Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:18 am

Here we go again - first Ohio in a very quiet signing a budget that includes anti-abortion elements (including the vaginal probe) and now The Infamous Gov. Walker has signed a bill requiring ultrasounds. I thought the national embarrassment of their last effort would be sufficient to keep the vaginal probes off the table.

Sadly it looks like the Old White Men are back at it. Maybe next they will want it done in public so they can charge admission to watch.

Quote:

Gov. Scott Walker quietly signed a contentious Republican bill Friday that would require women seeking abortions to undergo an ultrasound and ban doctors who lack admitting privileges at nearby hospitals from performing the procedures.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...uiring-ultrasound-93762.html?hp=l2

I find it amazing when conservatives are so strong on rights to privacy (especially from the "government") and here are conservative state governments having no concerns about "privacy" when they dictate a probe has to be rammed up a woman's vagina.

That's the most impressive lesson on privacy I've ever seen. I wonder how long it will be before responsible Republicans gag on these laws and get rid of them.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:33 am

Ultrasounds are normally done from the outside.



Nothing in the article or the bill mentions vaginal probes. Your language is blatantly inflammatory, and I have asked the Mods to correct your thread title.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
johnboy
Posts: 2560
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 9:09 pm

GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:36 am

So if I were a woman and knocked up, why should I have to look at an ultrasound?

Shouldn't that be between the woman and her doctor?
 
seb146
Posts: 14056
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:50 am

I suppose the government would pay for these medical procedures as well? This from the party that does not want government paying for medical care of any kind?
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
Braniff747SP
Posts: 2567
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 4:56 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:04 am

Quoting ken777 (Thread starter):
before responsible Republicans gag on these laws and get rid of them.

There aren't many left anymore. All the Rockefeller Republicans--my type--got voted out of office or are on the line; nothing can be done...

And then they wonder why they don't win elections that matter.
The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
 
jpetekyxmd80
Posts: 3976
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 3:16 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 6:55 am

What makes for an interesting juxtaposition is the Texas abortion shenanigans with another current issue:

"Texas, whose lax regulatory climate has come in for scrutiny in the aftermath of the West explosion, went into a special session of its state legislature on Monday to push through an omnibus abortion bill designed to regulate 37 abortion clinics out of existence. But the 2013 session will come to a close without any significant action to impose safeguards on the 74 facilities in the state that contain at least 10,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate.

Lawmakers in Austin have a handy excuse for punting on new fertilizer regulations: That would be intrusive. State Sen. Donna Campbell, the Republican who helped to shut down Democratic Sen. Wendy Davis' filibuster of the abortion bill on procedural grounds, told the New York Times that lawmakers should be wary of monitoring chemical plants more closely because there's "a point at which you can overregulate.""
The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
 
photopilot
Posts: 3075
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 12:41 pm

I laugh like hell watching the US debate over abortion. While Americans seem to fear any of the Mideast countries becoming Islamist theocracies, a large segment seems to want the Republicans to turn the USA into a Christian theocracy. Real problems that need solving are being pushed aside for the continual fixation on controlling what a woman does with her body. Her body.... her choice!!!!
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7699
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 1:46 pm

From what I understand an ultrasound early in the pregnancy doesn't show much from the outside, hence the vaginal probe.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12424
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 2:37 pm

Maybe some of the opposition party and woman legislators should put up bills banning the sales of Viagra and other 'erectile dysfunction' drugs in the state, require men to get anal probe ultrasounds every year to look for prostrate and bladder cancer, or mandate all men over the age of 14 must have condoms with them at all times. Perhaps too a special tax on the churches so the holy rollers who demand these ultrasounds and anti-abortion 'talks', would have to pay for it, as well as a special assessment to pay for the medical, social services, educational and other costs of the non-aborted children.

I bet more than a few doctors would nudge-nudge-wink-wink to their patients that they have done the ultrasounds and gave their patients 'the talk', bill for it (or to prevent insurance fraud not bill for it). Problem is that enough would 'obey' such an unjust law and those caught not doing the states' mandate would face further sanctions on their practice.

I wish the anti-abortion crowd, far too often seeking a easy way to 'heaven' would worry about far worse ways they encourage death like wars, the death penalty and taking away government benefits from the poor.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 2:39 pm

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 1):
Your language is blatantly inflammatory,

So's your picture, since most places effectively prohibit abortion that far along in a pregnancy. And since vaginal probes are indeed part of the deal, let's try and keep this factual. Thanks.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3):
I suppose the government would pay for these medical procedures as well? This from the party that does not want government paying for medical care of any kind?

Oh, no, not at all. If there's a way to tack that surcharge onto whatever the woman in question must pay for this, they will find it, rest assured. See below...

Quoting ken777 (Thread starter):
Maybe next they will want it done in public so they can charge admission to watch.

These rules won't pay for themselves!

I know we're being facetious there, but I would not put it past social conservative lady-haters to at least try that out.

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 5):
"Texas, whose lax regulatory climate has come in for scrutiny in the aftermath of the West explosion, went into a special session of its state legislature on Monday to push through an omnibus abortion bill designed to regulate 37 abortion clinics out of existence. But the 2013 session will come to a close without any significant action to impose safeguards on the 74 facilities in the state that contain at least 10,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate.

There is not a phrase sharp enough, nor font large enough to describe the epic facepalm this represents. Way to go, TX, way to go...

Quoting photopilot (Reply 6):
While Americans seem to fear any of the Mideast countries becoming Islamist theocracies, a large segment seems to want the Republicans to turn the USA into a Christian theocracy. Real problems that need solving are being pushed aside for the continual fixation on controlling what a woman does with her body.

Trust that many Americans are deeply concerned about this. Though the probability of conservative christian religious remaining relevant is declining every day, thankfully, it seems that there will always be some very vocal and ill-intentioned political minority factions to deal with. If it makes you feel better, part of why this type of legislation gets the press time it does is because it is so out there, and not representative of the majority.

