The question he was responding to was clear: "...there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions." He's talking specifically about the third trimester when he says "late-term" in his answer; the question provided the context.
Can you too show me /us where you read that late term was discussed as 3rd trimester by obama?
The context comes from the question posed in the original article:
http://relevantmagazine.com/life_article .php?id=7591
Again, "...there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?"
Excuse me but I don't see the answer to my question in that article . Quite possible I missed it.
Where is 'late term 'defined as 3rd trimester?
there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?
... I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother.
Ahha your right. Yeah my CRTL-F does not work in IE for some reason.
He is talking about 3rd trimester in this interview but he uses the language 'late term' which is defined as can start at 12 weeks (see my block quote above).
But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he calls 3rd trimester as later term.
Now on partial birth abortions: Partial birth abortion law speaks only to the method of abortion used. It is a method used before the 3rd trimester or was used since it is banned now.
Not withstanding his 3rd trimester position. I still stand by the statement that you cannot call yourself pro-choice if you don't leave a choice to the woman. If you restrict that right even in the 3rd trimester you are not Pro -Choice.
Um, yes you can.
I'm gonna have to write a diary about Casey v. Planned Parenthood, which controls the abortion question (it superceded Roe v. Wade, yet nearly nobody seems to have noticed that).
You have a right to an abortion up until the point of viability, under the Constitution. Your right is not unfettered.
None of your rights are unfettered. Every single right you have can be, and is, regulated and restricted at times by your government.
I'm sorry but what does Supreme Court case law have to do with the definition of the term pro-choice?
Have I missed something in this conversation?
I'll compose the diary and make my point that way.
I can't really do that effectively in the confines of a traditional comment. I'm not dodging, either. This isn't an easy topic to wade into, and I would prefer to do it right.
While I wait for the answer from you I'll even submit another point I made originally.
PRO CHOICE is a black and white issue. There is no 'Grey'. YOU are either for choice for women or you are about making laws to take that choice away. Even if it's a choice you are forcing upon them in one single case.
You don't have the right to define a choice for women if you are of the pro choice stance. Life is not considered 'human life' till birth among pro choice supporters.
That is why there is a federal ban on late term abortions. Please site a poll where any majority of Americans feel it is absolute. It is not a black and white issue.
Hold on did I miss something. LOL and quite possibly.
There is no federal ban on later term abortions. You maybe are confusing it with partial birth abortion, which a 'method' used to perform such abortion.
What poll do you need for me to cite on the word pro-choice?
Go look up NARAL maybe. NO pro-choice organization is anything but against any law restricting a woman's choice to CHOOSE.
Naral agrees with Obamas position. Please, show me anyone credible source that believes abortion is an absolute right through delivery.
Come on man are you just going to throw it out there and hope it sticks. NARAL is not with Obama on any restrictions. It's against their charter.
NARAL site: "For more than 30 years, NARAL Pro-Choice America has been the nation's leading advocate for privacy and a woman's right to choose."
There is no ambiguity in that statement about "we give up the right of a woman in cases of late term abortions under any circumstances".
Some more information on NARAL:
Lobbying Congress: NARAL Pro-Choice America fights the relentless onslaught of anti-choice policies and legislation introduced in Congress and works with pro-choice legislators in support of bills to protect a woman's right to choose and expand women's access to reproductive-health care. Fortune Magazine has described NARAL Pro-Choice America as "one of the top 10 advocacy groups in America."
Ah, thank you. I'd been living under a rock and had no idea as to whom NARAL is, and for what they fight.
I misinterpreted your comment. I should not have posted that. I apologize.
I should not multitask to that degree, it seems. I am abjectly sorry.
