|
July
15, 2005
The
Fifth Vote By
When Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day
O’Connor announced her retirement from the Court recently, it set off a
firestorm of speculation and posturing over who would replace her.
Today’s political environment is such that any retirement from
the Court would set off such speculation.
However, the debate over Justice
O’Connor’s successor will be particularly intense because she’s the
swing vote on the Court. That
means her vote frequently swung the court in one direction or the other.
Justice O’Connor’s fifth vote has become one of the most
important in In 2000, Justice O’Connor’s vote
overturned a federal law banning partial birth abortion.
Her vote cemented the Supreme Court’s nine unelected judges as
the only national policy makers on partial birth abortion.
This is clearly not what the Constitution mandates. Nowhere is this danger
of judicial lawmaking more evident that with partial birth abortion. This
procedure was described in graphic detail by Brenda Pratt Shafer, a nurse
with thirteen years of experience who, in 1993 was assigned to an abortion
clinic by her nursing agency. Very “pro-choice” at
the time, Ms. Shafer recalls that, “The doctor delivered the baby’s
body and arms, everything but his little head. The baby’s body was
moving. His little fingers were clasping together. He was kicking his
feet. The doctor took a pair of scissors and inserted them into the back
of the baby’s head, and the baby’s arms jerked out in a flinch, a
startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks that he might fall. Then
the doctor opened the scissors up. Then he stuck the high-powered suction
tube into the hole and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby was
completely limp.” Ms. Shafer concluded the
story of her first partial birth abortion experience by saying, “I never
went back to the clinic. But I am still haunted by the face of that little
boy. It was the most perfect, angelic face I have ever seen." It’s gruesome.
It sounds like something that should be illegal. But it’s
perfectly legal and more common than you might think.For years, supporters
of partial birth abortion have heralded it as rare and often medically
necessary to save the life of the mother.
They are wrong. Several major medical
organizations have said that the procedure is never medically necessary
and is far more common than supporters suggest.
Former Surgeon General
C. Everett Koop says partial birth abortion is “never medically
necessary to protect a mother’s life or her future fertility. On
the contrary, this procedure can pose a significant threat to both.” In fact many have misled
the public into thinking that this medically unnecessary procedure is
rare. In 1997, Ron Fitzsimmons, the Executive Director of the
National Coalition of Abortion Providers, admitted that he has “lied
through [his] teeth” about how often healthy mothers abort their healthy
unborn children. He told the At twenty weeks of
development the baby has already developed his own heartbeat, blood type,
brain waves, fingerprints, skeletal structure, taste buds, and nervous
system. Before he even sees the light of day, he rests and laughs
and reacts to his mother’s voice. He moves and kicks and cries and
even dreams. Seizing upon these
facts, Congress voted to end this procedure in an effort to take back its
rightful place as the nation’s only law-making
body. However, a court in Partial Birth Abortion
is unnecessary, indefensible, and morally wrong. The American people
oppose it. It’s time to
bring it to an end. The
only way to do that is by replacing Justice O’Connor with a judge who
interprets law instead of making it. So Mr. President, make
the new fifth vote a vote for the Constitution.
Make it the right one. #
# # |