But yes, in principle I do agree that these are usually the same people who hate islam and muslims because "they're all terrorists who hate us for our freedom". Indeed, the hypocrisy could be cut with a knife here.
Be A Perfectionst, You're Nothing If You're Just Another; Something Material, This Isn't Personal...
 
einsteinboricua
Posts: 4708
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 2:53 pm

I wonder how the GOP thinks it'll win public approval. I want to come back in a year or so and ask how the re-branding effort is going.
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
luckyone
Posts: 2302
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 3:05 pm

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 8):
I bet more than a few doctors would nudge-nudge-wink-wink to their patients that they have done the ultrasounds and gave their patients 'the talk', bill for it (or to prevent insurance fraud not bill for it). Problem is that enough would 'obey' such an unjust law and those caught not doing the states' mandate would face further sanctions on their practice.

What may also end up happening is the doctors performing the abortion/termination/D&E will just simply have an ultrasound at bedside before performing the procedure.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 8):

I wish the anti-abortion crowd, far too often seeking a easy way to 'heaven'

It's been my experience that when people start worrying about others' road to heaven they are typically either sheep who are just regurgitating what their preacher tells them, or they are somehow of the opinion that if they save everyone else their own spiritual short comings will be overlooked.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 3:21 pm

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 9):
So's your picture, since most places effectively prohibit abortion that far along in a pregnancy. And since vaginal probes are indeed part of the deal, let's try and keep this factual. Thanks.

From my limited reading on the subject, vaginal probe ultrasound is more useful in diagnosing the health of the woman's reproductive organs, cysts etc. For having a look at a fetus, the exterior method is the usual method. Maybe DocLightning will chime in.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 10):

I wonder how the GOP thinks it'll win public approval.

Well the pro-abortion crowd could use a few PR lessons as well.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...battle-heats-activists-hail-satan/

Quote:
Pro-choice protesters shouted, “Hail Satan!” as an attempt to drown out pro-lifers’ rendition of “Amazing Grace.”

Seriously? Hail Satan?

http://i.stack.imgur.com/jiFfM.jpg

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 8):
Maybe some of the opposition party and woman legislators should put up bills banning the sales of Viagra and other 'erectile dysfunction' drugs in the state, require men to get anal probe ultrasounds every year to look for prostrate and bladder cancer, or mandate all men over the age of 14 must have condoms with them at all times.

As I have explained here before, I am pro-choice, but am open to a reasonable compromise, such as strict limits on abortions in the third trimester.

The radical pro-abortion crowd is not doing itself any favors by statements like the above, where they continue to insist that the fetus, right up to the moment of birth, is nothing more than a tumor or a cancer. After 20 weeks or so, the fetus is viable outside the womb, and without question can feel pain, dream dreams etc. You'd better have a damned good reason for an abortion that late is my position. At that point, it is more than a lump of hamburger, and I wish the pro-choice crowd would be willing to admit that point.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 3:33 pm

What I don't understand with the so-called pro-life crowd is that as soon as the unwanted child who's right to life they have ensured is born, they do everything they can to ensure it's actual life is miserable and short, by getting rid of any healthcare that won't cost them a fortune, and slashing education and other social benefits. Pro-life? Well how about taking care of the living?
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:18 pm

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 1):
Ultrasounds are normally done from the outside.

When the baby is as large as the one in your picture. In the initial stages you need that vaginal probe.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 1):
I have asked the Mods to correct your thread title.

You asked them to change it. SInce the vaginal probes will be required in early pregnancies the title was correct.

Quoting johnboy (Reply 2):
Shouldn't that be between the woman and her doctor?

In a country where privacy is considered important it would. In the US privacy counts when the government wants to store phone records in a database - that's a real scary invasion of privacy, As for telling a woman to spread em so they can ram a probe up her vagina in order to satisfy a bunch of holy rollin Christians - well, privacy really isn't that important.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3):
I suppose the government would pay for these medical procedures as well?

        

There will probably be so regulation requiring that only ultra strong Pro-Life ultrasound operators will be allowed to

Quoting Aesma (Reply 7):
From what I understand an ultrasound early in the pregnancy doesn't show much from the outside, hence the vaginal probe.

Correct. The GOP learned that simple lesson when they tried this law. It's was a major embarrassment for the party, but it looks like the party is now beyond embarrassment.

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 13):
Pro-life? Well how about taking care of the living?

        

All these Do Good Christian Conservatives are more concerned about their tax cuts - which is why we rate right down there with Cuba in terms of infant mortality.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 12):
After 20 weeks or so, the fetus is viable outside the womb, and without question can feel pain, dream dreams etc.

If a baby is viable outside the womb then give the mother the option of turning the baby over to the state. A large number of these babies will be "special needs", but funds can be found to take care of them with simple tax increases.

That way the Christian Conservatives can adopt as many as they want.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:25 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 14):
SInce the vaginal probes will be required in early pregnancies the title was correct.

Source?

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 14):
In a country where privacy is considered important it would.

When will it get into your head that this has nothing to do with privacy, but with the life of a viable child?

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 14):
Correct. The GOP learned that simple lesson when they tried this law. It's was a major embarrassment for the party, but it looks like the party is now beyond embarrassment.

Hail Satan!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...battle-heats-activists-hail-satan/

Both side have their idiots.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 14):
If a baby is viable outside the womb then give the mother the option of turning the baby over to the state.

Are you advocating the return of state orphanages? I am not against the idea - but let's make it clear.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
seb146
Posts: 14056
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:48 pm

These are the same people who scream about personal responsibility but deny anyone access to the pill, condoms, or the morning after pill, in case of rape.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 12):
I am pro-choice, but am open to a reasonable compromise, such as strict limits on abortions in the third trimester.

The radical pro-abortion crowd is not doing itself any favors

For someone who claims they are "pro-choice" you sure do spend a lot of time and effort supporting the anti-choice side!

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 12):
where they continue to insist that the fetus, right up to the moment of birth, is nothing more than a tumor or a cancer.

Except you are wrong. A HUGE HUGE HUGE majority of pro-lifers are fine with no late-term abortions. That same HUGE HUGE HUGE majority of pro-choice people know and understand that there is a point where aborting the fetus is not an option. But, the anti-choice crowd has controlled the conversation for so long the only option is for a woman to carry the fetus to term because anything else is a sin.

That's another thing: Why are a small group of people imposing their morals on everyone else? How is that working in Iran with the mullahs controlling morality or in Saudi Arabia with the morality police? That's how I see the ultra right wing who are very vocal. They go on and on about keeping government out of everyone's lives but they want to impose strict moral codes. Not only for abortion but they insist America is a "Christian" nation and we all must live heterosexual lives. They have no idea what "walk the talk" means. They just want the Christian equivalent of Sharia law in this country.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
luckyone
Posts: 2302
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:54 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 16):
They have no idea what "walk the talk" means. They just want the Christian equivalent of Sharia law in this country.

