeks. Resetting the point where states could intervene to 20 weeks would have prevented six abortions in Idaho in 2009. But this isn’t about stopping those rare occurrences; it’s about establishing an earlier entry point so that government can limit a pregnant woman’s right to make a highly personal decision. From there, other strategies can be employed to make abortion even more restrictive or outright illegal.
Idaho is among several states where the fetal-pain strategy is being carried out. The Nebraska Legislature passed such a law last year and the governor signed it. Kansas passed one recently, and it awaits the governor’s signature.
The Idaho attorney general’s office issued an opinion that the Idaho version would not pass constitutional muster, but lawmakers want to spend taxpayer dollars to find out for themselves. This is foolhardy, given the nearly three-quarters of a million dollars the state has spent on futile court battles over previous anti-abortion laws. It is especially conspicuous in a year where more than $90 million in painful budget cuts were approved.
It would appear that no matter how cash-strapped the state is, there is always enough taxpayer money on hand for ideological windmill jousting.
This law would prohibit abortions after 20 weeks in the cases of incest and rape. It subjects the mother and medical professionals to criminal and civil sanctions, and it gives the father and other relatives standing to bring lawsuits. Theoretically, the “father” could be the rapist.
The Legislature ignored the admonition of state Rep. John Rusche, D-Lewiston, who is a pediatrician: “To knowingly force someone to carry a baby to term when they know it’s not going to survive I think is cruel.”
A recent Reuters article noted the example of a pregnant Nebraska woman who very much wanted to have a baby but lost most of her amniotic fluids at 22 weeks. She was told her baby would probably die outside the womb from undeveloped lungs and that the uterine walls would slowly crush the fetus. But she was denied her request for labor to be induced because of the fetal-pain law’s 20-week cutoff. Ten days later, she went into labor naturally and the baby died in her arms 15 minutes after delivery.
So the state substituted its judgment for the mother’s and still failed to prevent fetal pain under its definition. Gov. Butch Otter should veto this intrusive, reckless law.
To respond to this editorial online, go to www.spokesman.com and click on Opinion under the Topics menu.
Trudy Rubin: Egyptians say no to Islamists 
hawken on April 07 at 11:32 a.m.
The SAR does not allow some to post on this topic based upon their SAR, selective, bias. Depending upon the shift schedule of the moderators.
Yesterday I posted my opinion about abortion accompanied by YouTube videos, done professionally, by Medical Doctors, giving instruction and providing educational insight.
My videos were twice deleted by the SAR moderators on duty at the time and the string was ultimately shut down.
JohnClarke, for example complained about the “offensiveness” of the actual, YouTube, instructional videos. My posts were soon thereafter deleted.
What’s amazing to me is that abortionist complain about the “offensiveness” of the “real time,” instructional videos, but are not offended with the reality that takes place over 1,000,000 times each year.
So. My recommendation for any whom want to oppose abortion, you must speak in “non-offensive” terms to abortionists. Otherwise, you will probably have your post deleted.
Meanwhile, be prepared for the un-deleted “vitriol” you will get back from the abortionists.
The problem is, that even opposing abortion is “offensive” to abortionists, and demonstrably some on the moderator staff of the SAR.
If you have an interest in learning what actually occurs during abortions, to the unborn child, as shown professionally, by Medical Doctors, you will have to find that for yourself. I am not allowed to post them.
Credible, scientific resources are abundant on YouTube.
Now, we’ll see if the SAR allows me to express this opinion without deletion.
If that’s the case, one should never question the SAR, on anything. Unless you want your posts deleted or you want to be banned from posting. Just fall in line and bow to the “master.”
maria on April 07 at 11:50 a.m.
This article isn’t about YOU, hawken.
misjustice on April 07 at 6:06 p.m.
Poor Hawken! He’s soooooo abused!
AND too much of an egoist to know that the SR is a private entity which has every right to censor what is posted on their privately owned web site. He whined like he does in the above post after he was banned for 5 glorious days; cried like a little boy about how unfairly he was treated…and now he’s back, still crying, and whining, all while flying monkeys exit his posterior.
He’s all for state forced pregnancy because he loves the fetus but hates the poor child. He loves the austerity moves which will cut funding to poor kids; cuts to health care, to food stamps, to WIC, to public schools. Oh, and if one of those poor kids manages to go to college and chooses to then be a teacher, Hawken will blame that kid for crashing the economy, call it a leech, and applaud efforts to restrict collective bargaining by the teachers’ union.
Yep, he and the GOP love the fetus; because it can be a political football used to keep women in their place…and that’s the real goal of the restrictive abortion law in Ideeho. Gotta teach those uppity, wanton, seductress, slutty women a thing or two.
bsfmama on April 07 at 7:08 p.m.
