Texas liberals shamefully protest Perry's measures to safeguard women's health

The topic is the sanctity of life, no? The topic does not exist in a vacuum, the choice of abortion is a response to the burden of child care and a result of uninformed sex. You can address the issue at it's cause rather than continually hashing the variable views of the morality or legality. If you really care about the fetus, commit to supporting it.

If you just care about the religious voter, keep doing the same old thing of stigmatising a legal act.

 

And let the 13 hours of Wendy Davis begin...

 

Yup, they almost successfully suspended the rules yesterday, while Van de Putte was at her father's wake, but Lucio (a pro life D), said he wouldn't vote for it if Van de Putte was not given a chance to make it to the Capitol. I guess he didn't feel like she was given enough time, although SEVERAL hours passed by after his statement (she is in SA). So that measure failed and they had to wait the 24 hours.

These bills were not intended to pass in the first place. Most everyone thought they would die in the House (as they did in the regular session). Also, Perry likely purposefully kept abortion off the call until half of the special was already over. They knew full well they were setting up the Ds to kill the bill, they just want it to LOOK like they tried.

Regardless, thanks to their shenanigans, I get to enjoy 13 friggin' hours of that awful voice.

As for Perry calling another special, unlikely. His first grandson was either just born or is due very soon, he didn't want to call the first special because of this, he likely won't call another. Also, buzz around the Capitol is that he isn't running for Gov and will likely tout another Presidential bid. Dewhurst made comments to the contrary saying that if he is reading Perry right, he expects another special, but that was likely to put pressure on the House that either way these bills were going to be heard.

 

So it's established that your proposal for a "baby's choice" is impossible with regards to both abortion and infanticide. That just means your argument is invalid, not that there's no other difference between abortion and infanticide.

 

“Actually, mankind has existed for a pretty long time without anyone ever having to give a sex ed lesson to anybody. And now we feel like, oh gosh people are too stupid unless we force them to sit and listen to instructions. It is just incredible,” Gohmert said. “For heaven’s sake, let the kids be innocent.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/louie-gohmert-sex-education-93326.html?ml=la

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ngiJhmoFKkw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Get em' Deuell!

 

I give you the moron that proposed this bill.


http://thinkprogress.org/health/201...s-rape-kits-are-a-form-of-abortion/?mobile=wt

When Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, called for an exemption for women who were victims of rape and incest, Rep. Jody Laubenberg, R-Parker, explained why she felt it was unnecessary.

“In the emergency room they have what’s called rape kits where a woman can get cleaned out,” she said, comparing the procedure to an abortion. “The woman had five months to make that decision, at this point we are looking at a baby that is very far along in its development.”

The remark about rape kits, which is not accurate, sparked widespread ridicule on social media sites. Laubenberg, who has difficulty debating bills, then simply rejected all proposed changes to her bill without speaking until the end of the debate.

 

She is the author of HB 60, and while it is identical, we are debating SB 5, authored by Hegar and co authored by 8 other senators (2 of them women, and supported in committee by a democrat female senator).

That doesn't excuse her comments, or her lack of information on the subject, but this bill was originally proposed in the Senate, not the House.

 

Well it says debate during amendment 2 of SB 5. Apparently a woman raped in El Paso would have to drive to San Antonio to get an abortion but she says they can get a rape kit at an emergency room and get cleaned out. I think maybe there should be a general science exam for some of these nuts to be able to run for office.

<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/18331wy8GxE?hl=en_US&amp;version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/18331wy8GxE?hl=en_US&amp;version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

 

Like I said, doesn't excuse her ignorant comment, but she isn't the author of SB 5.

You don't need to link the video, I watched it live lol. Trust me, all of our eyes and jaws were wiiiiiide open. I think I actually gave myself a concussion when my head hit my desk. haha...as for science exams. Reps are not experts on 99% of the bills they sponsor. They are advised by experts. Doctors, business leaders, education leaders, etc., depending on the nature of the bill.

I am not familiar with the occupations of most House members, but I know that 3 of the Senate co-sponsors are doctors.