Indeed they would love it until they actually had to live by it themselves. They are perfectly fine with pointing at others' actions and sins but act completely surprised when the same is done to them.

In the South we joke that the only difference between a Methodist and a Baptist is that a Methodist will speak to you at the liquor store.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 6:15 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 16):
For someone who claims they are "pro-choice" you sure do spend a lot of time and effort supporting the anti-choice side!

Because there are very few people on this board who are totally anti-abortion - a position I disagree with but I can respect from a moral position, but plenty of those who want no restrictions whatsoever - a position I find even more distasteful as it is completely devoid of any sort of compromise or moral compass as it relegates the unborn fetus to the status of a tumor - which we scientifically know is false. We know for a fact that a fetus in the third trimester is viable. All the bits and pieces are there and functional. The extremist wing of the pro-choice movement simply refuses to acknowledge this fact.

As we recently saw with the House bill to limit abortion in the 3rd trimester, the reaction from the pro-choice movement (at least the vocal extremists within it) was the 'Slippery Slope' argument - that no restrictions can be accepted because it might justify future restrictions. No interest in compromise or negotiation whatsoever. That is what offends me. They accuse the pro-life movement of wanting Christian Sharia, but they are just as fundamentalist and uncompromising in their positions - the hypocrisy is outrageous.

Polls show that the majority want a compromise. Abortion allowed, but with restrictions. (look at the Gallup poll.)

http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

My position is that abortion must remain an option, in the first trimester definitely, but with increasing thought given to the developing human life thereafter. I think it is a reasonable compromise in line with what most people want.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 6:20 pm

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 15):
Source?

OK, here are a few:

Quote:

Question: What is a transvaginal ultrasound or sonogram?

Answer: Transvaginal ultrasound is an ultrasound that is used to help determine many things about a pregnancy. A transvaginal ultrasound is performed by using an ultrasound wand that is actually inserted into the vagina. This can be very helpful in early pregnancy as it is able to provide a better view.
http://pregnancy.about.com/od/ultrasounds/f/transvaginal.htm

Quote:

Ultrasound is commonly used during pregnancy to provide information about the developing baby. During an ultrasound, reflected sound waves are used to form a visual image of the baby in the womb. While several types of ultrasounds are available, a transvaginal ultrasound is more common during the early stages of the baby’s development.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/17...nsvaginal-ultrasound-in-pregnancy/

Quote:

Most prenatal ultrasound procedures are performed topically, or on the surface of the skin, using a gel as a conductive medium to aid in the image quality. However, a transvaginal ultrasound is an alternative procedure in which a tubular probe is inserted into the vaginal canal. This method of ultrasound produces an image quality that is greatly enhanced, but it is not a common prenatal procedure. However, it may be used early in pregnancy to get a clearer view of the uterus or ovaries if a problem is suspected. It may also be used early in pregnancy to determine how far along you are in your pregnancy (gestational age).
http://www.webmd.com/baby/ultrasound

There is 3 that indicate trans vaginal ultrasound early in pregnancy. You'll probably have little problem finding hundreds of others.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 15):
When will it get into your head that this has nothing to do with privacy,

Of course not. Forcing woman to spread her legs so a probe can be rammed up her vagina has nothing to do with privacy. After all she's only a woman. Woman haven't even had the right to vote for 100 years, why should a bunch of holy rollers worry about other women's rights?

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 15):
Are you advocating the return of state orphanages?

I'm saying that if a woman is denied an abortion then the state should have full responsibility for that baby - including all financial responsibilities. Obviously some can be adopted out. Some can spend their childhood in foster care and some will simply have to be warehoused until they die.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anencephaly shows one medical condition that shows a need for warehousing. If you can get into an anatomical museum you can probably find a lot of other medical conditions that fall into that same group. You might even come to the conclusion that, tragic as it is, there are situations where an abortion is the correct approach for some medical conditions.

State orphanages? Probably. If the decision to deny an abortion is a state decision then they need to take the responsibility and that may well include state orphanages. Pretty costly, but new taxes can take care of that - maybe taking away the tax exemption of religious properties, like churches. Great source of tax revenues there.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 6:44 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 19):
Most prenatal ultrasound procedures are performed topically, or on the surface of the skin, using a gel as a conductive medium to aid in the image quality. However, a transvaginal ultrasound is an alternative procedure in which a tubular probe is inserted into the vaginal canal

There you go. Topical is the norm. transvaginal is if you want to see more detail, but is not a requirement. In the context of the proposed law, no such invasive ultrasounds are required or mandated.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 19):
Of course not. Forcing woman to spread her legs so a probe can be rammed up her vagina has nothing to do with privacy.

The concept really seems to turn you on, you keep harping on it in such graphic detail. I shudder to think of you as a gynecologist.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
WestJet747
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 7:43 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sat Jul 06, 2013 7:27 pm

The party of smaller government wants to table even more regulations? Who woulda thunk it! The GOP continues to be an embarrassment to conservatism.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 15):
Both side have their idiots.

Except the pro-life side elects theirs into office...

Quoting photopilot (Reply 6):
I laugh like hell watching the US debate over abortion.

  

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 10):
I wonder how the GOP thinks it'll win public approval.

They don't think, that's why Obama won a second term. I didn't think he would be re-elected, but then the Republicans did that thing where they open their mouths and stupid things come out.

Quoting luckyone (Reply 11):
It's been my experience that when people start worrying about others' road to heaven they are typically either sheep who are just regurgitating what their preacher tells them

Indeed. I happened upon the Pride Parade in Toronto last weekend and the particular street corner I was on was also the same street corner all the Christian groups decided to set-up shop. I noticed that their campaign is based on the "we don't hate gays, we just love them so much that we want to stop them from sinning" argument.

