I don't think so and that's immaterial to me. It's still an unnecessary medical procedure mandated by the state for no reason other than ideology. A procedure that could cause further mental trauma to someone already conflicted (usually). Imagine if you wanted a vasectomy but first the state mandated you have an ultrasound of your balls.
Has this made it to a Federal District Court yet? And don't we have other threads about stupid Arizona?? This one is about stupid Oklahoma and now stupid Louisiana. You'd think Lousiana would have other items on their plate right now.
Lousiana recently passed a law banning human-animal hybrids. No joke. They're weird over there. (Love the food though)
I'm not really into emotion and stuff, so I wouldn't really be worried about an ultrasound. If I wanted the vasectomy I would have already considered all the logical implications and therefore would be aware of what it was costing me. If however, the nurse felt the need to lube me up down there for an ultrasound, I'd hope she wouldn't leave me hanging. Just kidding of course honey! In all seriousness, I just don't have a problem with an ultrasound being required as I don't consider it invasive and I do consider it a life.
I was thoroughly unimpressed by the etoufee that I had at a restaurant in NO when I was there for the Rockets game in '97.
That's cool. We disagree. I would add though that it's also gonna cost the women in question money. And you, should you have your balls ultrasounded.
I'm fine with tax dollars going to prevent abortions. I'm not cool with the vaginal probe as that is obviously an invasive procedure. I accept we disagree. That is a fundamental sticking point in this debate. If one side considers it a life and the other doesn't there is obviously a gulf between the two that cannot be bridged.
lol...my wife is from Louisiana. If she's part animal that would explain a lot...if you know what I mean...
Did you eat on Bourbon Street? A lot of those restaurants are crap tourist traps. There are a lot of good places outside of the French Quarter with great food without the same hassles. I will praise the Beignets in Cafe Du Monde though.
It was not on Bourbon Street, it was a place either in or just out of the FQ that the hotel doorman recommended. The hurricanes after the game were good, but the food was (at best) meh. Willie G's has MUCH better food than that place.
Not tax dollars I don't think. I think it's from the patient? (Another point as to why I'm uncomfortable with this) Agreed, although it's not really germaine to my argument. I don't want the government prescribing me anything medical. That's the doctor's job.
The patient wants an abortion. I don't think the extra cost of paying for an ultrasound is a big deal. The government isn't forcing you to get anything though. You are choosing to get the abortion. At that point the gov has the right to make requirements accompany specific procedures. Anyway, I don't actually "support" this law but I am not against it either. I don't think it will be very effective so I wouldn't be inspired to vote for it.
With all due respect, bull ****. "Anyway, I don't actually "support" this law but I am not against it either. I don't think it will be very effective so I wouldn't be inspired to vote for it." Why be a hypocrite? It is obvious that you think the "law" is groovy. It is not. It is an obscene invasion of privacy.
It would be sort of nice if the requirements had any medicinal rational rather then just being designed to harass.
