{ title: 'Catholic Courier. (Rochester, N.Y.) 1989-current, July 13, 1989, Page 1, Image 1', download_links: [ { link: 'http://www.loc.gov/rss/ndnp/ndnp.xml', label: 'application/rss+xml', meta: 'News about NYS Historic Newspapers - RSS Feed', }, { link: '/lccn/np00020006/1989-07-13/ed-1/seq-1/png/', label: 'image/png', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00020006/1989-07-13/ed-1/seq-1.pdf', label: 'application/pdf', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00020006/1989-07-13/ed-1/seq-1/ocr.xml', label: 'application/xml', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00020006/1989-07-13/ed-1/seq-1/ocr.txt', label: 'text/plain', meta: '', }, ] }
Image provided by: Rochester Regional Library Council
'\\•C-4* \•*• NiS&«N*<l&'W:'v-\ i- •-- m I-U0IIHM that would ^tamo's WMfDUt ATHOLIC COURIER Diocese; of Rochester Thursday, July 13, 1989 509 24 Pages Abortion case fragments court Ruling spurs praise, protests by activists uphold law restricting abortions WASHINGTON (CNS)—In its 5-4 ruling July 3 uphold- ing Missouri abortion restrictions, the deeply divided U.S. Supreme Court refused to overturn Roe vs. Wade -?. its 1973 decision legalizing abortion — but many obser- vers and some of the justices themselves viewed the de- cision as a first step in that direction. Others, including Justice Antonin Scalia, acknowledged that the decision shifts the abortion controversy from the national to the state level. Catholic officials and others who oppose legalized abor- tion have hailed the decision as a victory for pro-life for- ces. Backers of legalized abortion sharply criticized it. Provisions struck down as unconstitutional by lower federal courts but upheld by the Supreme Court: • Declared that life begins at conception. • Required physicians to perform various viability tests on fetuses apparently 20 weeks old or older. • Prohibited public hospitals and personnel from per- forming any abortion not required to save a woman'!; life. • Banned the use of public funds to encouriu. < r <_ un sel a woman to have an abortion not required 11 sivt her life. Writing the majority decision for the court Chiel Jus i H. Rehnquist declared that the appeal* court Continued on page 6 o JChristopher Millette Pro-life advocate David Long is surrounded by pro-choice protesters in front of Genesee Hospital dur- ing Project Life's press conference Monday, July 3, just after the Supreme Court issued its] ruling. By Richard A. Kiley Staff writer ROCHESTER — Pro-life activists here hailed the U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling July 3 upholding Missouri abortion restrictions as a step in the right direction, while some pro-choice demonstrators resorted to burning the flag to protest the long-awaited decision. David E. Long, the executive director of Project Life of Rochester and one of the leaders of local rescue missions during the past year, welcomed die court's decision. The court action, he said, \makes it clear that the right to kill one's unborn child at any time for any reason never was and never will be constitutionally guaranteed.'' Long conducted a news conference in front of Genesee Hospital, 224 Alexander St., Rochester, shortly after the decision came down on Monday, July 3. Pro-life activists have conducted weekly demonstrations in front of the Ro- chester hospital for nearly three years. Surrounded by about a dozen pro-choice supporters who came out to protest against the ruling, Long also said that he was ' 'disappointed that (the decision) wasn't more, but happy that it is the beginning of a process. \We have a very tough road ahead of us,\ he said. \The split of America is not unlike the pre-Civil War days. We're a deeply divided country.\ In a prepared statement releasedby the diocese, JBishop b^p^^tofesajd^was^^ear^ed^y^onday's) Supreme Court decision. \ ~ \By upholding Missouri's abortion regulations the Court has unmistakably affirmed the authority of the states to recognize and protect unborn human life,\ he said. \In particular, by upholding legislative efforts to protect viable unborn children and to prohibit the use of public funds to encourage or counsel for abortions, the court has made possible a legislative policy that protects unborn human life. Keeping in mind the physical and psychological harm abortion can do to women, I believe such legislation will also help to protect women.'' The bishop added that \by its action the court has begun to correct the gross imbalance imposed by Roe v. Wade on our legal system.\ Roe vs. Wade is the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. \(The court) has indicated a new willingness to defer to legislatures' responsible efforts to protect unborn human life,\ the bishop said. \I encourage all Catholics and people of goodwill in our diocese to work actively for state legislative initiatives which affirm the humanity of the unborn child. \Now is me time to recommit ourselves to continue working to create! a society which will advocate for laws that will support both the pregnant woman and her unborn child, so that no woman need ever feel she must resort to abortion,'' the bishop concluded. In its statement in response to the court's decision, the New York State Catholic Conference said it was \greatly encouraged by the direction the Supreme Court has ta- ken\ in the Webster case, but that \we believe the court should have taken its decision a step further and explicitly Continued on page 5 Inside Calendar Page 11 Centennial scrapbook Pages <T& 24 Columnists Pages 16 & 17 Features Page 10 Op-ed Page 18 Sports Page 14 World & Nation Pages 3-6 Youth Page 12 Court adds another chapter to abortion rulings CathoBc News Service WASHINGTON — When the U S Sopeeme Coort ruled in Wfto^rvf Re- pndmUve HeaUi Services Air it id dad another chapter to its 16-year hn lory of decuaons m abortion cases of ow courts previous i are • la>. 22, 1#3 hi twm 7 2 de- dafcap - tkm vt> \wale and Doe n oodvs Danforth and two similar cases the court declares that because the right to an abortion is fundamental neither a woman s husband nor a minor girl s parents may veto an abortion • June 20 1977 In Maher vs Roe and two other cases dealing with public finding of abortions, the court de tennmes is 6-3 ducwaons that its abor tun ntbjajsd»fl0tAaBa antes to pay for taasjons and do not pnfeifehDapnnb to perform abor- • Jan. 9,199* ^Jaajrt.ttM 6-3sCrtw<a ke« down as bw that re- quired doctors to use care and diligence in preserving the life of a fetus in an abortion • July 2 1979 Voting 8 1 in Bellotu V5 Batrd a Massachusetts caw: the court strikes down a law requiring con sent of a parent — or then a judge — be fore an unmarried minor could get an abortion But the justices split 4-4 on the reasons why the law should be overtur ned Four claim that the girl should be able to bypass her parents and go dirtx tty to a judge while four others hold daft even a judge shoold not have the r to nrass an abortion Cofitfnuod on pnflo 4