Virginia House Passes Bills Restricting Abortion

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rdowns, Feb 18, 2012.

  1. rdowns, Feb 18, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2012

    rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #1
    ****ing disgusting.

    So let's see, a mandate that insurance companies must cover birth control with no co-pays is bad yet a mandate to insert vaginal ultrasonic probes into women as part of a state-ordered effort to dissuade them from terminating pregnancies is OK. Less intrusive government indeed.

    I think we need to mandate anal probes to see if these legislators have brains.


     
  2. likemyorbs macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #2
    I love NJ, even if our governor is a cow. I'm amazed how things like this pass in other parts of the country.
     
  3. Heilage macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #3
    This is absolutely insane. These people are making themselves the enemies of the regular human beings of society.
     
  4. iJohnHenry, Feb 18, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2012

    iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #4
    They are after total control of people, from new "life" 'till you kick the bucket.

    They will accept nothing less.

    Women are not worthy to make these types of decisions, but they, men, are.

    "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?." ;)

    Oh, sorry Jesus, you can't opt out of life either. Against the law. :rolleyes:
     
  5. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
  6. renewed, Feb 18, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2012

    renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #6
    Don't see an issue. I would say aborting a child (no matter the stage) is pretty intrusive on the child's rights and the least a mother could do is see all angles before she decides to abort a child.

    There is an option to view the ultrasound but the woman doesn't have to.

    I think this discourages on the whim abortions and introduces the seriousness that an abortion is to those women who don't realize it until afterwards.

    I think a good addition would be counseling beforehand to find the true cause to an abortion. Why the woman has opted into having one.

    In Texas there is a mandate to view the ultrasound and hear the heartbeat on the books and I think it's a good one. If you can't stand to look at the ultrasound and listen to what you're aborting then you don't know what you are deciding to do. If you can go ahead with the abortion afterwards and your state allows it then it's between you and God from there-on-out.

    We've had this argument before so there is no reason to discuss the different stages and weeks of a pregnancy. To me pregnant is pregnant.
     
  7. Moyank24 macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #7
    Spoken like someone who has had neither.

    I'm seeing a lot of male names supporting these bills. They should all have to submit themselves to these probes before supporting such laws.

    The last thing we need are men legislating what I can and can't do with my body. And what I must have to go through when I make a choice about my body. Enough is enough already.
     
  8. likemyorbs macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #8
    Why is it anyone's business why she wants an abortion? Why should the government be able to force someone to have an ultrasound before an abortion? Your counseling idea is completely out of line, it's no one's business but her own. And do you realize how much that would cost? It would be easier to just go to a more abortion friendly state and have it done.
     
  9. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #9
    How much money is too much money to save lives? I think you're failing to realize that my concern is not only on the woman but also the human that she is deciding to abort as well. I've said this before but I'll say it again for the threads sake:

    In other words the child (human) being aborted has rights too. The child is a human. And as I stated no need to argue, it's been done before, with me about the stages of pregnancy.
     
  10. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #10
    this is the problem:

    [​IMG]

    Link

    While this is for congress, it was probably the same situation for Virginia's house.

    the only people who should most be involved with this are women since it is first and foremost their choice, and their bodies.
     
  11. Moyank24 macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #11
    Exactly. Well said.
     
  12. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #12
    How come when it’s us, it’s an abortion, and when it’s a chicken, it’s an omelette?
     
  13. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #13
    More Teapublican insanity. These people really want to lose their jobs in November.
     
  14. renewed macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #14
    I highly doubt you'll ever have to deal with whether or not to have an abortion.

    And it's not 'Your body' it's the body inside of you that is getting denied rights (awarded rights in this case).

    I applaud these men for standing up for the rights of humans who cannot defend themselves. And if it takes a group of men sans women to do so then so be it.
     
  15. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #15
    You should read the medical professional opinion on the law. They flat out have said the law goes against their oath for best for the patient if they follow the law. Also the courts have ruled against the law. The only reason the doctors currently are required to follow it is because the courts said while they are under appeal they have to follow it but so far 2 courts have ruled against it.