As an aside: It was quite interesting that the Muslim group who usually sets up an information table on that particular corner (Dundas & Yonge) was absent on the day of the parade. It seems even they know it's a hopeless cause and just decided to steer clear of confrontation.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 18):
but plenty of those who want no restrictions whatsoever

Alright Dreadnought, I think it's "put up or shut up" time. Please provide a single example of somebody on this forum suggesting zero restrictions on abortion. Every single abortion thread, you whip out the same lines about people here claiming that they want abortions even in the final month of pregnancy (referring to fetuses as "hamburger" is a favourite of yours I've noticed). Well, I've read every single thread on abortion since become a member on A-net two years ago and I cannot a recall a single time anybody has taken that position. I know that because I personally do not support third trimester abortions, and I would have said something if anybody proposed that.

I look forward to being proven wrong.
Flying refined.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:30 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 20):
Topical is the norm.

For general OB medical care, or because mothers-to-be want to see "their baby".

As the references I provided indicate, the vaginal probes are generally for early in the pregnancy when topical scans are not that effective. People who don't believe that women, including rape victims, will be forced to endure a vaginal probe in the early part of their pregnancy probably believe in the Tooth Fairy.

I can just see the rape victims, laying there thinking "here we go again".

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 20):
In the context of the proposed law, no such invasive ultrasounds are required or mandated.

What about those women very early in their pregnancy where the topical approach doesn't let the holy rollers deliver aggressive arguments agains the pregnancy? Think those women will get off easy? Only if they have a doctor who isn't afraid of the religious freaks who are going to be watching over them.

In terms of a topical scan, it is still FAR more invasive in terms of Constitutional Rights To Privacy that conservatives are so concerned about when it comes to phone logs.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 20):
The concept really seems to turn you on

Actually the forced procedure makes me want to gag. Just like the last time the GOP tried to ram that law through.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:07 am

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 21):
Except the pro-life side elects theirs into office...

Really? Last I checked Abortion was less restrictive in this country than in most others.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 21):
Alright Dreadnought, I think it's "put up or shut up" time. Please provide a single example of somebody on this forum suggesting zero restrictions on abortion. Every single abortion thread, you whip out the same lines about people here claiming that they want abortions even in the final month of pregnancy (referring to fetuses as "hamburger" is a favourite of yours I've noticed). Well, I've read every single thread on abortion since become a member on A-net two years ago and I cannot a recall a single time anybody has taken that position. I know that because I personally do not support third trimester abortions, and I would have said something if anybody proposed that.
House Approves New Abortion Restrictions (by WarRI1 Jun 18 2013 in Non Aviation)

Read all the posts of the people who were against this bill in all its forms, and/or who where against any sort of negotiations on the issue.

WarRI1
einsteinboricua
AeroWesty
seb146

and others.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 22):
As the references I provided indicate, the vaginal probes are generally for early in the pregnancy when topical scans are not that effective.

Who said it has to be particularly effective? Look, I don't particularly approve of the idea. If you want an abortion and it's early in the pregnancy, not much will talk you out of it. I see this as a useless extra regulation and extra cost. But your reaction is that of a chicken-little. The law requires an ultrasound. I 5-second quick topical swipe probably satisfies the requirement - even if you can's see anything. So I agree with you that it should not pass, but I abhor your inflammatory rhetoric.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:28 am

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 5):
State Sen. Donna Campbell, the Republican who helped to shut down Democratic Sen. Wendy Davis' filibuster of the abortion bill on procedural grounds, told the New York Times that lawmakers should be wary of monitoring chemical plants more closely because there's "a point at which you can overregulate.""

Sure, there's a point at which you overregulate. But when your state is one of the most dangerous states in which to work, you haven't reached it.   

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 18):
but plenty of those who want no restrictions whatsoever - a position I find even more distasteful as it is completely devoid of any sort of compromise or moral compass as it relegates the unborn fetus to the status of a tumor - which we scientifically know is false.

Or maybe we just don't want to put women through the unintended consequences of making certain types of abortion illegal.

Whenever you start introducing exceptions into an abortion law, you open up a whole can of worms. That's true whether you're talking about an exception for rape in a complete ban or an exception for something dangerous to the mother in a late-term abortion ban. Let's take the case of a woman who has been told by her doctor that there is a problem with her pregnancy that could endanger her health and recommends an abortion. She goes for a second opinion, and the second doctor disagrees and thinks that the pregnancy could continue safely. She's past the cutoff date for an abortion, and so will have to qualify for an exception. If she has the abortion, she'd be opening herself up to prosecution by the state (and don't think for a second that there aren't pro-life attorney generals out there who would be happy to do so) for having an abortion when there was an opinion that it wasn't medically necessary. If she tries to sort things out beforehand that there's a more solid case for her having an abortion if she wants to go that direction, the process gets delayed, and if the abortion ends up happening later in the term than it should, which is something nobody wants to have happen. And, of course, during that time the pregnancy could take a turn for the worse and she could get sick and die (as happened in Ireland fairly recently) - obviously that's not a desirable outcome for anyone either. She's in a no-win situation - she's either at risk of being a criminal (and possibly going to jail) or at risk of putting her life in danger. And she's done nothing wrong. How is that fair to her? Yet that's the situation that implementing any sort of abortion ban would put her in.

If you're going to advocate putting people in that position, you'd better show that the potential benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks. If women are going around having late-term abortions of convenience like it's no bigger deal than getting their hair or nails done, then that's despicable and disgusting and wrong and I'd say that getting rid of that would be worth it. But I've never seen anything from the anti-abortion crowd to indicate that that's the case - it seems to be a lot of anger about a problem that doesn't really exist. And it's not right to put well-meaning people in criminal jeopardy over a phantom problem.

I certainly don't view a fetus as nothing more than a tumor, and I certainly have no love for late-term abortions, but I have even less love for legislatures making decisions on what is medically necessary and what isn't. That's an unacceptable government intrusion into what should be someone's personal decision about their health. Not only do legislatures lack the expertise to make such a determination, but legislatures are inherently political, and politics has no place anywhere near such decisions.

