Here the state is facing a huge budget crisis with a shortage of upwards of $27 billion, and what does the Lege, and Perry, find time for? Men telling women what to do with their bodies. How ****ing stupid. They should be looking at raising revenue and using the "rainy day fund," because a budget storm is upon us. The people of the State of Texas should be ashamed of their government. They would be if they bothered to pay the least bit of attention to what is going on.
This is a well written and timely bill. Finally these "women" will be forced to preview the consequences of there selfish and thoughtless actions. Well done Gov. Perry and State Congress. Well done.
I think it is reasonable to scan women's uteruses before they get on planes, and everyone's rectums. This is an obvious attempt to circumvent the established precedent of when life begins, decided where it belongs, in the Supreme Court, to enact in to law a religious preference. There is no medical reason to perform a sonagram on a fetus that is about to be aborted anyway. Will insurance companies refuse to pay for it? Could a patient be sued for not paying for it? Should the State pay for all of them?
I'm no doctor but why isn't this standard practice? It seems to me that if a woman walks in off the street and wants an abortion that it would be prudent for the physician to do a sonogram. As a layman, I find it hard to believe that this wouldn't normally be done. I can't believe any doctor would perform this procedure without visually checking things out first. For instance, how would he know she doesn't have twins? Regardless of the law, this simply seems like common sense.
If I'm not mistaken, the sonogram is already required, but with no obligation to force the woman to see it.
You mandate people to buy health insurance because we all share the risks and benefits. People who don't have health insurance still get treatment, they just have other people pay for it. You don't mandate that women have unnescesaary medical prceedures hoping impose your own cutural values on them through guilt. apples/oranges For a woman who is choosing an abortion, wouldn't that just be twice the reason to get it? It is entirely reasonable that a woman considers the abortion as the removal of a mass of cells from her own body that allows her not to bear a child in the future. The Court says that is legal.
this law doesn't force that at all...it says, specifically, that she can choose whether to see it or not.
Dolphins don't see stuff with sound, that is bats. And god did make us bats. Well, at least one of us. PWNT.
I don't really want to get into this argument generally, and you were probably joking a bit anyway, so consider the below just a comment to your post specifically. If one used this line of thinking, we also would never get on planes, go scuba diving, travel faster than humanely possible, etc, etc.
My comment was that I don't see how any doctor can make a determination as to how to proceed with an abortion without doing a sonogram regardless of what the law says. As an example how would a doctor even know if there were two fetuses to remove unless he performed a sonogram. Perhaps there is a way. I don't know. As my post indicated, as a layman, it seems a sonogram is an integral part of any abortion procedure. Regardless of anyone's opinion of abortion and regardless of anyone's opinion of this proposed legislation, doesn't it seem reasonable to perform a sonogram prior to performing an abortion?
Just wait till the government gets into the health care business in full scale. One political swing and abortions will require all kinds of stuff. This law is similar to firearm waiting period or other such nonsense. It places another hoop for the woman to jump through because it will discourage 1% or whatever from getting an abortion.
Once again. Three People Involved and we really only consider the WANTS of 1 of them. No one gives a **** about the father No one gives a **** about the baby Maybe the Dad wants to take a gander at the child before he walks away for ever. Hell, we don't even give the father 3 months to 'make up his mind' if he wants to be adad. Rocket River
It's not a baby yet by the definition of the law and the mother. And no one mistake me for an abortion proponent. It's a horrific choice from all the possibilities for birth control, hard for the Mother, unsavory for the doctor, divisive for society. But that's just like, my opinion, man. The Court says it's legal.