    This law is unconstitutional and in many ways it is basically requiring the women to be raped to get their legal right to abortion. The courts I expect will quickly over turn the law.

    The GOP has turned petty forcing their religious beliefs on everyone which is against constitution. They are doing it in under handed ways.

    This is a crap law and you know it.
     
  16. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #16
    So- should I also be arrested every time I jack off? All those wasted little spermies could be people!

    A microscopic blob of cells is not a baby, and you damn well know it.
     
  17. likemyorbs, Feb 18, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2012

    likemyorbs macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #17
    Yes, and charged with 300 million counts of murder, one for each sperm. And a woman should be arrested every time she ovulates for failing to get pregnant. Every female should be pregnant at all times from her first period all the way until menopause. That's when god says its ok for her to not be pregnant anymore. And no man shall ever ejaculate unless it's inside a vagina without any contraceptive. You're pretty much screwed Lee.
     
  18. HarryPot macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    #18
    And you must also accept that jacking off is a completely different thing.

    A sperm fertilizing an egg is immediately a potential for a future human being. Sperms in the water pipes mean nothing. A fertilized egg has everything it needs to grow up into a human being, a single sperm or a single egg by themselves are nothing.

    --------------

    What I think is stupid about abortion is when people are in favor of it but just until the first 3 months of the pregnancy. Either be in favor or against it. If you are in favor, because you think women should have a say in their body, then you better be in favor of women aborting 8 months old pregnancies.


    As for me, I don't favor abortion. I think it is just the easy way out for having a careless sex life. There's so many ways to prevent unwanted pregnancies that abortion shouldn't be something we need to debate about.

    The government should be more concerned with making people realize having sex also requires being responsible. Because it is not only unwanted pregnancies that come from irresponsible sex, but many STDs.
     
  19. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #19
    I don't have to accept one damn thing. A fertilized egg does not have everything it needs to become a person either. It can't do that on it's own.
     
  20. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #20
    And don't forget menstruating women. Every month they go without getting pregnant, they're wasting an egg which could be a person.
     
  21. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #21
    sorry but that is not the case. I am not a fan of late term abortion unless it is medically necessarily.

    the first 3 months is enough time for a woman to know if she is pregnant and decide. There is a difference between that and late term abortions.

    What is wrong is Conservatives are forcing their religious views on people with what ever laws they can find and get around Roe vs Wade.


    Now say at 24 weeks where the baby can in theory survive with out the mother then yeah it closer to murder so to speak but in the first 3 months sorry but it is still a blob of cells and could not survive with outside of the uterus.

    You are either pro choice or anti choice simple as that.
     
  22. niuniu macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #22
    This has nothing to do with science or rights of a woman or a child. It's ominously religious. Typical good-livin' church going folk screwing the country up with their gobbledygook.
     
  23. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #23
    Sure, add to the guilt by having the poor girl see a miniature "growth" within.

    I sat in the next cubicle when my wife had her hysterectomy, and a priest in the next one was trying to dissuade a young girl from going ahead with her abortion. He had her in tears.

    My, what a charming man you are.

    So YOU say. "Rights" fought for by Religions losing their servant base.

    Save your sperm .. breath. He is a tool of his Religion, nothing more.
     
  24. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #24
    You don't see an issue in forcing a woman by legislation to have something inserted in her vagina that she doesn't need? I wonder how you would react being forced by the government to undergo an unnecessary medical procedure?

    This has been explained to you clearly in other threads. You see it as a black and white issue. For others the "3 months" is a reasonable timeframe given the formation of the nervous system and the likely ability of the foetus to experience it's surroundings/suffer.

    Nobody favours abortion. Some just favour it's access as a harm-minimisation approach.
     
  25. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #25
    A point for you for this term.

    This ultrasound seems to fly in the face of the Doctors' credo, "But first cause no harm."
     

Share This Page