Mandating that a woman see the ultra-sound before abortion (ethic, elect, money)
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.
In my opinion while the anti-choice crowd obfuscates it being anti-choice comes down to holding at least one of 2 basic assumptions (in bold).
First.
Women are property. This is the kind of anti-choicer who insists on paternal consent to abortion even in cases of rape.
Second, and this is the one at play here.
Women are intellectually feeble. The only reason you would want to force a woman to see an ultrasound is because you don't think she is capable of deciding which information she needs to make a decision regarding her pregnancy on her own.
Sounds more like women using men for fun, then throwing away the consequences of their action - pretending it never happened. It did, and you created a life, because you are irresponsible. Be a grownup and at least be willing to look the baby in the face, before you tear it limb from limb.
If welfare wasn't available, we wouldn't even be having these discussions.
Keep gov't out of it, stand on your own if your so gung ho on womens rights. Show us how independent you really are.
You know, you just keep asking the same question, with a little wording variation, over and over and over.
We could go on all night, with me giving the same answer over and over, but I think I'm going to watch Dexter and go to bed.
The problem for the pro-abortion crowd is what George Orwell described as double-think.
To contend that a fetus is not a person and that ending his or her life is not homicide is incompatible with the need to suppress information about the fetus' state of development and alternatives to abortion. If it is indeed a "glob of tissues", why would a woman viewing an ultrasound image of this "glob of tissues" not continue with her plans to have the "glob of tissues" in question removed from her body before the "glob of tissues" organizes itself into a human?
The point to lying is to deceive another person, but this is impossible when both parties know the truth and the person being lied to knows the lair in question is lying at the time they lie. Trust me on this one. I've sold used cars for a living and I know all about lying and being called on it.
We all know the same things because they are common sense. I was a failure as a used car salesman and fired from my job, but not before receiving intensive sales training. The training I received was supposed to keep what would become a normal and logical conversation about the price of vehicle from happening. If a customer asked a question, I was given the answer in advance and was expected to recite the canned reply on queue then immediately ask a question of my own to prevent a logical follow up question. This second diversionary question was especially important since the answers given to the original questions were always illogical.
For example...
Customer: "Why is the price of the vehicle so high?"
Salesperson: "Have you seen the price of new cars these days?" (without hesitation) "Is the vehicle you're buying for you or someone else?"
So now the situation is one in which the pro-abortion crowd must cling to their slogans and propaganda because the facts are against them. "Stay off price" is the rule for used car salesmen. For abortion supporters, "stay off facts" would be the rule, so we get lots of name calling, rationalizing and diversionary questions instead of a discussion of the facts.
A fetus is a person. It becomes a new person at the moment of conception when a new biological process begins. This new living entity has its own unique DNA which is not the father's and not the mother's. It is his or her own. There is no counter for this argument beyond merirtless rationalizations about what imagined transformative events must take place before personhood is bestowed.
So yeah, we know your lying, and you know that we know you're lying.
Before ultrasounds, doctors were able to inform a woman of the surgical procedure she was about to undergo. A picture of a fetus isn't the procedure, rather the cause for the procedure.
I think all women already know what a fetus looks like.
Women of all races are given the right to choose abortion......how is that practicing eugenics?
Do you want to ban women of certain races the right to choose? or ALL women? So much for your argument. FAIL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Kim
Then it can't hurt.
Afraid they will change their minds?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinebar
No! Because forcing them to look at a picture or hear the heartbeat is an attempt to make an already difficult situation even more so. Just another right wing, christian attempt at controlling a woman's body.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Already difficult?
That's such a puzzling statement.
What harm could come from informing a woman about the surgical procedure she is about to undergo?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
A woman knows there is a fetus in her uterus that she does not want there. She knows what a fetus is and what it looks like.
She knows the doctor is going to remove it through her vagina.
That is all she needs to know.
If she wants to see pictures, etc., she is FREE to ask to see them.....as it should be.
You know.....FREEDOM, CHOICE.
I have had back and foot surgery....did I ask to see footage of a surgery like the one I was about to undergo? NO! I did not need or want to see it.
