Saying they are “increasingly concerned about potential roadblocks around the issue of abortion” in Congress’ health-care debate, abortion opponent Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH) and 4 other Democrats propose “a common-ground solution” that would neither require nor ban private insurers from covering the procedure as long as federal funds are not used, according to a letter obtained by the Washington Post.

PGD is a procedure wherein 1 cell of an 8-celled embryo is removed and eugenically tested for defects, sex, appearance attributes – whatever the prospective parents wish to cull from their prospective families by discarding embryos that don’t measure up.

Scientists have discovered a host of abnormalities in the babies allowed to be born after this procedure.

When such “factors” as these – emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age – are all declared to “relate to health” in the “medical judgment” of the doctors who perform abortions, then it may be fairly said that the rule in Blackmun’s paragraph (c) in Roe’s trimester framework is swallowed up by its exception.
If a woman would be distraught by the prospect of becoming a mother, if her boyfriend is threatening to leave her, if she would have to cut short her progress through college, if she simply declares to the abortionist “I don’t want this baby” – any reason the doctor will accept is a perfect and complete shield from the state’s prohibition of post-viability abortions, no matter how close to a timely childbirth the mother is, and no matter how good the prospect for a successful birth with a healthy mother and child.
In practice, it will suffice if the woman gives the physician no reason whatsoever. He is in the abortion business, and she has to come to him for the “procedure”; plainly her “emotional” or “psychological” state is such that she associates the termination of her pregnancy with a restoration of her “health.” If an official inquiry were to be made by state authorities after the abortion, the physician need cite no more than his “medical judgment” to this effect.

NARAL says Sotomayor’s testimony during her confirmation hearings shows President Barack Obama’s first high court choice is a stronger supporter of privacy rights than either Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Samuel Alito, the previous two nominees. And the group notes that Sotomayor also said several times that privacy rights include a woman’s right to choose to terminate a pregnancy.