The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has upheld part of the controversial judgement being handed down by South Dakota courts on abortion law. Particularly, a legal requirement to inform women prior to performing abortions that they’ll be more likely to commit suicide post-abortion; that the unborn child is protected by the United States Constitution; and that the women wait at least three days after first meeting with a doctor before an abortion will be performed.
Read the original article here:
Federal appeals court partially upholds South Dakota abortion consent law
Are the parts of the law the Eighth Circuit upheld backed by widely held scientific protocols or are they scare tactics? As to one, the jurisprudence is quite inaccurate. The Constitution discusses persons and citizens not fetuses or otherwise unborn children. The Supreme Court, which held in the Dred Scott v Sandford decision that blacks could never be citizens because they were held to be, in effect, subhuman has not held that the fetus is a human with all the rights under the Constitution. Let’s see the consequences of such a finding. A child is born with fetal alcohol effects should be able to sue her alcoholic mother for damages: why not? And how do you define fetus? After conception? Then God (because so many people think that He is present in their lives) is by far the biggest abortionist because He is responsible for every fertilized ovum that does not attach to the uterine wall and for every miscarriage. If this part of the law is in effect and an abortion is performed on a pregnant woman by a doctor, who is charged with murder, the doctor because in fact, the procedures he or she used ended the life of the fetus. But isn’t the woman guilty for aiding and abetting the murder? Should they both be convicted of life imprisonment or death. If not, why not?