Should I have been FORCDED to watch it before I was allowed to have the surgery? NO!
"I think all women already know what a fetus looks like."
Right, but do they know what their fetus looks like?
"You know.....FREEDOM, CHOICE."
You should know freedom is incompatible with ignorance and it can never exist in the absence of accountability.
Most woman don't need to see a sonogram to know whats going on. Some have already had children and are intimately familiar with the whole process. I don't see the point unless someone is on the fence and wants to have one before deciding. That's fine. But to assume everyone has to have one is beyond logical and I think the folks supporting this know it...which is why we get the "are you afraid they will change their minds?" type of arguments. The only possible reaction to knowing you are wrong is being stupid on top of it.
In this case, they only requirement was to look at what you were about to do.
So you think women are really, really stupid? Or do you just want to control what others do with their bodies?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earlyretired
Dont expect people that don't want to be involved have anything to do with it through taxes or insurance...
They're not funded by taxes. Duh.
And if my insurance authorizes it, it's none of your business, now is it?
After all, insurance covers the little blue pill while not covering birth control in many cases.
You have no problem paying for social services to ensure that all people are cared for, right? Or is it simply a matter of control over a woman's body?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Kim
In this case, they just want them to look at a picture and think about it some more.
But to your point, Planned Parenthood was founded by a eugenicist who desired to rid the world of "undesirables."
So who's on the icky side of abortion?
It's none of your business and thinking that women are too f-ing stupid is more than insulting. It's not your call to cause any one further distress.
Don't want an abortion, don't have one.
It's not up to you to make any decision for any woman.
Last edited by chielgirl; 10-26-2011 at 03:05 AM..
This kind of debate on abortion all comes down to the premise that women are incapable of making their own decisions without special assistance from the state.
Yet the state gives them special permission to kill their child specifically because they have acted irresponsibly and are viewed by the state as incapable of not getting knocked up.
The fact of the matter is with no other right is their this much interference. There is no law that requires voters to read information about candidates provided by the state, there is no law that mandates state approved pre-marital counseling, there is no law that requires you study about other countries before you may attain a passport. It is only with the right to control reproduction that these kind of odious requirements are even considered.
Five of the nine justices on the court at the time listened to perjured testimony then concluded that a select group of individuals were no longer persons. Same court, different group...same conclusion.
If at the moment a woman choses to copulate she does not assume the responsibility to care for the life she creates by copulating, at what point does she assume this responsibility?
We know that men are required to provide financial support for children they create under such circumstances whether they intended to conceive or not. Are women a special class of people who are excused from adult responsibilities because of their sex?
Yet the state gives them special permission to kill their child specifically because they have acted irresponsibly and are viewed by the state as incapable of not getting knocked up.
What special permission is needed? I'm pretty sure, if left to our own devices, women will still end unwanted pregnancies.
Quote:
If at the moment a woman choses to copulate she does not assume the responsibility to care for the life she creates by copulating, at what point does she assume this responsibility?
Hahahaha. Copulating assumes nothing but copulation. Unless someone is actively trying to have a child men would never ever get to have sex and that's a world we have never and will never live in. The point she takes responsibility is when she acts...one way or the other. What you MEAN is at what point does she accept that she will carry and give birth? The answer is "when she wants to". I realize that makes you nuts but that's the way it is.
I view it as informed consent, who could be against that?
the doctors talk to the patient before the abortion and tell them what to expect. they are already informed. why should she incur another expense for something that isn't even medically necessary?
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper
If she doesn't want to get pregnant, why is she having unprotected sex? What ever happened to personal responsibility? You can't get pregnant without a mans sperm, so how come he doesn't get any say about this? It's as much his child as it is yours.
BC does fail. abortion IS talking personal responsibility. the man should have a say, but it is her choice, she is the one that has to carry and give birth not the man
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper
What are you so afraid of - they might change their minds?
not at all, that is why they call it choice. women who go to have an abortion have already made their choice. trying to guilt them into changing their minds with an expensive unnecessary test is wrong
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.
