Wednesday, December 17
Ohio PBA Ban Upheld
The Sixth Circuit has turned back the constitutional challenge to Ohio's partial-birth abortion law.
District Judge Arthur Tarnow's (appointed 1998) dissent is chilling and callous in its use of euphemisms to mask unspeakable barbarism. As we know, this is the sine qua non of pro-abortion advocacy. He cannot bring himself to use Ohio's statutory term, "partial birth procedure," opting instead for "intact procedure" and "intact method," as if what's "intact" is some Mayan pottery. Tarnow concludes at one point that the law is unconstitutional because "it is clear then that requiring fetal demise before completion of the intact procedure may present additional risks of serious health consequences for some women." He's talking about 100% viable children at this point.
Let that sink in for a moment: the United States Constitution requires that viable children be delivered alive and then killed.
If it's that clear, then why doesn't he say so?