"Don't be stupid! It's just a blob of tissue."
Those are the chilling words alleged to be spoken by a person performing an abortion on a young woman who reports she didn't want one.
Here is the sad story:
Donna Santa Marie’s Forced Abortion
Lawsuit Would Ask Supreme Court to Tackle Botched Abortions
Washington, DC -- In a case which will determine whether women injured by abortion have any rights under the law, Norma McCorvey, the former "Roe" of Roe v. Wade and Sandra Cano, the former "Doe" of Doe v. Bolton (the two cases that brought legalized abortion on demand to America) are announcing that they are joining with 700 women who have been seriously injured by abortion to file an Amicus Curiae petition brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case of Donna Santa Marie Et Al v. Whitman, Et Al.
In addition to "Roe" and "Doe", 700 women who have been injured by abortion in similar circumstances will also file a Friend of the Court brief to show the Court that these conditions are widespread in the abortion industry.
Many of these women will appear at a Monday press conference to testify about their own personal experience in abortion clinics and to testify that it is time for the abuse of women to come to an end. There must be a remedy for this injustice. Women will be present to be interviewed from the following states Mississippi; Oklahoma, Tennessee, Iowa, Texas, Michigan, Nebraska, California, Connecticut, and Florida.
The Donna Santa Marie case is the first case in the nation to reach the Supreme Court on Cert. Petition asking the Supreme Court to define the rights of women against the abortion industry.
Donna Santa Marie was a 16-year-old girl who was forced by her parents and abortionist to have an abortion against her will. Her father even punched her in the stomach to try to induce a miscarriage. The abortionist had to be called in to perform an abortion without her consent.
Despite these horrific facts, New Jersey Federal Courts have ruled that Donna Santa Marie cannot sue the doctor, the abortionist, because the infant was not born alive and have cited Roe v. Wade as justification. If Roe v. Wade is supposed to be based on a woman's choice, how can she be forced to have an abortion and have no remedy under the law.
The other women in the case were misled and deceived into having abortions. One of the Plaintiffs, Rosa Acuna, specifically asked her doctor: "Is it a baby?" Her doctor replied, "Don't be stupid! It's just a blob of tissue."
Later, after several weeks of bleeding, she was admitted to an emergency room and when she asked what the problem was, the nurses told her, "They left part of your baby in you when you had the abortion."
Rosa Acuna began to study fetal development and came to the horrible realization that she had killed her own baby, with severe psychological effects.
If Roe v. Wade is based on a woman's right to choose, shouldn't that choice be voluntary and fully informed? Shouldn't there be a remedy against an abortionist who does not fully inform a woman of the nature and consequences of abortion? The Federal Courts in New Jersey have said no. The Supreme Court will be asked to reverse this decision and allow women who are injured by abortion to sue the abortionist.
Source: The Justice Foundation; March 21, 2003 as quoted in Pro-Life Infonet 3/24/03 #2933
http://www.righttoliferoch.org/ndonnaforced.htm
Here is the sad story:
Donna Santa Marie’s Forced Abortion
Lawsuit Would Ask Supreme Court to Tackle Botched Abortions
Washington, DC -- In a case which will determine whether women injured by abortion have any rights under the law, Norma McCorvey, the former "Roe" of Roe v. Wade and Sandra Cano, the former "Doe" of Doe v. Bolton (the two cases that brought legalized abortion on demand to America) are announcing that they are joining with 700 women who have been seriously injured by abortion to file an Amicus Curiae petition brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case of Donna Santa Marie Et Al v. Whitman, Et Al.
In addition to "Roe" and "Doe", 700 women who have been injured by abortion in similar circumstances will also file a Friend of the Court brief to show the Court that these conditions are widespread in the abortion industry.
Many of these women will appear at a Monday press conference to testify about their own personal experience in abortion clinics and to testify that it is time for the abuse of women to come to an end. There must be a remedy for this injustice. Women will be present to be interviewed from the following states Mississippi; Oklahoma, Tennessee, Iowa, Texas, Michigan, Nebraska, California, Connecticut, and Florida.
The Donna Santa Marie case is the first case in the nation to reach the Supreme Court on Cert. Petition asking the Supreme Court to define the rights of women against the abortion industry.
Donna Santa Marie was a 16-year-old girl who was forced by her parents and abortionist to have an abortion against her will. Her father even punched her in the stomach to try to induce a miscarriage. The abortionist had to be called in to perform an abortion without her consent.
Despite these horrific facts, New Jersey Federal Courts have ruled that Donna Santa Marie cannot sue the doctor, the abortionist, because the infant was not born alive and have cited Roe v. Wade as justification. If Roe v. Wade is supposed to be based on a woman's choice, how can she be forced to have an abortion and have no remedy under the law.
The other women in the case were misled and deceived into having abortions. One of the Plaintiffs, Rosa Acuna, specifically asked her doctor: "Is it a baby?" Her doctor replied, "Don't be stupid! It's just a blob of tissue."
Later, after several weeks of bleeding, she was admitted to an emergency room and when she asked what the problem was, the nurses told her, "They left part of your baby in you when you had the abortion."
Rosa Acuna began to study fetal development and came to the horrible realization that she had killed her own baby, with severe psychological effects.
If Roe v. Wade is based on a woman's right to choose, shouldn't that choice be voluntary and fully informed? Shouldn't there be a remedy against an abortionist who does not fully inform a woman of the nature and consequences of abortion? The Federal Courts in New Jersey have said no. The Supreme Court will be asked to reverse this decision and allow women who are injured by abortion to sue the abortionist.
Source: The Justice Foundation; March 21, 2003 as quoted in Pro-Life Infonet 3/24/03 #2933
http://www.righttoliferoch.org/ndonnaforced.htm
posted by MissHailey at 7:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home