Also, it should be said that what angers me the most about the sorts of abominable bills that Ohio has passed, and that Texas tried to pass (and thankfully failed to, at least for now), is not the limit on when you can do an abortion. It's all the other stuff, like how the bills require abortion clinics to adhere to such strict standards that almost all of them in the state would be forced to close, thus imposing a severe hardship on women who want to get even early-term abortions. Ohio's law requires abortion clinics to have a transfer agreement with a hospital, then prohibits a public hospital from entering into such a transfer agreement, leaving mostly religious hospitals as possible candidates (and you can guess how willing they'd be to work out a deal). That's not about protecting women's health at all, that's about trying to impose a complete abortion ban by making it too impractical to get an abortion. If the bills just banned abortion after a certain time period and left everything else intact, I think you'd see far less opposition to them (though I'd still feel uncomfortable with them for the reasons I mentioned above). But that's not the direction the GOP has decided to take.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 18):
As we recently saw with the House bill to limit abortion in the 3rd trimester, the reaction from the pro-choice movement (at least the vocal extremists within it) was the 'Slippery Slope' argument - that no restrictions can be accepted because it might justify future restrictions. No interest in compromise or negotiation whatsoever. That is what offends me.

May I assume, then, that you were offended when the pro-gun lobby raised hell about a background check law because it was a slippery slope to total confiscation of weapons?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
seb146
Posts: 14056
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:58 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 18):
a position I disagree with but I can respect from a moral position,

Again: Why legislate morality? Why is that for one small group to do?

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 18):
The extremist wing of the pro-choice movement simply refuses to acknowledge this fact.

Actually, they don't. The reason you think that is what MSM has told you.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 18):
I think it is a reasonable compromise in line with what most people want.

Except the far-right wing "morality police" are in control of state houses and law making. So, they want to tell people when and how they can do this. Which is never. Because we must all live by the far-right wing morals.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:36 am

Quoting Braniff747SP (Reply 4):
All the Rockefeller Republicans--my type--got voted out of office or are on the line

Rockefeller Republicans were neoconservatives from the other side of the aisle, although they predate them by a few years. Or just a Limousine Liberal by a different name.

There's not much point in voting for a Republican that is in favor of high social spending. Beats a hippie, but don't confuse that with fiscal conservatism. Most prominent Rockefeller Republicans came from blue states anyway, and Nixonian politics looked good mostly thanks to following the Great Society and were superseded by Reaganite policies which continued to be successful through the Clinton administration.

But personally, I don't pay too much attention to the abortion debate. Personally, I'm smart enough to make sure that it never affects me. But a bit of gender equality might be nice. A man should be able to sign a form, during roughly the same interval in which a woman can have an abortion, certifying that he is willing to pay the cost of an abortion and, if the woman declines to have one performed, the father irrevocably waives all parental rights and is absolved of all responsibilities, financial or otherwise.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 25):
Again: Why legislate morality? Why is that for one small group to do?

Ask all the liberals who think it's moral to take the first third or so of my paycheck (and some want more than that) partially so they can pay their crappy social programs: subsidizing buses, handing out welfare checks and tax breaks to people who decided they'd rather have kids than go to school. That's my money, and every dime of morality liberals legislate eventually translates to horsepower off my car and inches and pixels off my TV. Go ask them about legislating morality.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19821
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:38 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 1):
Nothing in the article or the bill mentions vaginal probes.

It does not but it is common in early pregnancy to have to do one if the goal is to find the heartbeat.

In my opinion, It is laughable at best and heinous in reality to mandate an unnecessary medical procedure prior to an abortion solely for the purposes of increasing the cost and other barriers of abortion. Similarly, you cannot tell me that you are interested in "women's health" when you cancel womens health programs and then place absurd restrictions on abortion centers (like requiring ambulatory surgery compliance to be able to give a patient RU-486 or methotrexate pills). Performing an unnecessary procedure is a direct violation of the Hippocratic Oath.

It is also my opinion that every legislator involved in the passage of such a law (one that mandates a clinical algorithm) should stand for the criminal charge of practicing medicine without a license, unless they hold a license. It's one thing to pass laws regulating physician behavior, standards, training, etc. It is quite a different thing to try to write a clinical algorithm into law (especially when it is baseless).

Regardless of where you stand on the ethics of abortion, this is a reprehensible bullying tactic. Bullying women out of getting abortions. Disgusting. I just hate bullies. In addition, it demeans all women going to get an abortion as unaware that they contain a beating heart. The woman who just found out that her infant will have Trisomy 13 is devastated enough without needing to be shown the ultrasound. She knows damned well that heart is beating.

If you want to ban abortion, ban it. Don't feed me some line about "protecting women's health" when you oppose providing such services as free breast cancer screening but are going to mandate ridiculous procedures and facilities standards prior to an abortion.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 18):
Because there are very few people on this board who are totally anti-abortion - a position I disagree with but I can respect from a moral position, but plenty of those who want no restrictions whatsoever

Please quote who wants "no restrictions whatsoever." As soon as this murderer guy who killed babies that were crying, the no-choicers (There is being "pro-life," which is different than being "anti-choice") accused all pro-choicers of endorsing his behavior when every single pro-choice organization and poster on this board expressed outrage and disgust.

I can respect being anti-abortion and truly pro-life because that is exactly what I am. I am anti-abortion and I am pro-life. This in no way conflicts with my being pro-choice. I just prefer that the choice occur before conception in the form of a reliable form of contraception (and abstinence is not a reliable form of contraception; I've seen more pregnancies from botched "abstinence...").

The other thing is that abortion is allowed up to the age of viability and I don't like that, but nobody is promoting viable-aged fetuses (unless they have severe anomalies incompatible with life, such as Trisomy 18/13, anencephaly, etc.).
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:40 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 24):
If the bills just banned abortion after a certain time period and left everything else intact, I think you'd see far less opposition to them (though I'd still feel uncomfortable with them for the reasons I mentioned above). But that's not the direction the GOP has decided to take.

I agree I would prefer the much simpler approach, such as the abortion bill passed by the House the other week.

Quoting Mir (Reply 24):
May I assume, then, that you were offended when the pro-gun lobby raised hell about a background check law because it was a slippery slope to total confiscation of weapons?

Yes, and I have said so. I have nothing against a national gun registry, with obligatory reporting when you sell or inherit a gun. But there would have to be safeguards put in place to ensure that database is ONLY used for criminal investigations, and not for any other purposes.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 25):
Again: Why legislate morality? Why is that for one small group to do?

Let's remove the laws against murder then. Let's face it, there are a lot of people in the world we could do without - the generalization that all human life is to be protected is a moral one.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 25):
Actually, they don't. The reason you think that is what MSM has told you.

BS. I have repeatedly challenged people here to admit that, and they always evade.

