10% of all U.S. abortions are committed in the State of New York. (Guttmacher's latest figures have the US at 1.21 million abortions annually, and the NY Dept. of Health's latest figures have it at 118.381 abortions annually.)
Although the US Supreme Court in 1973 basically ordained abortion on demand throughout all 9 months of pregnancy by writing a health exception through which a Mack truck could drive, preexisting NY State law only allows abortion after 24 weeks to save a pregnant mother's life. Plus, abortions after 24 weeks must be attended by a 2nd physician to care for the potentially viable child.
The Reproductive Health Act take NY law even beyond the loose confines of Roe v. Wade by making it a "fundamental right, and therefore completely unregulatable....
This year the RHA stands a chance of passing due to a new Democrat Senate majority since 2009 of 32-30. (The House is safely Democrat, 109-41.)
But the other side still doesn't have the votes. According to the New York Times, the RHA only has 26 sponsors at present. NY State Right to Life political liaison Deb Cody told me this morning 3-4 Democrats have committed to oppose it, but 3-4 Republicans may support it - so the vote, if it happens, would be close.
Here's where the pro-abort bickering starts. Legislative session was supposed to end June 21 but is being held over because there is no budget. Gov. Patterson is demanding a budget by Monday. The session could end at any moment after that.
So NARAL NY is calling for an up-or-down vote now. It wants to know which Democrats to support in November, whether or not RHA passes. President Kelli Conlin is also trying to entice Republicans to support RHA by saying her group won't oppose them if they vote "aye." NARAL uploaded a video on YouTube yesterday:
Note the pro-abort push centers on the ability to commit eugenic abortions.
Meanwhile, other pro-abort groups don't want to call for a vote unless the outcome is a sure thing. According to the NYT, Family Planning Advocates of NY State President Tracey Brooks (pictured right) sniped, "There are other advocates who show up in town once in a while. We're the ones who are there 5 days a week. When we walk into the leadership and ask for the bill to move, the bill will move. It's just not there yet."
Also, according to the NYT, "... Democrats... fear that a failure on the abortion bill... could sap political momentum for abortion rights."
So stay tuned. I find this entire topic particularly gross when thinking it's about the freedom to commit elective late-term abortions on babies of viable age.
And one other thing. From the people who say they want abortion to be "safe, legal, and rare," RHA would allow any "licensed health care practitioner" to commit abortions, not just doctors.
Does that mean an LVN could perfrom an abortion? NO offense intended to any of the wonderful LVN's out there, but there is no way that the program has sufficient training to perform a surgical procedure.
Of course, that's just one of the many issues with the bill, but I find this one really telling. I guess they don't care so much about the "safe" part of their equation, now do they?Posted by: lauren at June 24, 2010 11:41 AM
Consider this while pro-aborts attempt to pass new abortion laws:
it's not about the right to terminate a pregnancy anymore. It's about a woman's right to a dead baby.Posted by: Cranky Catholic at June 24, 2010 12:10 PM
A pregnancy can be terminated with a cesarean birth. At late stages I'm not sure what one would discover that would be devastating - other than the boyfriend broke up so having his kid would cramp their reproductive 'freedoms'.
Oh, happy, happy day... *more* late-term abortions.
I wish I hadn't just eaten lunch. I feel like I am going to lose it all.Posted by: army_wife at June 24, 2010 12:48 PM
It's great to see pro-abortion activists at each other's throats! Let's hope this continues.Posted by: Brad at June 24, 2010 1:02 PM
making it a "fundamental right, and therefore completely unregulatable....
Wait a minute. Weren't the Dems telling us just a few months ago that we needed to pass Obamacare because health care is a "right" that requires massive regulation and government oversight in order to guarantee exercise of that "right?"
If women are entitled to privacy in decisions related to pregnancy, what is NY doing about Obamacare's infringement on a woman's right to privacy in other aspects of her health care?Posted by: Fed Up at June 24, 2010 1:47 PM
What an absurd YouTube ad! Pregnant women can't get reproductive health care in New York? Of course they can!!! And so can their babies! Just say what you really mean, folks: women can't abort viable babies in New York! (I could use even more accurate language here but...you know what I mean.)Posted by: Alice at June 24, 2010 3:49 PM