Kudos to Idaho for taking a stand for what is right, even if it costs the taxpayers some money. Most of the good and right things in life come with a price. The majority of Idahoans are pro-life and I, for one, am willing to spend my tax dollars to defend the unborn. It is wrong to take a human life and I am proud to live in a state that recognizes the unborn life in the womb as human, whether it feels pain or not. I also am certain that delivering a baby, even when it dies 15 minutes after birth, is a far more satisfying experience for the mother than aborting that baby before it died. Holding your baby for any amount of time is a priceless experience, whereas killing your baby is not going to be a cherished memory. Delivering a baby, even if it was conceived as a result of rape, would be a far better experience than aborting that baby. Giving life to a baby is an unmatched moment in one’s life no matter how it was conceived. However, taking the life of your own child is something that many, many women live to regret, and it can never be undone.
mtharves on April 07 at 9:06 p.m.
bsfmama,
So how do you feel about the death penalty that Idaho has? Not used often but still on the books. “It is wrong to take a human life”, oh that’s right, that’s how you feel about the death penalty.
woamike on April 07 at 9:23 p.m.
Abortion vs. Capital Punishment:
I love how you guys try to compare killing an innocent unborn child with offing a vicious killer or child rapist.
Moral relativism at its best.
MJ, you sound like a broken record. When are you going to come up with some good arguments instead of that reguritated, discredited tripe? Pitiful and and lame - grade school rigor at best. You should get together with the rest of your gang and come up with something better than this level of road apples:
“Yep, he and the GOP love the fetus; because it can be a political football used to keep women in their place…and that’s the real goal of the restrictive abortion law in Ideeho. Gotta teach those uppity, wanton, seductress, slutty women a thing or two.”
As always, classy.
Goodnight my dears.
gailandmarshall on April 07 at 9:24 p.m.
mtharves - Don’t expect ignorant people like bsfmama to think rationally. They believe what their pastor tells them to believe.
gailandmarshall on April 07 at 9:30 p.m.
And I’m sure the child in Nebraska suffered more when it was suffocating to death than it would if it had been given the mercy of an abortion before fully developing.
maria on April 07 at 9:37 p.m.
Be careful what you wish for:
http://www.psywarrior.com/BabyHitler2.jpg
maria on April 07 at 9:40 p.m.
woamike: easy there, cowgirl. You sound like you been rid hard ‘n put away wet.
maria on April 07 at 9:55 p.m.
Hitler was an INBRED!
Jeffrey_Grey on April 08 at 9:09 a.m.
Three points:
1) I am staunchly pro-life. Always have been. Always will be. But as unwavering as I am in my beliefs, I realize that in the real world there still have to be some limits. I find the proposed Idaho legislation’s refusal to make allowances for cases of rape, incest, the health of the mother and forcing a mother to bring a non-viable fetus to term to be utterly appalling!
2) The Idaho Attorney General has stated, several times now, that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional on its face. What happened to the parrot-squawk of, ‘We must follow the Constitution, not try to interpret it or get around it!’
Hypocrites!
3) The people who go into reflexive paroxysms over Big Government’s ‘insidious’ encroachment into our private lives profess to have no problem with substituting the government’s preferences over the mother’s when the decision at hand involves bringing a child to term only to hold it for 15 minutes before it dies?
Hypocrites!
Hugh_Murphy on April 13 at 10:17 a.m.
Where to start with this horrible editorial full of mistruths and ignorance? Firstly, with the “quote” from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists that their is supposedly “no legitimate scientific information that supports the statement that a fetus experiences pain”. Oh how merciful and sweet are all you pro-death people! You are not causing the innocent baby any pain. All you have to do is watch any number of real films showing an abortion to see that this is utter nonsense. But I suppose that is not “legitimate scientific information”.
Secondly, the editor’s presumption that this legislation’s real purpose is to limit “a pregnant woman’s right to make a highly personal decision”. Since when does any woman have the right to terminate a human life? Perhaps the editor should actually read the Roe v. Wade case and how it was judged through the eyes of the famous plaintiff, Norma McCorvey (the real Jane Roe in Roe v. Wade) who is now a staunchly pro-life advocate.
Then there is the remark about spending money for anti-abortion laws. Abortion is the most heinous crime against humanity in the history of humanity, and the editor is worried about mispending. Officially, some 50,000,000 abortions have been performed worldwide, since records have been kept. The real number is necessarily much higher.
Lastly, human beings have souls given to them by God. We do not have the “right” to discard our offspring as other animals do: therefore, we have to make every effort we can to bring a human life into the world and give it a chance at life. I’m sure the child who lived to see it’s mother for 15 minutes was glad the mother didn’t terminate it in her womb.