Let's try again. Are you, Seb, willing to say in plain English that a fetus in its 3rd trimester is as viable a human life as any newborn infant - the only difference is that he hasn't made his first change of address yet. The baby feels, dreams, expreriences pain and pleasure, and is by all intents an living human life. The point at which it becomes such is open to discussion, but is somewhere around 6 months, maybe earlier.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:47 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 23):
Read all the posts of the people who were against this bill in all its forms, and/or who where against any sort of negotiations on the issue.
Quoting dreadnought (Reply 23):
AeroWesty

Eh? Wanna quote us from the other thread where I took up that position, Clem?
International Homo of Mystery
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:59 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 29):
Eh? Wanna quote us from the other thread where I took up that position, Clem?

Your reply #21, where WarRI1 claimed that any law limiting abortion "is the opening rounds of a much larger fight to overturn Roe versus Wade which would mean (no) abortions, nada, the dream of the (Right) which is wrong for women."

You answered with a checkmark. Clearly, a no-compromise position.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:08 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 30):
You answered with a checkmark. Clearly, a no-compromise position.

LOL! I was agreeing that it was the opening round to overturn Roe v. Wade, and what overturning Roe v. Wade would mean in legal terms. No where did I say I harbored a no-compromise position. That's just nutty.
International Homo of Mystery
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:25 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 31):
LOL! I was agreeing that it was the opening round to overturn Roe v. Wade, and what overturning Roe v. Wade would mean in legal terms. No where did I say I harbored a no-compromise position. That's just nutty.

Oh stop BSing. We are (mostly) adults here. That is a completely bogus argument. A new law cannot overturn Roe v Wade. That was a judicial decision. The only way to overturn it is with another USSC decision.

Which is part of the problem. Abortion has been a contentious issue for half a century largely because the only law on the books is a deeply flawed decision. Look at all other modern countries. People feel just as deeply about abortion in many of them, but it is no longer a big issue because their legislatures hammered out a compromise that set into law a reasonable middle-ground, and the issue was considered settled. We need to do the same. That is not done in the Supreme Court. That's done in Congress.

But I get the feeling that there are many groups (on both sides) that do not want the issue to be settled because it would compromise their political and financial support structure. It's kinda like racism. The last thing that race-peddlers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton want to see is races living together and working together in total harmony. It would put them out of business.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:30 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 32):
Oh stop BSing. We are (mostly) adults here. That is a completely bogus argument. A new law cannot overturn Roe v Wade. That was a judicial decision. The only way to overturn it is with another USSC decision.

Correct! And it is my opinion that overturning Roe v. Wade is exactly what the anti-abortionists want. You can BS around all you want in your posts implying what you think people are saying, then running with it as if it was the truth, but it'll still come across as the same old BS. You do it often enough, it's an age old pattern that's easy to spot.
International Homo of Mystery
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:42 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 33):
Correct! And it is my opinion that overturning Roe v. Wade is exactly what the anti-abortionists want.

You never took Logic in school, did you?
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:44 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 34):
You never took Logic in school, did you?

Part B of your pattern is to start with the personal attacks when you get frustrated with your lack of ability to get out of the hole you've built for yourself. Really, you need a new schtick.  
International Homo of Mystery
 
seb146
Posts: 14056
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:54 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 26):
they can pay their crappy social programs

So, feeding the hungry (who need to be working before they can get food stamps) and making sure the poor have a reliable way to get to work and helping kids is immoral. That's what you are saying. We should just demand people help themselves but do nothing to actually help out. That's the whole mantra of the right wing.

It's okay to legislate morality of one tiny sliver of the far right wing but heaven forbid we should actually do anything for a large number of people who actually need helping out.

On the other hand, you are right. Why legislate exactly what the Bible says? Helping the least among us? Let them fend for themselves. The right hates the Bible anyway, so that makes sense.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:11 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 36):
So, feeding the hungry (who need to be working before they can get food stamps) and making sure the poor have a reliable way to get to work and helping kids is immoral.

No, I'm just saying I shouldn't be forced to pay for it.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 36):
We should just demand people help themselves but do nothing to actually help out.

Yes. You're getting it.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 36):
It's okay to legislate morality of one tiny sliver of the far right wing but heaven forbid we should actually do anything for a large number of people who actually need helping out.

No, but I think that if you're going to be against legislating morality, you should be against it when liberals do it too.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 36):
Why legislate exactly what the Bible says?

You don't have a problem with it when it means giving you someone else's money.

If I'm going to do what the Bible says, I'm going to do it because the Bible says so and not because the government says so.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 36):
Let them fend for themselves.

Exactly.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
seb146
Posts: 14056
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:37 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 37):
I'm going to do it because the Bible says so and not because the government says so.

The right-wing (AKA Republicans) claim they follow the Bible to the letter and claim they are the party of Christianity. They stand up and tell everyone how much they want to be like Christ and this is a Christian nation. Last time I checked, my Bible said that helping the least among us (the working poor, the disabled, children) is a Christian value. Following that logic, using tax dollars to feed and house the working poor and children is a Christian value. So, the right should have no problem with any of that. However, they demonize anyone trying to help themselves. And, at the same time, ship jobs overseas and blame the poor for not getting jobs.

How very Christian.

Yet another example of how the right wing picks and chooses it's way through life.

[Edited 2013-07-07 09:39:01]
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:52 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
Last time I checked, my Bible said that helping the least among us (the working poor, the disabled, children) is a Christian value. Following that logic, using tax dollars to feed and house the working poor and children is a Christian value.

A bit off topic, but you are very, very wrong about this. You are supposed to help the poor with your own money (or effort). Requiring others to do it (via taxes) is absolutely meaningless as far as Christian Charity is concerned.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:10 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 26):
Ask all the liberals who think it's moral to take the first third or so of my paycheck (and some want more than that) partially so they can pay their crappy social programs

You tend to forget that part of your taxes that goes to Defense, the VA, law enforcement (like the FBI) CDC and other health related departments, infrastructure development and maintenance (including airports), border patrol and border infrastructure, etc.

Every day you drive to work you are driving on infrastructure paid for by tax dollars. Or do you live close enough to walk to work?

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 28):
a fetus in its 3rd trimester is as viable a human life as any newborn infant - the only difference is that he hasn't made his first change of address yet. The baby feels, dreams, expreriences pain and pleasure, and is by all intents an living human life. The point at which it becomes such is open to discussion, but is somewhere around 6 months, maybe earlier.

