2008 Woodie Awards
Semantics in the Courtroom
Regina Pynn
Issue date: 4/20/07 Section: Opinion
On Wednesday, April 18th the Supreme Court handed down a ruling in the Gonzales v. Carhart case that has sent shock waves through everyone involved in the abortion debate. Abortion advocates are fearfully wondering if Roe v. Wade will be overturned in the near future. Abortion foes are wondering the same thing, albeit with less trepidation.
In the interest of full disclosure let me state that I am, indeed, a female and I am, indeed, a firm believer that abortion is one of many reproductive options that couples must have available to them. The Court's ruling is very disturbing to me, but even those with reservations about abortion must view the case with unease.
The case centers around the "Partial-Birth Abortion Act of 2003" that bans one of several options for late term abortion termination. When Congress passed this action, it was immediately appealed in several appellate courts by pro-abortion organizations including the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the National Abortion Federation. Every court the decision was appealed to called the act unconstitutional because it failed to provide exceptions to protect the health and safety of the mother. The act reads, "There exists substantial record evidence upon which Congress has reached its conclusion that a ban on partial-birth abortion is not required to contain a 'health' exception, because the facts indicate that a partial-birth abortion is never necessary to preserve the health of a woman, poses serious risks to a woman's health, and lies outside the standard of medical care."
And the Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, has concurred. Why was this decision made?
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) is an organization founded in 1951 that, according to their website, "Is the nation's leading group of professionals providing health care for women. Now based in Washington, DC, it is a private, voluntary, nonprofit membership organization." According to the organization, "more than 90% of American board-certified ob-gyns are affiliated with ACOG."
In the interest of full disclosure let me state that I am, indeed, a female and I am, indeed, a firm believer that abortion is one of many reproductive options that couples must have available to them. The Court's ruling is very disturbing to me, but even those with reservations about abortion must view the case with unease.
The case centers around the "Partial-Birth Abortion Act of 2003" that bans one of several options for late term abortion termination. When Congress passed this action, it was immediately appealed in several appellate courts by pro-abortion organizations including the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the National Abortion Federation. Every court the decision was appealed to called the act unconstitutional because it failed to provide exceptions to protect the health and safety of the mother. The act reads, "There exists substantial record evidence upon which Congress has reached its conclusion that a ban on partial-birth abortion is not required to contain a 'health' exception, because the facts indicate that a partial-birth abortion is never necessary to preserve the health of a woman, poses serious risks to a woman's health, and lies outside the standard of medical care."
And the Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, has concurred. Why was this decision made?
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) is an organization founded in 1951 that, according to their website, "Is the nation's leading group of professionals providing health care for women. Now based in Washington, DC, it is a private, voluntary, nonprofit membership organization." According to the organization, "more than 90% of American board-certified ob-gyns are affiliated with ACOG."
Be the first to comment on this story