Was it right for the Supreme Court to Ban Partial Birth Abortion

The language in the title is wrong because it assumes that the supreme court has the power to ban something. The Supreme Court has, in the past, assumed that it ahd this right, but it doesn’t. They upheld the ban on partial birth abortion stating that this decision does not contradict an earlier statement in which they struck down a law that banned multiple forms of abortion including the one in which a late term baby is ripped apart inside the womb and removed piece by piece, whereas this ban only refers to one type of abortion which is the one in which the baby is partially removed intact before it is killed, usually by crushing its skull to make it easier to remove. I don’t embrace the decision wholeheeartedly but feel it was neccesary. I personally feel that the other procedure whch is still legal is far more barbaric and should be banned as well, and I also feel that the federal government should stay out of this issue, but I’m starting to think that what we really need is a Constitutional Amendment that decides officially at what point a human being is considered human and has rights. It will require compormise and nearly everyone will be unhappy with the decision but it will end the debate in our courts once and for all. I feel that it should be at the time when the baby is determined to be able to survive independantly of the mother and that there should be very little argument to that but there will be plenty.

Let me tell you of a recent case that happened in Scottsdale, Arizona just last month on April 27th. I’m writing the article on May 31, in case it isn’t posted today. This was mentioned in the opinion page of a local newspaper as a letter to the editor under the title “‘Murder’ is a matter of timing”. Cynthia Joyce Tureman, a 28 year old woman, is accused of giving birth in a bathtub and drowning her baby. The death penalty is being considered in this case. It should be noted that, had this woman gone to an abortion clinic before giving birth she could have had her baby killed legally and would not be on trial for murder. Although what the letter fails to mention, probably because the writer wasn’t aware, is that the ban on partial birth abortion was upheld on April 18. Nine days before she killed her baby. So she could have had this procedure performed two weeks earlier and it would have been legal. As far as I can tell, from the information I’m gathering about the ban, she could have had the baby ripped from her womb a piece at a time even the day before, although she would have had to go to another state to do it, because Arizona bans late term abortions. I have been saying for years that the difference between a partial birth abortion and infanticide in the eyes of the law should be nonexistant, since it is no better than taking the baby out and crushing its skull before it has a chance to take its first breath. Yes the Supreme Court made the right decision.