If life is viable then, as I've said before, the state should just take the baby as part of the abort procedure. The moment the state takes the baby it also assumes all responsibilities for that chile, including premie health care (which is expensive, but probably can be done in a large ward for less money.) Normal babies? The state should be responsible for them until they have been educated to the point where they can work in a job that pays a living wage. That might mean training in a trade, or college (if appropriate, based on the student's school work). If the baby is "special" then the state should assume a lifetime responsibility. If you look at a Downs kid, that might be total care for a severe case, with less involvement for a mild case.

But reality is that states demanding a baby live assumes full responsibility for that baby, If taxes need to be raised then raise them. I've already offered one simple approach for increasing tax revenues to help take care of those kids.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 32):
A new law cannot overturn Roe v Wade. That was a judicial decision.

True, but politicians can surround that decision with laws that severely limit, or kill, the force of the decision. These laws coming out these days are efforts to severely diminish the force of the USSC decision.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:21 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
The right-wing (AKA Republicans) claim they follow the Bible to the letter and claim they are the party of Christianity.

I don't think I've ever seen them do that.

Democrats believe that it isn't the government's place to enforce Christian values, "family values" or whatever sort of values you like. The left's idea is that if you think it's moral to not have an abortion, then don't have an abortion but leave everyone else to their own devices. Therefore, it should follow that their attitude should also be that if you believe it is moral to help the poor then by all means do that, but leave everyone else to their own devices. Yet, that isn't the case. You will find liberals across the country applauding crappy social programs and wanting to expand them, using money that belongs to someone else.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
However, they demonize anyone trying to help themselves.

Most of the people who try that hard to help themselves do. The problem is that too many don't, and the social policy makes it possible to do so.

It's my money and I should be the arbiter of where it goes as much as possible. I'd much rather see my money flow to my local Porsche dealer than ghettos and trailer parks across America.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 40):
You tend to forget that part of your taxes that goes to Defense, the VA, law enforcement (like the FBI) CDC and other health related departments, infrastructure development and maintenance (including airports), border patrol and border infrastructure, etc.

Every day you drive to work you are driving on infrastructure paid for by tax dollars.

Show me where I said all taxes and government services should be abolished.

But, since you can't do that, I'll go ahead and explain that I'm willing to pay for useful things such as what you mentioned, but perhaps some of the health stuff should be reconsidered. If you want to go screw someone you meet at the club, you can pay for your own condoms and birth control.

What I'm not interested in paying for is welfare and social programs.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
luckyone
Posts: 2302
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:23 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
I don't think I've ever seen them do that.

Have you been paying attention, because they most certainly do on the local level.
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 8716
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:05 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
What I'm not interested in paying for is welfare and social programs.

When a child is born out of wedlock, or in wedlock, but impoverished, in ill health, where in the world do you think the money for the child is coming from? There are no jobs for most, hence the poverty, no education for many of these women. Ignorance breeds poverty, and we have done an excellent job of creating the conditions for both. We would be supporting millions more now if it were not for Roe versus Wade all those years ago. Republicans talk out of both sides of their mouth on this issue, and many more.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:49 pm

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 43):
When a child is born out of wedlock, or in wedlock, but impoverished, in ill health, where in the world do you think the money for the child is coming from?

There are those two people responsible for bringing the kid into the world. And nobody is proposing outlawing charity.

But, let's remember that pregnancy and kids is not just something that happens to people. It is not like getting a cold. People can take steps to make it nearly impossible that a pregnancy will result, which would be the smart thing to do if you do not want, or cannot afford, to have a child.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 43):
There are no jobs for most,

Last time I checked unemployment was hovering around 8%, which would correspond to employment of 92%. Now if you think that 8% is "most" then having a conversation with you about economics or pretty much anything else is a fool's errand and what we should be doing is discussing the educational system.

But, that aside, yes not all jobs pay that well. Perhaps not well enough to have a family in which case the smart thing to do would be not have a family. There are plenty of things I cannot afford, so I don't buy them. It's really quite simple.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 43):
no education for many of these women. Ignorance breeds poverty,

People drop out, or don't show up, or show up and don't take it seriously. Schools aren't cheap, but what happens if people do not take advantage of them? Liberals will just send you a check, no worries.

[Edited 2013-07-07 14:56:07]
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 10:29 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
Democrats believe that it isn't the government's place to enforce Christian values, "family values" or whatever sort of values you like.

Republicans are the party that plays lap dog to the big companies and the wealthy. They never saw a political contribution they didn't like. Look how hard Romney wanted zero taxes on capital gains so he would only pay 1% or 2%on his $20+ million income a year.

Not everyone believes in serving only the powerful and the wealthy. They become moderates or liberals or independents or Democrats.

As an ex-Republican who still votes for a GOP candidate when I want I believe that the party needs to move back to the center and address issues important for everyone. All I see now is efforts to cut taxes when that 's not affordable, voting to end ObamaCare 39 or 40 times, efforts to end abortions through obstruction laws, efforts to pleas the powerful and wealthy, etc.

That's why I find you comment above pretty queer.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
You will find liberals across the country applauding crappy social programs and wanting to expand them, using money that belongs to someone else.

There you go again. ANyone not marching in lockstep with you is a "Liberal", which is supposed to be so social disease or something.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
It's my money and I should be the arbiter of where it goes as much as possible.

You et your chance when you vote. Otherwise move to some country without income taxes and change your citizenship. Nothing will change in this country enough to suit you so maybe you should look elsewhere to find happiness.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
Show me where I said all taxes and government services should be abolished.

I guess you would support taxes going to programs that impact your job in a positive way.  
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
What I'm not interested in paying for is welfare and social programs.

What about hunger. You happy to see kids in elementary schools have their 2 meals a day cut out? With all the new casual gun laws you might find taking welfare away from the poor makes you a good target, Better forget that Porsche as it tends to say "Rob Me".

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44):
There are those two people responsible for bringing the kid into the world.

Or maybe one person responsible and the other raped? You're assumption tend to make everyone fall into one group that you turn your nose up at.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44):
Last time I checked unemployment was hovering around 8%, which would correspond to employment of 92%.

