home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:46828 alt.politics.bush:13303 alt.politics.elections:22812
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!news.byu.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!uw-beaver!news.u.washington.edu!news.uoregon.edu!nntp.uoregon.edu!cie.uoregon.edu!eisimps
- From: eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson)
- Subject: Re: DID BUSH KILL HIS CHANCES BY NOT ATTACKING FOCA?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov6.064805.28774@nntp.uoregon.edu>
- Sender: news@nntp.uoregon.edu
- Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange
- References: <nyikos.720418431@milo.math.scarolina.edu> <SCOTTS.92Nov4160323@MORPHEUS.CIMDS.RI.CMU.EDU> <1992Nov5.181747.4351@midway.uchicago.edu>
- Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 06:48:05 GMT
- Lines: 20
-
- In article <1992Nov5.181747.4351@midway.uchicago.edu> shou1@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu (Roger Shouse) writes:
- >
- >Read the original post again. Americans tend to not support abortions after
- >the first trimester. The proposals of which you speak would have banned
- >abortions in the first trimester. When faced with a choice of abortion
- >on demand or no abortion at all, Americans choose the former. The real
- >battle will continue to be fought in the middle, not at the extremes.
-
- You do not have your facts in order. The Maryland measure codified Roe v.
- Wade. It says nothing about first trimester abortions being a special
- category. It had *nothing* to do with banning abortions since it was a
- preemptive strike in case Roe gets reversed by the Supreme Court. Had it
- been voted down, they could have chosen any range of alternatives available
- in the current caselaw. They chose the rule of Roe. Maryland, by the way,
- is heavily Catholic last I heard.
-
- Arizona was a RTL measure that would have banned abortions except in the
- classic exceptions of rape, incest, life of mother. It lost, too.
-
-
-