From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Subject: Re: What The Supreme Court Said
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 21:24:20 GMT

Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:

> In a few days it will be the anniversary of the pair of 1973 Supreme
> Court decisions that legalized abortion on demand for the full nine
> months of pregnancy.  Many people are still under the erroneous
> impression that the Court legalized only early abortions because
> statements to that effect still appear in the media.    There is some
> excuse for the media having said that at first, because Roe v. Wade
> seems to make that distinction, but there is no excuse for them con-
> tinuing to repeat it after the facts were pointed out as they were
> repeatedly by pro life organizations and individuals.

Hold on a moment, Marty.  The Right Reverend Doug Holtsinger owns the
LyingAboutRoeVsWade franchise in talk.abortion and many other newsgroups
as well.  You may have to pay a royalty.

This particular lie has been refuted so many times, I don't think it's
necessary to post large chunks of RvW to show you that you are wrong.
Instead, I'll re-post DearOldDoug's article where he finally admits that
access to abortion in the later stages of pregnancy is contingent on the
medical judgement of the attending physician, and therefore not 'unrestricted'
or 'on-demand' at all:

--- begin article ---

From: dsholtsi@csl36h.csl.ncsu.edu (Doug Holtsinger)
Subject: Re: Roe v. Wade is unrestricted abortion on demand throughout pregnancy

In article <1992Nov23.131950.7363@hemlock.cray.com> 
rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:

> From Roe v. Wade:
>   "On the basis of elements such as these, appellants and some *amici*
>   argue that a woman's right is absolute and that she is entitled to
>   terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for
>   whatever reasons she alone chooses.  With this we do not agree."

This means that a woman's ability to obtain an abortion
is dependent on the availability of physician who's willing
to perform the abortion.  The paragraph you cite says 
absolutely *NOTHING* about the state's power to intervene.

She cannot "terminate her pregnancy" at "whatever time" she
chooses because the physician determines when the abortion  
should be performed.  

She cannot "terminate her pregnancy" in "whatever way" she 
chooses because the physician determines the abortion procedure.

She cannot "terminate her pregnancy" for "whatever reasons" she
chooses because the physician determines whether her reasons
are justified. 

The physician has the final authority over when the abortion
is performed, how it is performed, and whether it's performed 
at all.  The state can do absolutely *NOTHING* to prevent
a physician from performing any abortion, during any part 
of pregnancy.

---end article ---

Larry Margolis just posted a long excerpt from RvW; I suggest
you find that article and read it.

> "Experience beats in vain upon a congenital progressive." --  C. S. Lewis

"A conservative government is an organized hypocrisy." -- Benjamin Disraeli

-- 
Chris Lyman    /   email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov   /    my thoughts, my words
     "Dignity.  Always dignity." -- Gene Kelly in "Singin' in the Rain"
Newsgroups: talk.abortion