Politicians say stupid things all the time, and they pay for them in elections. Sometimes it's ignorance, sometimes it is the fact that they are mentally and physically exhausted, ESPECIALLY in the House. They generally go late into the night. Sometimes they just try to think of things to respond with and don't actually think before they speak. It happens on both sides of the aisle, see the "Uncle Thomas" by a Democrat congressman (Winkler - Minnesota) comment after the VRA decision. He, a history major and Harvard Law grad, claims he was not aware it was a racial epithet.

 

There's no legislation tied to his lack of awareness. It's not people saying stupid things that's at issue, it's people creating laws based on ignorance. If they spent more time reading the science instead of passing around Bible leaflets maybe they wouldn't sound so damn stupid.

 

Getting rid of abortion clinics does as much to prevent abortions/unwanted pregnancies as building prisons does to prevent crime/violence.

 

No, it doesn't. The only parallel you've drawn between abortion and infanticide is that your argument doesn't make sense in either case. You're the only one who said that the baby or fetus should have a choice, which obviously isn't possible.

In most people's view, infanticide isn't wrong because the baby should have a "choice", it's wrong because a baby is a person and has human rights. For there to be "hypocrisy" here, supporters of abortion rights would have to believe that fetuses have the same rights as babies. Generally, they don't believe that, so there's no hypocrisy.

 

What kind of science are you looking for? According to one of the authors, the bill was intended to increase health standards. There are complications to abortions, they end up in emergency rooms. We have heard from the doctors who have treated women hemorrhaging days after these procedures. They are not reported to the clinic they had the procedure, because they go to an emergency room and not the clinic.

This isn't about the Bible, well it is for some people (including Lucio, a D), this is about improving standards after the Gosnell and Karpen revelations. I am against abortion, but I don't consider myself very religious. In fact, the only time I reference the Bible is when I argue AGAINST Christians when they are hateful and judgmental (WWJD). To many this bill is simply about moral values, not grounded in religion. Even atheists oppose murder, does that mean they are religious? When does life begin, if not at conception? 20 weeks? 30? Birth? When the cord is cut? We don't know what will happen to these people or to their fetus' if they continue to term, but we do know what happens to the fetus -- they die.

I simply look at abortion as the result (99% of the time) of irresponsible women AND men. There are consequences for your actions, and abortion, to me, is a cop out. This is not taking away women's choices, you always have the choice to be responsible, to use protection, or to abstain should you choose, but if you don't, there are consequences. It's why I am for legalizing drugs. If you want to inject dangerous things into your body, go right ahead, but don't expect the state to pay for your treatment.

 

People are smarter (or maybe not ), more educated, when knowledge is provided. I'm hearing fear of the lost of innocent here, but I'm not sure why we place such a high price on it in today society when there ISN'T much of any innocent with kids today. They know more, they get together, they do their things. Shed light or leave it to chance? Perhaps chance make sense for some, so I would said, provide education, but give any student/parent the right to opt-in or opt-out. Nothing wrong with more choice and more knowledge. Restriction out of fear and keeping things in the dark is not helpful for today kids.

Leave the fear behind.

 

Or parents could start being parents again.

 

Wowzers. What an embarrassment.

 

Basso and BigTexxx are pro-birth, not pro-life.

Basso and BigTexx care so much about the fetus but once its shot out the cervix, the baby becomes a "taker" and a tax burden. Soaking up all the delicious money that can be lining the pockets of Big Oil in subsidies. Too bad its going to CHIP/WIC/Sect 8 instead of helping to pay for the war right??

 

GO WENDY!

via TPM

Texas Senator Begins Planned 13-Hour Filibuster To Kill Anti-Abortion Bill

Wearing pink tennis shoes to prepare for nearly 13 consecutive hours of standing, a Democratic Texas state senator on Tuesday began her one-woman filibuster to block a GOP-led effort that would effectively close most abortion clinics across the nation’s second-most populous state.

Sen. Wendy Davis of Fort Worth began the filibuster at 11:18 a.m. CDT Tuesday. To derail a vote in the GOP-dominated Senate, she must keep speaking on the bill until midnight — the deadline for the end of the 30-day special session.