Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-16-2012, 05:20 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,851,724 times
Reputation: 4585

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by chielgirl View Post
Then I wouldn't have been born.
Duh, that's not rocket science.

Most people shouldn't breed to begin with.
I think there is a lot of evidence that supports that supports you, on this forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-16-2012, 05:35 AM
 
994 posts, read 724,879 times
Reputation: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckynumber4 View Post
Yeah thanks for the advice but I've gotten pretty far without getting pregnant so obviously, I've been doing fine without your great words of wisdom

This law is just stupid. Showing women an ultrasound is supposed to be "inform" them of what? That not getting an abortion would result in a baby? Because, I'm pretty sure that's why they are getting the abortion.
Don't be deliberately obtuse. If there wasn't any purpose to the ultrasound, then anti-life people wouldn't fight against it so hard. If they announced you had to have an extra ultrasound from now on before having an appendectomy would there be a discussion about it here? Of course not. You liberals see it as a threat to abortion on demand or you wouldn't bother commenting on it. So don't pretend you're completely mystified about the whole thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 05:42 AM
 
Location: Vermont
11,759 posts, read 14,650,345 times
Reputation: 18528
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
I think social conservative is a really deceptive phase, because there's nothing conservative about asking the government to step in to regulate and control personal behavior, as long as you're not harming others. Real conservatives are about less government--not more. That doesn't mean no government--the line most moderates draw is to always try the free market or individual responsibility approach first, but if that approach is harming others or creating a situation that's unfair, it's time for government to step in to even things out and create rules and order. It's kind of a "let common sense prevail" approach. Does that make sense?
Maybe, but that's not what a conservative is.

We see what conservatives want, and with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul as examples, they want to outlaw not only abortion but also contraception, gay sex, free expression relating to sex, drugs (especially the drugs favored by blacks and other minorities),equal rights for women and minorities, holding corporations accountable for the harms and costs they impose on society, and all kinds of other things that are the diametric opposite of "let[ting] common sense prevail".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 05:42 AM
 
10,092 posts, read 8,203,345 times
Reputation: 3411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kkaos2 View Post
Don't be deliberately obtuse. If there wasn't any purpose to the ultrasound, then anti-life people wouldn't fight against it so hard. If they announced you had to have an extra ultrasound from now on before having an appendectomy would there be a discussion about it here? Of course not. You liberals see it as a threat to abortion on demand or you wouldn't bother commenting on it. So don't pretend you're completely mystified about the whole thing.
I think you'd better look in the mirror as far as being obtuse.

If they were requiring a medically unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound before you had an appendectomy, EVERYONE, including the people who passed this bill, would be screaming that we lived in a dictatorship. I'm not a liberal, and I'm moderately pro life. A regular ultra sound isn't painful or invasive--they could have made that choice if the purpose was actually to show the mother the baby before the abortion, to give her time to make sure she wanted to make that choice. This procedure shows less, and it's invasive and painful. The only reason to use a transvaginal ultra sound is to punish the women for having an abortion. That's what scares the heck out of me, and that's where you nuts are going to lose a whole lot of women, including republican women, over issues like this. It is a big deal--a VERY big deal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 05:45 AM
 
10,092 posts, read 8,203,345 times
Reputation: 3411
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmccullough View Post
Maybe, but that's not what a conservative is.

We see what conservatives want, and with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul as examples, they want to outlaw not only abortion but also contraception, gay sex, free expression relating to sex, drugs (especially the drugs favored by blacks and other minorities),equal rights for women and minorities, holding corporations accountable for the harms and costs they impose on society, and all kinds of other things that are the diametric opposite of "let[ting] common sense prevail".
My point is that there's nothing conservative (seeking stability and slow change) about those positions--they're radical and extremist. Just because they call themselves conservatives doesn't make it so. That's the problem, and that's why the GOP is ripping itself to shreds right now--it's a fight between the crazy radicals, the moderates, and the corporate guys.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 05:46 AM
 
Location: Earth
24,620 posts, read 28,277,661 times
Reputation: 11416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kkaos2 View Post
Don't be deliberately obtuse. If there wasn't any purpose to the ultrasound, then anti-life people wouldn't fight against it so hard. If they announced you had to have an extra ultrasound from now on before having an appendectomy would there be a discussion about it here? Of course not. You liberals see it as a threat to abortion on demand or you wouldn't bother commenting on it. So don't pretend you're completely mystified about the whole thing.
The whole point is that you don't.
Are you missing the irony of your comment "don't be deliberately obtuse."
I would think not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 05:49 AM
 
10,092 posts, read 8,203,345 times
Reputation: 3411
Quote:
Originally Posted by chielgirl View Post
The whole point is that you don't.
Are you missing the irony of your comment "don't be deliberately obtuse."
I would think not.
The part that gets me--some of these same people were sure that the government was going to kill grandma by setting up a process where doctors had a conversation with elderly patients about their end of life wishes. Now they think it's ok to MANDATE an invasive, unnecessary medical procedure just because they want it done? Are they serious? Really?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 06:27 AM
 
12,905 posts, read 15,656,633 times
Reputation: 9394
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
The part that gets me--some of these same people were sure that the government was going to kill grandma by setting up a process where doctors had a conversation with elderly patients about their end of life wishes. Now they think it's ok to MANDATE an invasive, unnecessary medical procedure just because they want it done? Are they serious? Really?

Yes, they are seriously hypocrites.

To the poster above who asked if someone was being obtuse: I don't argue that an ultrasound is required before an abortion. After doing my own research last night, I did read that it's quite common that the performing doctor does a very quick, in-office ultrasound to view the uterus before the procedure. So, I don't think anyone is arguing that, when required by a physician who is performing a procedure, we are all OK with this.

To mandate that all women will have a transvaginal ultrasound, to hell with what a PHYSICIAN thinks, is nuts. Really, really think about this. I know you are cheering inside because you feel that your team has won a touchdown, but think long and hard about what they, the government, have mandated will happen. Because one day, it is going to be about something that YOU might feel is invasive or infringes on your body or rights in some way when it is not their job, but only your doctor's, to make that kind of call. This type of ultrasound serves no purpose than to degrade the pregnant female. And I know it's hard to believe, but these procedure will be performed on those women who didn't get pregant at a party. There will be rape victims, incest victims, and women who have severely deformed fetuses being subjected to this vaginal penetration. Oh but let me not forget what Delegate Marshall of Virginia stated: some incest victims consented to it. Essentially he doesn't care.

I think they need to take a step back and just require a regular ultrasound.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 06:42 AM
 
5,391 posts, read 7,228,906 times
Reputation: 2857
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
My point is that there's nothing conservative (seeking stability and slow change) about those positions--they're radical and extremist. Just because they call themselves conservatives doesn't make it so. That's the problem, and that's why the GOP is ripping itself to shreds right now--it's a fight between the crazy radicals, the moderates, and the corporate guys.
You can argue whether or not they're conservative, but the fact is, Republicans in Virginia (and I suspect, other states, especially in the South) have pursued similar socially conservative policies for many years, centered around their version of Christian morality. It's nothing new. The positions sound extreme to some of us, but these legislators are not in the extreme in their party, they are pretty much in the norm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 07:21 AM
 
16,431 posts, read 22,194,526 times
Reputation: 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
I think there is a lot of evidence that supports that supports you, on this forum.
And all this time I thought we were friends...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:18 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top