Mandating that a woman see the ultra-sound before abortion (legal, abortions, government)

[ray1945]

Originally Posted by oz in SC

What does viability of the fetus have to do with the woman's right to her own body?

Forget what the law states....

Explain why a woman loses her right to choose at a certain date and time.

I know this might be difficult due to the illogical nature of being pro abortion but give it a go.

You do realise you are stating that others DO have the right to tell a woman what she can do with her own body right?
That is your position.

At the point of viability, two human bodies are now in question. Under most circumstances, neither can be allowed to destroy the other.

See, that wasn't hard, was it??

[Cinebar]

Originally Posted by Annie53

Please do some research so you don't continue to make a fool of yourself.

Good luck with that.

[oz in SC]

Originally Posted by Annie53

Good grief....will you get off of it?

Pro-choicers agree with the abortion restrictions that are in place now.....no more restrictions are necessary. We have told you that over and over and over.....yet you still refuse to acknowledge it.

Women that have third tri-mester abortions don't have them because they simply changed their minds. Women that have third tri-mester abortions have them because there are serious medical complications.

Women that have third tri-mester abortions want a baby.....but they do not want to die or they do not want to bring a seriously malformed baby into the world just so it can suffer in agony and then die.

Please do some research so you don't continue to make a fool of yourself. You obviously do not know what you are talking about and everyone here knows it.

Can you THINK for yourself on this for a moment?
Leave the law and how it is written out of it.
WHY is it okay to restrict a woman's right to choose at a certain date?
How can it be okay to do so if you do truly believe it is her body and her choice to make?
If you do truly believe it is only her choice some of the time,then you don't really believe it is her right to choose,but the governments.

What might be the problem of so many is their inability to think beyond what is the law,and what is legal...but then a LOT of people cannot think past that point to the 'why and how' of a subject.They do not possess the sense to ask why....

[oz in SC]

Originally Posted by ray1945

At the point of viability, two human bodies are now in question. Under most circumstances, neither can be allowed to destroy the other.

See, that wasn't hard, was it??

There were always two humans involved.

Did you mean there were now two persons?

As to viability,it now is around 24 weeks gestation,meaning well into the second trimester,and the earliest was at less than 22 weeks...

So should abortions be restricted further using your logic?

And as to the legal viability point-

on account of technological developments between 1973 and 1992, viability itself was legally dissociated from the hard line of 28 weeks, leaving the point at which "undue burdens" were permissible variable depending on the technology of the time and the judgment of the state legislatures

Fetal viability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Aganusn]

Originally Posted by SourD

Maybe the ho should check HER bank statement before having unprotected sex or foregoing BC to make sure SHE can afford the child if she gets pregnant.

And if she is the one percent that gets pregnant on birth control? Or happens to have a condom break at the wrong moment inside her?

[SourD]

Originally Posted by Aganusn

And if she is the one percent that gets pregnant on birth control? Or happens to have a condom break at the wrong moment inside her?

Oh wow, a whole one percent! You know as well as I do that those situations are rare. What about the other 99%?

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by oz in SC

Can you THINK for yourself on this for a moment?
Leave the law and how it is written out of it.
WHY is it okay to restrict a woman's right to choose at a certain date?
How can it be okay to do so if you do truly believe it is her body and her choice to make?
If you do truly believe it is only her choice some of the time,then you don't really believe it is her right to choose,but the governments.

What might be the problem of so many is their inability to think beyond what is the law,and what is legal...but then a LOT of people cannot think past that point to the 'why and how' of a subject.They do not possess the sense to ask why....

We have told you the why.....viability. Which just happens to match up with what the laws state......no restrictions unitl the third tri-mester.....and by then it really doesn't matter because women in the third tri-mester do not abort just because they change their minds.....as I pointed out to you earlier.

Women do not ask for abortions in the third tri-mester without good reason.....women abort in the third tri-mester because they cannot complete the pregnancy without dying or putting a newborn through unnecessary torture....just so it can die.

That is why pro-choicers agree with the government restrictions during the third tri-mester......women do not ask for third tri-mester abortions without a valid medical reason anyway. Your contention that women ask for third tri-mester abortions just because they change their minds is bogus.....and you just don't want to admit it.

[oz in SC]

Originally Posted by Annie53

We have told you the why.....viability. Which just happens to match up with what the laws state......no restrictions unitl the third tri-mester.....and by then it really doesn't matter because women in the third tri-mester do not abort just because they change their minds.....as I pointed out to you earlier.

Sigh,the law again....
Anyway,the law does NOT state that at all....
Women should be free to do what they want with their bodies,that is the basis of your position.
Now you think legislators know better....

Women do not ask for abortions in the third tri-mester without good reason.....women abort in the third tri-mester because they cannot complete the pregnancy without dying or putting a newborn through unnecessary torture....just so it can die.

If you actually believe it is solely the woman's choice,you cannot put restrictions upon what she can choose...because you then do NOT believe it is her choice to make,you think government knows better.

That is why pro-choicers agree with the government restrictions during the third tri-mester......women do not ask for third tri-mester abortions without a valid medical reason anyway. Your contention that women ask for third tri-mester abortions just because they change their minds is bogus.....and you just don't want to admit it.

So you DO support restrictions....but only when you agree with the reasons...

And you don't find that the least hypocritical?

A group of lawmakers,mainly men,deciding when a woman has the right to choose...

I have NEVER given ANY reason why a woman should be allowed to choose,in fact IF I believed it was a right,there would be no restrictions upon it.

What you believe is women have PERMISSION to have an abortion,based upon society's interests.

[oz in SC]

To those who support the idea of viability of the fetus restricting a woman's 'right' to choose.

Do you then believe that as medical advances are made and viability is increased,then abortions should be further restricted?

Because logically speaking,you would have to believe this way.

So right now,viability stands at 24 weeks gestation,although babies have lived at less than 22 weeks,meaning halfway through the pregnancy.

Logically,that would mean restricting abortion to before that time.

Is that your position?

If not,what is your reasoning?
Thanks.

[Arus]

Originally Posted by Annie53

Your contention that women ask for third tri-mester abortions just because they change their minds is bogus.....and you just don't want to admit it.

his entire stance is bogus.