This vaginally probed procedure you're talking about isn't as big a deal as everyone seems to make it out to be. With both my children my first ultrasound at 8 weeks was done via vaginal probe. It is less painful and better handled than the yearly pap women have to go through. As for lying to the woman about a disabled child, that's terribly wrong. There are women out there who are great mothers who can handle mentally and or physically handicapped children and care for them all their lives. There are other mothers who would cave under having such an enormous responsibility. Don't get me wrong, motherhood is a huge responsibility, but on days when it seems too much you get to think ahead of when you're child moves out and you'll have the house to yourself again one day. It never happens for those who must be cared for their entire life. They either live with it because they are wonderful, caring, selfless people or they become bitter and start to some how feel that they no longer love their child. And you're right, it is a selfish decision for the mother to abort a fetus that will forever be handicapped, but what of the baby? Should a child be brought into this difficult world knowing that it will not know anything but their house and perhaps being hooked up to machines. I'm not talking about a kid whose missing a leg or a kidney or even an eye. We have pairs for a reason. But a child who has to be hooked up to machines all their life. Or has to wear a helmet out in public because of fear they'll seize and bash their heads into something. No one should be lied to, especially about the health of their children or themselves. As for the rape victims. Bull ****. They shouldn't have to put up with that. They've already been traumatized and now they have to see that whoever raped them impregnated them. I'm not one for aborting a baby just because you don't want the child or it's not your husbands, etc etc...but where the health of the baby or mother is at risk or you're a rape victim, by all means, you've the right to do so. And know so.
I'm not being a hypocrite. In general I don't have a problem with laws designed to help reduce abortions. I don't have a problem with laws requiring abortion patients to get further education. I don't have a problem with requiring extra out of pocket expenses for abortions. I also don't think an ultrasound is an obscene invasion of privacy. You are there for abortion. Why is an ultrasound invasive? Because of all that I don't have a problem with the basic tenets of the law, but I don't really support it because I don't think it will actually work that well because I think most women who are that point will still get the abortion.
Please explain to me what is hypocrtical about my position so that I can re-evaluate... I am black woman selling Labrador puppies. Why? No seriously, I'm not sure why anything I said is hypocritical or why the hypocrisy would hinge on my gender. You are there for an abortion. An abortion isn't a piece of paper, it's a procedure. Why would an ultrasound be invasive under the circumstances? I have already agreed that the vaginal probe would be invasive, but a traditional gel based on top of the belly ultrasound? Hardly.
I agree which is why I said I don't really support the law because while I don't have an issue with the basics of the law itself I think it will be ineffective.
I don't think you're being hypocritical. Just nonsensical. If you readily agree that the law won't be effective at it's intended result - why support it? Furthermore, arguments about the invasive nature of the procedure are really moot. There is no medical reason to do it - end of story. Frankly, your arguments to support sound more punitive than anything else. I hardly think such an attitude effectively communicates a rationale to postpone a planned abortion. See previous post.
I already said I wouldn't vote for it. My only point is that my issue with the law isn't because I think it's invasive or because I think we should limit obstacles to abortion, it's because I don't think this particular one wouldn't work all that well. There are lots of laws like that.
I'm going to kind of, sort of, agree with you here justtxyank. If the woman is already there to have an abortion, which is a procedure, of which we all saw the picture from before...then a vaginal probing isn't that much of a difference. I mean there is already going to be tools up in there to destroy the fetus, why not something that will capture it's image first. Still not for it for rape victims though.
Thank you for bringing a woman's point of view and relating your experience. That said though a prostate examine isn't painful but do I really want it mandated that I get something stuck up my butt when its medically unnecessary?
What would be medically unnecessary about a prostate exam? You've got to put an example with it? Are you going in because something is wrong with your colon? Are you going to have parts of it removed? Then yes, a prostate exam seems necessary? Are you going in to have your eyes looked at? Because if that's the case, I doubt a prostate exam has any relevance. ^_^
Here's the quote: Looking at the link you provided, I realized that you didn't provide the link to this quote. Do you have it, by any chance? Another great quote from that thread: I disagree with you, by the way. He is being hypocritical because he is trying to tell a woman what to do with her body. It is not his body and he is not a woman. Thanks for the source, though. Saved me some writing!
I see your point - an abortion is already going to involve a lot of...insertion - so why should another probe matter? Answer: Because it's not necessary and it's none of their business. The only rationale is ideologically driven and designed to make the woman feel guilty for a legal operation. It's callous, unproductive, and (almost certainly) illegal.
If you look at the ultrasound, and decide you can't go through with it, what does that mean? What if it prevents you from making a grave mistake? Just throwing it out there.
Unwealthy women do not get a free pass excuse for an abortion. It's downright ridiculous for a woman to think that they can use that as an excuse to kill an unborn child. Health clinics give out birth control for free...or better yet. Don't have sex. Accidents do happen though happen. My first was a beautiful accident, but abortion never entered my mind.
That is not hypocritical. You can believe that it is wrong, baseless, ignorant, etc. but it is not hypocritical.
What if it convinces you to make a graver one? I.E. bringing a child into the world that you can't care for, who ends up neglected, malnourished, abused, and finally grows up to become a violent criminal/murderer/rapist?
Like I said before I believe that the only women who should be allowed abortions are those who will medically be affected or if the child is mentally/physically affected. I'm going to abort a child if it's going to put my life at risk. Or for women who were impregnated while being raped. So those who are poor can get an abortion, do I think they should have to have an ultrasound? Sure why not? They did indeed knowingly get pregnant. Or those cracked out mothers, or the mother who got pregnant by her husbands' best friend instead of her husband. These aren't excuses. An ultrasound is nothing more than a picture, if they're determined to have an abortion then a picture shouldn't change their mind.
