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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:03 PM
 
25,445 posts, read 9,809,749 times
Reputation: 15337

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
Oh so what ? If a woman is thinking of consenting to an abortion, then she's already agreeing to a Dr. shoving plenty of instruments up in there.
This is exactly the kind of response I would expect from someone who hasn't a clue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:06 PM
 
16,376 posts, read 22,490,585 times
Reputation: 14398
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
They didn't say the woman couldn't have the abortion. However, I think there will be all sorts of problems with this because forcing a woman to have a vaginal ultrasound would be tantamount to rape.
They are not forcing the woman to have an ultrasound. In fact, they are hoping she doesn't have the ultrasound. The legislature is using the ultrasound as way to reduce the number of women that get abortions. Many women won't have the extra money for an ultrasound so they'll have the baby instead. If they're that poor that an ultrasound is too expensive, then they'll probably be on various forms of welfare once the baby is born, and actually for the birth as well. Tens of thousands of dollars cost to the state taxpayers if the mother and child are on welfare for awhile.

Or they are hoping if the woman has the ultrasound, that she'll change her mind and decide to keep the baby after having the ultrasound.

Some progressive large corporations that are looking to add new facilities in new locations might cross KY off their list due to the backwards laws of the state.

Wonder how many young people leave KY each year once they finish college. Brain drain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:06 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,211,524 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
Oh so what ? If a woman is thinking of consenting to an abortion, then she's already agreeing to a Dr. shoving plenty of instruments up in there.
Or being prescribed a couple of pills that are taken orally. No "shoving" anything in there needed for many abortions.

Plus consent to one medical procedure doesn't mean that you consent to anything but that one medical procedure. If I have a part of my liver removed the doctor can't just decide to remove part of my lung too just since he already taking parts of organs anyways. The government can not require me to have a non medically necessary medical procedure or even a necessary medical procedure. I can even refuse tests my doctor wants me to have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:07 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,876,419 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
This is exactly the kind of response I would expect from someone who hasn't a clue.
You are trying to selectively play the consent card when the woman is already consenting to invasive medical examinations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:08 PM
 
25,445 posts, read 9,809,749 times
Reputation: 15337
Quote:
Originally Posted by sware2cod View Post
They are not forcing the woman to have an ultrasound. In fact, they are hoping she doesn't have the ultrasound. The legislature is using the ultrasound as way to reduce the number of women that get abortions. Many women won't have the extra money for an ultrasound so they'll have the baby instead. If they're that poor that an ultrasound is too expensive, then they'll probably be on various forms of welfare once the baby is born, and actually for the birth as well. Tens of thousands of dollars cost to the state taxpayers if the mother and child are on welfare for awhile.



Or they are hoping if the woman has the ultrasound, that she'll change her mind and decide to keep the baby after having the ultrasound.



Some progressive large corporations that are looking to add new facilities in new locations might cross KY off their list due to the backwards laws of the state.



Wonder how many young people leave KY each year once they finish college. Brain drain.
I see women leaving these ignorant states in the future. Who wants to put up with such nonsense?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:08 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
16,911 posts, read 10,594,283 times
Reputation: 16439
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
You are trying to selectively play the consent card when the woman is already consenting to invasive medical examinations.
Yup. The ultrasound is part of the abortion. If you consent to one you consent to the other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:11 PM
 
19,642 posts, read 12,231,401 times
Reputation: 26435
This is a little over the top. They could give the woman a pamphlet explaining the fetus has a heartbeat, showing it's approximate size, since they think women are too ignorant to know what a fetus is. No need for this procedure that should be limited to use for medical reasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:11 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,211,524 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
You are trying to selectively play the consent card when the woman is already consenting to invasive medical examinations.
How is peeing in a cup to determine if you are pregnant, and taking a couple of pills for an early abortion invasive?

Consent to one action doesn't mean consent to any and all actions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:12 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,876,419 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Or being prescribed a couple of pills that are taken orally. No "shoving" anything in there needed for many abortions.

Plus consent to one medical procedure doesn't mean that you consent to anything but that one medical procedure. If I have a part of my liver removed the doctor can't just decide to remove part of my lung too just since he already taking parts of organs anyways. The government can not require me to have a non medically necessary medical procedure or even a necessary medical procedure. I can even refuse tests my doctor wants me to have.
I don't think you can take abortion pills as late as a heartbeat but maybe. There is no single step in most any medical procedure. You agree to a medical procedure then a whole hosts of steps and things are done that you have no forehand knowledge of and may not have wanted to do. This is just changing or adding a step in the procedure, but adding it up front to be better informed if you want to go through all the steps of the procedure..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2019, 12:13 PM
 
19,724 posts, read 10,128,243 times
Reputation: 13091
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
Well I am for doctors being required to provide more information to patients instead of the assembly line of the Dr. rushing you to do a life altering procedure because he's a Dr. and wants to make more money.
You have no clue what you are talking about. They get counseling first. There is no rush to do anything.
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 11:53 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