"The term "partial-birth abortion" is a Trojan Horse. "Partial birth abortion" does not refer to any established medical procedure. It is a term invented by anti-choice activists"

So, Don,

What do you suggest we call it so that we can discuss it? I think we all are up to date on the political arguments -- and we all know to what procedure we refer. Or should we just not discuss it because there is not a specific medical terminology? It (as a term) was brought up (by me) merely because Clint said he didn't know if there was any limit to when an abortion could be performed. I merely told him, no, there is no limit right up to the very moment of birth.

I brought this up because several had already brought up the notion of "viability" and he had expressed some question as to the ambiguity of such a judgement (about viability).

I was merely pointing out that, regardless of the moral qualms you might have regarding human life=viability, it does not currently matter according to the law of the land.

I am more than happy to drop the issue (of whatever we are to now call partial birth abortion -- wherein labor is induced, an instrument is inserted into the fetus brain, and a now dead thing is stillborn), as arguing its finer points was not the intent of its having been brought into the conversation (as I just described).

(this isn't meant to sound nearly as snide as I know it's going to sound given the current atmosphere of this thread. I am just aware of having been corrected for something that is quite secondary to the point I was making. And I'd like to clear that up)