And what about the shift in wages and salaries? Isn't that going down in terms of buying power?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 44):
There are plenty of things I cannot afford, so I don't buy them. It's really quite simple.

And then there are people who did all the right things. Studied hard, got their degrees (some even in engineering, worked hard at their jobs for years as demonstrated by promotions and salary increases. Saved for the kids educations and were pretty responsible in the community.

Then the Bush/Cheney Great Recession hit and those folks found themselves out of a job. Might be working now at a fraction of their previous salary - something you should really keep in mind when dreaming about that Porsche.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Sun Jul 07, 2013 10:57 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 45):
There you go again. ANyone not marching in lockstep with you is a "Liberal", which is supposed to be so social disease or something.

The way some of them talk, it certainly seems like a disease. Not as bad as actually being a socialist though.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 45):
You et your chance when you vote.

So tyranny of the majority then. It's my money and it doesn't matter if literally everyone else in the entire country dislikes how I spend it.

You should remember that argument if the majority voters somewhere decide to ban abortions or gay marriage. The people in favor had their say!

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 45):
I guess you would support taxes going to programs that impact your job in a positive way.

Any such programs would be things the government actually needs to do, so it's not a problem.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 45):
What about hunger. You happy to see kids in elementary schools have their 2 meals a day cut out?

I'm pretty indifferent, but more incentive to get kids in school and paying attention won't hurt. Plus the kids won't take the money and go buy Kools instead.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 45):
With all the new casual gun laws you might find taking welfare away from the poor makes you a good target, Better forget that Porsche as it tends to say "Rob Me".

If the money has to go out anyway, I'd much rather pay for say, expanded police departments or a gated community, than paying for welfare and social programs. Presumably, whoever is being hired as officers and such got there by staying out of trouble and maybe getting an education. If the money must be paid regardless, I'd much rather pay someone who has demonstrated some personal responsibility to actually do something rather than pay welfare queens to sit in their trailer.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 45):
Or maybe one person responsible and the other raped? You're assumption tend to make everyone fall into one group that you turn your nose up at.

Go find the percentage of pregnancies that are the result of rape. Idiocy is a far larger factor in pregnancies.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 45):
And what about the shift in wages and salaries? Isn't that going down in terms of buying power?

Americans have to compete. Simply showing up with an American passport doesn't cut it when the rest of the world isn't bombed out or buried under Communism. Actually, people should bear in mind the struggles of such places that suffer from excessive government regulations. Eastern Europe is still trying to catch up to their more capitalistic counterparts in the west.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 45):
And then there are people who did all the right things. Studied hard, got their degrees (some even in engineering, worked hard at their jobs for years as demonstrated by promotions and salary increases. Saved for the kids educations and were pretty responsible in the community.

Then the Bush/Cheney Great Recession hit and those folks found themselves out of a job.

Nobody ever promised the economy would never go bad. Save your money and don't listen when people try to convince you that you can own a house no matter what and you aren't really American until you do.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
StarAC17
Posts: 3400
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:54 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Mon Jul 08, 2013 1:22 am

Quoting photopilot (Reply 6):
I laugh like hell watching the US debate over abortion. While Americans seem to fear any of the Mideast countries becoming Islamist theocracies, a large segment seems to want the Republicans to turn the USA into a Christian theocracy. Real problems that need solving are being pushed aside for the continual fixation on controlling what a woman does with her body. Her body.... her choice!!!!

  

What is the biggest hypocrisy of all of this is that in many of the states that are passing these kind of laws have no problem with capital punishment. Texas executes more than any other state but is one to pass new abortion restriction and want to regulate out the clinics.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 16):
These are the same people who scream about personal responsibility but deny anyone access to the pill, condoms, or the morning after pill, in case of rape.

The ones who oppose both abortion and then oppose sex ed and easy access to contraception are either stupid, hate sex, ashamed that they like it or hadn't had enough about this.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 26):
But personally, I don't pay too much attention to the abortion debate. Personally, I'm smart enough to make sure that it never affects me.

It will never affect you as you don't carry the child.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 26):
But a bit of gender equality might be nice. A man should be able to sign a form, during roughly the same interval in which a woman can have an abortion, certifying that he is willing to pay the cost of an abortion and, if the woman declines to have one performed, the father irrevocably waives all parental rights and is absolved of all responsibilities, financial or otherwise.

Again you don't carry the child and you cannot demand an abortion of the

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 40):
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 26):
Ask all the liberals who think it's moral to take the first third or so of my paycheck (and some want more than that) partially so they can pay their crappy social programs

You tend to forget that part of your taxes that goes to Defense, the VA, law enforcement (like the FBI) CDC and other health related departments, infrastructure development and maintenance (including airports), border patrol and border infrastructure, etc.

Every day you drive to work you are driving on infrastructure paid for by tax dollars. Or do you live close enough to walk to work?

  

Also you would probably not even notice if all the welfare and safety net taxes were taken out of your pay.
Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Mon Jul 08, 2013 2:07 am

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 47):
It will never affect you as you don't carry the child.

...until the woman shows up with a court order for child support payments.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 47):
Again you don't carry the child and you cannot demand an abortion of the

It wouldn't be a demand. Just an opt out of parenthood similar to what women would have.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 47):
Also you would probably not even notice if all the welfare and safety net taxes were taken out of your pay.

I bet I would. It's the entitlement spending that's been growing the last few decades and fueling the current budget woes.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
seb146
Posts: 14056
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: GOP Brings Back Ultrasounds Before Abortion

Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:52 am

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 47):
The ones who oppose both abortion and then oppose sex ed and easy access to contraception are either stupid, hate sex, ashamed that they like it or hadn't had enough about this.

They also call themselves Republicans.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
Most of the people who try that hard to help themselves do

Yes, but with low wage jobs they had to take after all the good jobs they were promised were shipped overseas.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
The problem is that too many don't, and the social policy makes it possible to do so.

Even though they have to provide a source of steady and verifiable income to get food stamps. Like a low wage job they had to take because the good paying jobs they were promised were shipped overseas.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
I don't think I've ever seen them do that.

You, my friend, have been living under a rock. Look at Newt Gingrich.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 41):
Democrats believe that it isn't the government's place to enforce Christian values, "family values" or whatever sort of values you like.

So, keeping people from starving is the same as abortion?
Patriotic and Proud Liberal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: afterburner and 19 guests