MSNBC: Senate Approves Ban on Late Term Abortion

[Cush]

Breaking on MSNBC

93-0 VOte

[FlashHarry]

1. Is that last-trimester abortion?

I don't know all the facts. Personally, I have no problem banning elective abortions in the last trimester––so long as the law doesn't apply if the mother's life is in danger.

[goobergunch]

3. Motion to Go to Conference on S. 3, the "Partial-Birth Abortion" ban bill

and there is no "health of the mother" provision in it.

[FlashHarry]

6. In that case, I DO have a problem with it.

Other than the health of the mother being in danger, why would anyone have a late-term abortion? This isn't meant as flame-bait; I'm just curious. I'm pro-choice, by the way.

[Malva Zebrina]

8. other than the health of the mother

is the condition of the fetus. Certain conditions guarantee that the fetus will not live more than a few hours or a day or two.-- One abnormality is that the fetus is born without a mouth -- and some without a nose or mouth as I understand it. I do not have the exact name of this anomaly, but it certainly is one reason that a woman would want to abort a monstrosity such as that or others like it--one other is that the brain is exposed without a skull covering-- The mother should have the legal right to abort in the last trimester in these cases.

[Bridget Burke]

11. Severe fetal deformity...

If you're really curious, I'll send you links. Not recommended on an empty stomach.

[Pathwalker]

4. They voted to send it to conference - disagreeing with the house

which voted to ban it. It was on cspan2 - and I watched the vote. So, either MSRNC is flat out lying (no surprise there) or Cspan is lying.

[goobergunch]

7. The bills are identical

except for a section at the end of the Senate bill that re-affirms Roe vs. Wade.

Senate bill
House bill

[cally]

9. Not this particular vote, but the ban

on late term abortions in NOT ever a ban on elective late term abortions. Folks, like me, are adamantly in support of late term abortions because women sometimes have to make desparate decisions whether they will risk their own life or have an abortion. A personal story explains the issue. A close friend at the time came to my house crying hysterically. She and her husband had a much loved daughter and we were excitedly waiting for the birth of her second, much wanted, child. She had just found out that the second child had a 10 to 15 percent chance at life and that if she carried the baby to term she was likely to die (I forget the percent.) As we sat there crying and discussing this, we both realized that she actuatlly had no choice. She owed it to her two year old child to try to be there as her mother. She went for a late term abortion to save her own life. I know the anti-abortion folks see this as a 'choice' and they want to ban all late-term abortions. I see it as a choice to live! Let a woman with her family and Doctor decide this. We don't need laws for these situations because they are all so specific to the individual.

[goobergunch]

2. I believe this is a motion to go to conference...

it is almost unheard of to reject going to conference.

The actual bill is not up for vote.

[jburton]

5. Not quite

This was a vote to go to conference, not a vote on the bill

[MaineDem]

10. Thank you

I was surprised this came up for a vote and I hadn't heard anything from NOW or other organizations. This makes sense now.