553
edits
Changes
→Trimesters
:: That is just not correct. Some states have tried to ban third trimester abortions, and the courts have thrown out the ban ever time. Third trimester abortions cannot be banned under Roe v Wade. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 01:38, 4 May 2007 (EDT)
:: That is just not correct. Some states have tried to ban third trimester abortions, and the courts have thrown out the ban ever time. Third trimester abortions cannot be banned under Roe v Wade. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 01:38, 4 May 2007 (EDT)
:::First of all, my edit replaced the questionable language with the language of the Court. I did not speculate about what the Court’s language meant in practical terms, I simply said what the Court said. My edit is truer than what was there before, as what was there before put the language you are suggesting in the mouth of Blackmun where it does not belong. Second, the section I edited was about the opinion in Roe v. Wade, not the way that opinion has been interpreted—you are talking about what has been done in reading the opinion, not what the opinion actually says. Third, most of the bans that have been struck down have been struck down because they do not include an exception for the mother’s health (the Court said that the States can ban abortion in the third trimester “except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.”--language I included in m edit) Fourth, a number of restrictions short of total bans have been upheld under Roe v. Wade. For example, waiting periods were upheld in Planed Parenthood v. Casey and parental consent and/or notification laws were upheld in Bellotti v. Baird. Finally, you are simply wrong, see [[Gonzales v. Carhart]] where the Court upheld a total ban on partial-birth abortions (while explicitly not overruling Roe).--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 09:43, 4 May 2007 (EDT)