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.
Ultimately its not a mutual decision. Man was an abortion woman does not baby is born.
Man wants baby woman does not baby is aborted. Man and woman want baby aborted woman has to do it and man should have to view sonogram in Texass.
man and woman wants baby , woman has to do it,
So in any scenario it still ultimately the womans choice
And neither TEXASS or any other state needs to stick their noses into what is a woman's choice.
No, it can't.......not until well after most abortions are performed. By the time they can feel pain, only medically necessary abortions are performed....and then pain control should be administered.
So, I guess those women would view it as harrassment if they were forced to.
14% of the women who did view the sonograms did NOT view it as a positive experience.
THAT is why it should be a CHOICE, left up to the woman involved, period.
{Reading is fundamental.}
They don't have to look at the screen, either. Big whoop. It is less invasive than the procedure to kill the life inside...btw, I do not know firsthand but I imagine the abortion is ultrasound-guided.
You do realize that if federal courts continue to support this kind of state law, that a state could then decide that everytime someone comes in for flu like symptoms, that they be required to get any other exam or medical procedure the state deems "necessary"?
For instance, you go to your doctor with a mole on your left arm, but now because state law mandates it, you've got to have your colon examined. Just following the rules.
People never think of the full ramifications of these laws before passing them.
I support taxpayer funded birth control education....correct use of BC will LOWER the amount of abortions that are done. Less unintended pregnancies=less abortions. DUH!
There is NO method of birth control that is 100% effective, not even sterilization.....that is why we need abortion as an option.
And, if a woman cannot afford an abortion, how in the hell can she afford a child? That is why I am in favor of tax funded abortion.
You must be for MORE abortions, why else would you want to deny people access to free birth control education? Absolutely disgusting.
See how that works? I can do it too!
What is disgusting is that pro-abortionists advocate killing the life over putting the baby up for adoption so it can have a loving home. And don't feed me crap about how there are so many kids in foster care. As someone who has looked into domestic adoption of an infant, I can say the waiting lists are a mile long. The ones who end up in foster care are born to parents who are screwups but decide they want to try to be a parent an get their welfare checks and end up getting the kid(s) taken away. Many of these are minorities, and statistically speaking, there are fewer black adoptive parents than white ones, so they end up in the system.
So, you can't imagine that a husband and wife, who already have as many children as they can afford, would not discuss an 'unwanted' pregnancy and if it should be aborted or not? And if they chose abortion, the father does not have to view the fetus?
Or is it your contention that ONLY wild single women (whores and prostitutes, in your mind probably) get abortions?
The vast majority of women getting abortions are single and/or young. Married couples who already feel they have enough children generally take measures to ensure they do not get pregnant again to begin with, and are less likely to abort if it did happen.
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.