Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With the entire country concerned about the high cost of health care, has anybody addressed who is going to PAY for the implementation of this law? It has to be considered; this is not going to be cheap, and it certainly isn't going to be paid for by women who don't want or need it (and often can't afford it).
I think part of the point of the law is to make it to where some women can't get abortions because they can't afford sonograms.
Liberals don't want you to see the sonogram because they're afraid you'll know what you're looking at.
Women changing their minds after seeing the human life they have created goes counter to the Liberal Ideology that killing babies is good for the world.
That's why they oppose this law.
They oppose it because they do not need nor want the government interfering in a private medical procedure. Funny how the right apsolutley Loves Big Brother when it serves their needs but later claim only the Lefties are For Big Government. The Hypocracy of the right has no bounds.
I was a bit confused also. So when you use the argument its a womans choice and her body you are correct, but when i use the argument I'm wrong? You seem offended i was using this argument
No, I don't understand where you are coming from. You obviously don't like the idea of a woman being able to choose abortion even if the father disagrees, yet, you are now saying you are all for a woman having the final say.
The songram law does not stop the woman and the doctor form choosing abortion
I already knew that and already said that repeated that my statement was suggesting that the need for a SONOGRAM should be between a woman and her doctor. There was never any question, or even an implication, that my statement implied that anything kept her from choosing abortion. All you are trying to do is punish the woman for having sex you did not get to pre-approve.
Maybe using protection and not getting pregnant to begin with would be a good idea. I was not "lucky." I was careful.
So if a woman is diagnosed with cancer when she's pregnant (the most common time to be diagnosed with cancer as a young adult), it's her fault? Yes, you were lucky. You are lucky you have not had serious
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrea3821
1) My husband.
You are lucky he's alive. And healthy. And not a rapist. And employed. And didn't leave you. And any number of things that many women do not have.
Quote:
2) Yes. All women have parents and they all have someone who got them pregnant. Most have friends.
When I was pregnant, I was pregnant by a rapist. Should have had him tag along to help, right? More recently, I spent a year fighting cancer and my parents were 1000 miles away and unable to afford to help me financially or visit. My friends, as many friend groups deal with after college, are all struggling and scattered across the world. You are lucky.
Quote:
3) It's against the law to fire someone b/c they are pregnant. If they don't want to be in a nasty slum, they don't have to get pregnant to begin with, or keep the baby once they have it.If they are in the nasty slum, however, they get welfare, so who knows, fo rthem it might be a toss up.
You are lucky if you had an employer who was understanding about your pregnancy. Don't be so naive to think that people are not let go because they are pregnant, under the guise of layoffs.
Quote:
4) I'm well aware of that. But I can put myself in others' shoes. I just wish they would put themselves in the more responsible shoes of someone like me.
Once again, you are lucky. You were not raped. You have no health issues. You did not have birth control that failed when you are unable to carry or care for a child. I am not going to stop being intimate with my boyfriend (using precaution) for the next 3 years until it is safe for me to carry a child (and any child I ever carry will be high risk and require months of bedrest). If I get pregnant through two kinds of birth control, I will not feel one ounce of regret prioritizing my life and my health.
You are INCREDIBLY LUCKY that you can't even begin to comprehend others' circumstances.
With the entire country concerned about the high cost of health care, has anybody addressed who is going to PAY for the implementation of this law? It has to be considered; this is not going to be cheap, and it certainly isn't going to be paid for by women who don't want or need it (and often can't afford it).
Who will pay?
The anti-choice pro-SMALLER governmentRepugs, of course! They are BIG givers and will fund the unnecessary sonogram, the cost of hospitalization, and the first year's supply of diapers....
And, everyone else....as one procedure causes cost to rise they will rise throughout healthcare.
Repugs think Obama's mandatory health insurance is a terrible thing (can't force THEM to have health insurance)....but they think women should be FORCED by GOVERNMENT to have an unnecessary procedure.
Do they EVER use reason or logic ..ever!!???
How does the law stop a woman and a doctor from making the choice?
Good gawd!
When a person is FORCED by LAW to look at something , their CHOICE is taken away....
Do ya get it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
