Partial Birth Balogna

When will the deception ever stop? That is what I asked myself when I read this weekend's Washignton Times editorial which states: "As Congress found during its meticulous investigation, partial-birth abortion is never necessary to save the life or health of the mother."

Well, that could be true; but if it is, then why did Congress include a life of the mother exception in the law that is now before the Supreme Court?

Don't believe it? Here is what that law says: 

Sec. 1531. Partial-birth abortions prohibited

(a) Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. This subsection takes effect 1 day after the enactment.

I always thought deception came from the pro-abortion side, not the pro-life side of the aisle. Like I said before, the term "pro-life" is meaningless.