Quote:
|
Originally Posted by smooth
Bush is incapable or unwilling to engage in abstract thought. He had a similarly confused expression when the Senator was explaining that he didn't vote for the partial birth abortion ban due to a 17 year old girl who would be forced to report to her parents (one of which abused her).
Did this happen? Did the Senator really know a 17 year old girl in such a situation?
Does it matter for the point to be valid or should he have taken 30 seconds from his reply time to explain to the denser community that he could very well be speaking hypothetically?
|
We could talk hypotheticals to no end, but anyone who supports partial birth abortions is out of touch with the majority of the American people if you ask me. You could give hypotheticals allowing any horrible crime if you wanted to.
Anyways, he disagreed with requiring notification of parents because of the 17 year old, not partial birth abortions. You have to have parental support for any medical procedure, why should abortions be differnt? Of course it is a horrible situation that the girl would be in, but this is such a limited example that it would have to be taken on a case to case basis. Wouldn't you like to know if your daughter was going to get an abortion, and not thinking she was going to be gone for a few days? Abortion is something that teens should not be going through alone.
On his disagreement of partial birth abortions he says there is not a clause that lets it happen if the "health" of the mother is in questions. Well, there is a "life" of the mother clause which is important. The problem is that the health of the mother could be said to be anything, mental health, etc. She could say that it would cause her undue stress to have the baby and she would be qualified for a partial birth abortion.