Boycott Virginia - new abortion law, new personhood law..... War on woman
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I think you should have a rectal probe before being allowed to take a laxative. To be sodomized without consent is nothing but humiliating. |
Anonymous
|
If it's "just a fetus" and not a baby, why are you so up in arms about seeing a picture?
You can't have it both ways: It's too painful and tortuous for a woman to have to look at that but, wait, it's not really a baby, right, so it's really no big deal? Either abortion is a no big deal medical procedure, it is killing a baby, or it is a fuzzy gray zone. But when you go on and on about how hard it is for women to look at those images, you are undercutting one of the main arguments that helps keep abortion legal. |
Anonymous
|
Comparing the Holocaust to abortion rights?
Wow. Wow. |
Anonymous
I think before 11 weeks or so they use "transvaginal" ultrasound for better accuracy. It's a "probe" that goes inside you. My 8 week dating sono was this. At my NT test at 11w4d, they did both kinds, looking at different things. |
RantingAtheist
Member Offline
Member Offline
Yes, it's too bad some of the same evil motherfuckers are trying as hard as they possibly can to deny access to contraception as well. |
Anonymous
I'm the 13:32 poster. I should clarify that I whole-heartedly oppose the legislation that is the original subject of the thread. I agree that it's a slippery slope. I also agree that, until we can come up with some acceptable, reasonable solution (and I don't see one on the horizon), abortion should be legal and obstacle-free for women. I still feel that it's ending a life, but if I have to choose between the rights of the pregnant woman and the rights of the fetus she's carrying (a horrible choice to have to make), then I choose the woman. |
Anonymous
It's not separate. It's a symbiant of a particular host that cannot be removed from the host and survive. A two month old cant be cared for by someone else. It is not dependent on the host, it's just dependent. |
Anonymous
One individual's rights end where the other's begin. So you can't smoke in a public place because others have to breathe it. You may have to pay more in taxes to offset the health costs of twinkies an beer. You can drive whatever you want, but the government will reward you with tax breaks or HOV use if you reduce the pollution that everyone has to breathe. The government also tells me where to shit. I can't poop in my yard, because the sewage might spread disease. That's a legitimate controlling role for the government because my actions in that scenario code affect others in society. In the case of abortion, we have to weight the woman's rights against that of the fetus. So far the majority consensus is that the woman's right to control her own body trumps the fetus's rights. Whether you agree with that or not: If you are a conservative, you should be very worried about a regime that thinks it's OK to issue mandates about what happens between a citizen and their doctor. |
RantingAtheist
Member Offline
Member Offline
Probably going to need an example of this. You hear a lot of moaning about this stuff from the right, but not a whole lot of substance. Your side is the one that's the party of curtailing freedom. Own it. |
Anonymous
3 Third trimester babies can survive outside of the mother's body. If it boils down to ability to live separate from the womb, then that falls apart in the realm of third trimester abortions. |
Anonymous
Excellent points. |
Anonymous
Using that logic life begins at age 16 when they can work on their own and hold down a job. |
Anonymous
Here's why I'm up in arms about a woman being forced to look at a picture (and it being noted in her file if she refuses to look at it - for whatever purpose later). Insisting on an ultrasound that has no medical value, followed by insisting that a woman look at the picture and listen to the heartbeat if they can find one devalues the woman's choice in the matter. If I decide that I want to get an abortion, that's my decision. I've made my choice. Showing me an ultrasound picture is an attempt to manipulate me while I'm already in a vulnerable emotional state - not because seeing the picture itself is so traumatic but because not a single woman I know who has terminated a pregnancy, for whatever reason, made that choice lightly or easily. The assumption that all my thought processes will go right out the window with an ultrasound photo, that I just need more convincing to see it your way invalidates my freedom of choice. The picture is not the issue. The manipulative tactics are. I've posted several times on this thread and I never said it was not a big deal. Of course it's a big deal. But all these tactics to "educate" women about their "options" fall on dead ears when the tactics really serve only to disrespect a woman's right to make her own medical decisions. |
Anonymous
It's not merely a quetion of survivability. It's a question of whether another human has a right to reside in you. Or do you have the right to remove it. Whatever the consequences to the human being removed. |
Anonymous
That is untrue and mis-information guided by the recent uproar of the government mandating Catholics institutions to provide mandatory contraceptives. Most religious groups actually support birth control and teach it in their marriage classes as a means to plan a family. You are trying to drum up an issue with making parallels to the wrong groups. FYI Virginia legislature isn't majority catholic. |