For those against abortion - This is not to become a debate

mammag wrote: Just wanted to give this link to you fellow pro-lifers....

http://www.fightfoca.com/

There is a petition to sigin to fight the freedom of choice act.

lisar replied: I am pro-choice to an extent. I don't think partial birth abortions should even be legal. That's just wrong. And I think parents should know when teenagers have one done. My thing is I am pro-choice because if I was to get raped and get pregnant I don't think I would want to have that child. Or if my daughter was to ever get raped at say the age of 12 I don't think she should have to go thru having a child at that age. I could go on and on but I wont.

cameragirl21 replied: I actually am a huge supporter of this act and hope Obama keeps his word and signs it. As for it being his first order of business, as he promised Planned Parenthood, that is already a lie because he said recently that his first plans are to overturn the ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research and to overturn Bush's order to drill in Utah. So clearly signing FOCA is not going to be his first order of business.
But I have a question--what does this change, in the long run? I mean, I get that it loosens abortion restrictions but what does it change as far as future administrations go? Will it make it harder to overturn Roe v Wade or would it make overturning it irrelevent because of these new laws and is it anything permanent? I mean, let's imagine in 8 years there is a repub president...couldn't he overturn this act? And if so then all it changes is the status quo during the Obama years, it doesn't create a permanent new order of things, does it? I'm just curious because as I said, I'm really excited about his signing this but the more I think about it, the more I think it's probaby largely irrelevent because it only takes effect during this presidency and could easily be overturned by a future president, right? If anyone knows any different, please clue me in, thanks.
Simply put--would this act take precedence over Roe v Wade and would it mean, therefore, that overturning Roe v Wade would be useless because FOCA supersedes it? And is this act reversible by a future president? That is the short version of my question if anyone has an answer.

mammag replied: Like I said, I'm not debating the issue, just putting the link for those who are interested.

cameragirl21 replied: I'm not debating either, just wondering if there's anything more to this than just another document for Obama to sign and a future president to overturn.
I'm curious if it's anything permanent and if it supersedes Roe v Wade, if anyone knows...Ed or Jeanne? You guys are usually up with these things....

luvmykids replied: Thanks for the link

punkeemunkee'smom replied: Thank you for the link!

lisar replied:
Its a good question but I have no idea.

Maddie&EthansMom replied: Thank you for the link.

Boo&BugsMom replied: Thanks!

Danalana replied: Cool, thanks for posting!

cameragirl21 replied: so to answer my original question, it looks like this would be pretty permanent.
http://www.nrlc.org/FOCA/LawmakersProposeFOCA.html
I thought this would just be an executive order, which would be reversible however it would be difficult to do if Obama retained the presidency for 8 years and this were already accepted as the law. But this is actually a bill introduced by congress that seems to have quite a bit of support and requires only a presidential signature, which would effectively make it federal law. It's not a consitutional ammendment, from what I can see so technically it is reversible but it would require a majority in the congress to undo it and probably a sponsor from both houses to undo it...wouldn't be easy to do but it is doable. So it's not technically permanent but for all intents and purposes, it pretty much would become the law.
And it also looks like it would by and large supersede Roe v Wade as it technically goes a step further, by removing various restrictions...it simply mandates that abortion must remain legal and accessible without restriction. There seems to be some degree of restriction on late term abortions, stating that they can only be done for health reasons, and ultimately leaving it up to the doctor in charge to determine if there is a viable health reason.
I imagine with a democratic majority in congress, there is going to be a great deal of pressure on Obama to sign this, especially since he already went on record saying he would.
In as much as I personally support this bill, I do feel that anyone and everyone should have the right to peaceful protest, such as signing petitions so I'm not here to comment on that, just sharing the info with regard to the bill because I actually asked a lawyer friend of mine today and then did a little bit of research myself, on predominantly anti-abortion websites to try to get the scoop.

boyohboyohboy replied: thank you for the link

my2monkeyboys replied: Thank you for posting the link -- very good information to have!

Nina J replied:
I agree 100%