Be Upset About Facts

Wesleyan Covenant AssociationMany people are upset about New York’s revised abortion law, and there are many things to be upset about. From what I have seen however, there are many people who are upset over things that simply are not in the law, so here is a quick review of what is different, and what the revised law actually does.

  1. Abortion is no longer governed by the New York State penal code. This removes significant protections to unborn children under law after 24 weeks.
  2. It does allow for abortions after 24 weeks, but it does NOT allow for abortion on demand up to the time of birth. This is not an elective abortion that anyone can get. The law says the following: “According to the practitioner’s reasonable and good faith professional judgment based on the facts of the patient’s case: the patient is within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or there is an absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.” I know that many will argue that this is to vague and will be twisted to allow for abortion on demand, but that is not what is being allowed for.
  3. The bill does allow for some who are not doctors to perform some limited abortions. Midwives, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, may perform non-surgical abortions. After the 12th week, it must be at a hospital on an in patient basis, and after 20 weeks, a doctor must be present to handle any live birth.

This source has a fairly decent and objective explanation, along with the text of the bill itself. There are indeed many things in the law to be angry about, but can we at least be angry about the facts. Misinformation is never a valid tool of trying to prove a point, and there is a lot of misinformation about this law. Know the facts, and be angry and concerned, I am after all, just know what you are actually angry about.

I want to be clear. Elective abortion is always wrong. I have not changed on that even a little bit. I think that the New York law is poorly conceived for several reasons as well. I am not saying don’t be upset by these things, or not to stand against these things, I am saying that we need to have accurate information so that we are not spreading falsehoods and so that we know what it is that we are actually opposing so that we can articulate and explain it.

You Might Also Like

9 Replies to “Be Upset About Facts”

  1. I am not an expert, but “the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health”, as determined by even a doctor, is pretty much on demand. You look hard enough, you’ll find a doctor to recommend anything, considering “protecting health” is such a nebulous term. Just like you can find a judge to recommend anything, if you look hard enough. Still say litigate the heck out of it, until the Supreme Court accepts or rejects it.

    1. Of course, the next level of lawsuits will be a lawsuit against a doctor because he/she thought the health of the mother was not in need of protecting, and the doctor refuses to do the abortion. If refusing to simply bake a cake for a person is subject to a lawsuit; a doctor refusing to perform a medical procedure when the mother thinks her mental health and her “decision process” is in jeopardy, with a big fat paycheck is in the near future – look out doctors! Especially if the mother goes to see the doctor “late term”, and there is no time to “doctor shop”. I would not be surprised at anything left wing liberals will do anymore. They seem to have an infinite imagination on how to screw over the average “Joe”, minding his own business, trying to do his/her job.

    2. The abortion necessary to protect the patient’s life or health has already been litigated, oddly enough in the same day as Roe v. Wade was. The case was Doe v. Bolton where the exact same language was used. The New York law, in this respect, is nothing more than a reaffirmation of Doe v. Bolten. There has been no serious explosion of post 24 week abortions since 1973. The New York law does nothing different than the SCOTUS judgement 40 years ago already did, save for adding that an abortion could be performed if the fetus was incapable of surviving outside the womb. No state can deny an abortion after viability if “the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health”. Nothing new in this.

      1. I am not a lawyer. Looking at your referenced case, on wiki (ok, not a legal source, but all I have access or interest in looking up):
        It states
        “Broad definition of health
        The Court’s opinion in Doe v. Bolton stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her health. The Court defined “health” as follows:

        Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, “an abortion is necessary” is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors – physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age – relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.”

        By that simple reading, the New York Law would not be necessary, since the Doe case seems to establish the exact same nebulous condition for a late term abortion. So why was the New York law necessary? And why has there been bans on extremely late term abortions floating around in other states? Seems like they would be perfectly legal to have abortions the day before an expected birth, if “health” was as defined in your Doe decision.

        I am not arguing your point. I am seeing the absolute glee expressed by the liberal democrats passing their law, and therefore assume it is actually accomplishing something new that New York did not have previously. Sorry, I do not trust activist lawyers, activist legislators on State or Federal levels, or explanations that justify their actions. Simply put – I DO NOT TRUST THEM! The Doe decision states “all these factors may relate to health”! Find the right Planned Parenthood doctor, and your guaranteed late term abortion will happen. But I don’t think it currently happens that easily. Guess I’ll just wait and see what the fall out is, and keep my mouth shut in the mean time. Although I really am getting to hate liberal activists. Guess I’m not very Christian.

        1. One final comment by me:

          After re-reading your post, there are two quotes that seem to be at odds:

          “This removes significant protections to unborn children under law after 24 weeks.”

          “I know that many will argue that this is to vague and will be twisted to allow for abortion on demand, but that is not what is being allowed for.”

          1. Sorry Scott, but I have to agree with Gary. Doe v. Bolton is important in case law and gives wide latitude for the definition of “health”.

  2. No need to be sorry Ben, and you are correct, there is wide latitude given for “health”. My point is that the uproar over New York’s law is primarily over what has been law since the 1970’s already, and the numbers are pretty clear that there is no rush for late term abortions. Rags, such as the New York Examiner, claimed that New York legalized it, when it has been legal for quite some time. I am not defending this in any way, but making an uproar over this and then further claiming that it will have results that is not at all backed up by the data makes us prolife types look rather silly. No numbers suggest that there is going to be any sort of increase in late term abortions, and the numbers in fact say that the number of them is very small, and decreasing. The over all point is that the claims by many that this allows for abortion on demand up to the day of birth and the like are not supported by the evidence or even the availability of a provider that will handle a late term abortion, as only about 15% nationally do. There simply is no evidence that suggests that late term abortions are in any way being abused in a statistically significant way. None of this makes abortion a good decision, or a moral one, but we all to often do not know what it is that we are getting in an uproar over and it makes us appear to be less credible.

    1. I see your point, but it does not change the fact that this is state sanctioned murder, whether it occurs very rarely or not. You should read what some radical ethicists have to say regarding which lives are “worthy”, and “worthwhile.” 1/3 of babies are aborted in New York City. This is not theoretical. Late term abortion (the baby would be viable at that time outside of the womb) is murder when the mother’s life is not in danger.

      1. We are getting off topic here, but that is ok, I don’t mind. I hope that you have not mistaken this for me defending abortion, that is not the case at all. I am however stating that we need to be able to argue with facts and knowledge of the situation.
        I have read much of what the radical ethicists have said. It’s been being said since at least Plato in The Republic, though the specific word came much later on. It is theoretical in the sense that it has not been done. Attempted by some, yes, but not accomplished. There are certainly those who think this way, but again, there is not evidence that there is some vast conspiracy to accomplish this through abortion. There is some anecdotal evidence that may lean in that direction, but at the end of the day, there simply is not proof of it. Trying to equate the opinions of a few as the motivations for many, without some actual link that ties them together is disingenuous. That does not make abortion correct morally and/or ethically of course. One can argue against abortion from any number of solid positions, some religious, some philosophical, etc. without having to resort arguments about eugenics that can not be substantiated.
        “Late term abortion (the baby would be viable at that time outside of the womb) is murder when the mother’s life is not in danger.” I have not, and would not, say otherwise. I would go further and say that abortion after the process of conception (the fertilized egg has implanted in the uterine wall) is murder as a matter of fact.

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.