Georgia challenges Choice with ultrasound bill

[coda]

"Pre-Abortion Ultrasound" Measure Approved in the House


Amelia Hines
WNEG NewsCHANNEL 32
Tuesday, March 20, 2007


The Georgia house approved a measure yesterday that would require doctors to offer to show patients requesting an abortion an ultrasound image of the fetus if an image was made.

Representative Ed Setzler of Acworth said the legislature should send a strong signal that it "supports the right of all individuals, no matter how fragile."

Critics said of the measure urged the state not to interject itself in the abortion debate.


© 2007
A MEDIA GENERAL COMPANY
Terms & Conditions

[TC]

thats sick.


but not as disgusting as south carolina which is passing a law to actually require women to view their fetuses on ultra-sound before obtaining an abortion!


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070321/ap_on_...tion_ultrasound (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070321/ap_on_re_us/abortion_ultrasound)





By SEANNA ADCOX, Associated Press Writer Wed Mar 21, 7:49 PM ET

COLUMBIA, S.C. - With calls of emotional blackmail from opponents, a measure requiring women seeking abortions to first review ultrasound images of their fetuses advanced Wednesday in the South Carolina Legislature.

The legislation, supported by Republican Gov. Mark Sanford, passed 91-23 after lawmakers defeated amendments exempting rape or incest. The House must approve the bill again in a routine vote before it goes to the Senate, where its sponsor expects it to pass with those exemptions.

Some states make ultrasound images available to women before an abortion, but South Carolina would be alone in requiring women to view the pictures.

Critics consider the proposal a tool to intimidate women who already have made an agonizing decision.

The state's three abortion clinics already perform ultrasounds, paid for by the woman seeking the procedure, to determine the fetus' age. The state's informed-consent law, passed in 1994, requires abortion doctors to tell women at least an hour before the operation the likely age of their fetus and give them information about fetal development and alternatives to abortion.


:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:


if the christian fundies want to make doctors show non-religious women ultrasound images of fetuses they want to get rid of as a matter of &#39;informed choice&#39;, they should demand that doctors show christian women who want to go through with unplanned childbirth videos of women going through labour and childbirth and post-birth repair surgery, including all of the frequently occuring medical complications...so they can have full information and see what they&#39;re getting into and consider the alternatives <_< .

bet if it was put that way they wouldn&#39;t be thrilled about ensuring &#39;informed&#39; consent.

[RASHskins]

UGGGGG Damn fucking Christians.

[Cheung Mo]

The only time anti-choice laws are correct are when they are used as a means of correcting a gender imbalance. For instance, I would support a ban on aborting female fetuses in China due to severe gender imbalance issues stemming from the fact that population controls were implemented without considering the large amoung of misogyny and anti-female mysticism (i.e. having a female child is bad luck) among conservative-minded and rural Chinese.

[TC]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 23, 2007 03:51 pm
The only time anti-choice laws are correct are when they are used as a means of correcting a gender imbalance. For instance, I would support a ban on aborting female fetuses in China due to severe gender imbalance issues stemming from the fact that population controls were implemented without considering the large amoung of misogyny and anti-female mysticism (i.e. having a female child is bad luck) among conservative-minded and rural Chinese.
oh, okay, so you think forcing women to give birth to babies they don&#39;t want against their will is okay if its done in the name of psudo-liberal eugenics just not christian conservatism.

[Cheung Mo]

Originally posted by TragicClown+March 23, 2007 05:26 pm--> (TragicClown &#064; March 23, 2007 05:26 pm)
Cheung [email protected] 23, 2007 03:51 pm
The only time anti-choice laws are correct are when they are used as a means of correcting a gender imbalance. For instance, I would support a ban on aborting female fetuses in China due to severe gender imbalance issues stemming from the fact that population controls were implemented without considering the large amoung of misogyny and anti-female mysticism (i.e. having a female child is bad luck) among conservative-minded and rural Chinese.
oh, okay, so you think forcing women to give birth to babies they don&#39;t want against their will is okay if its done in the name of psudo-liberal eugenics just not christian conservatism. [/b]
China is not sustainable when the growth of the male population is outpacing the growth of the female population. How else could this problem be rectified? Do you want technolgically incubated females to become wards of the state or something?

[TC]

Originally posted by Cheung Mo+March 23, 2007 06:51 pm--> (Cheung Mo @ March 23, 2007 06:51 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2007 05:26 pm

Cheung [email protected] 23, 2007 03:51 pm
The only time anti-choice laws are correct are when they are used as a means of correcting a gender imbalance. For instance, I would support a ban on aborting female fetuses in China due to severe gender imbalance issues stemming from the fact that population controls were implemented without considering the large amoung of misogyny and anti-female mysticism (i.e. having a female child is bad luck) among conservative-minded and rural Chinese.
oh, okay, so you think forcing women to give birth to babies they don&#39;t want against their will is okay if its done in the name of psudo-liberal eugenics just not christian conservatism.
China is not sustainable when the growth of the male population is outpacing the growth of the female population. How else could this problem be rectified? Do you want technolgically incubated females to become wards of the state or something? [/b]
Sure, i&#39;d much rather proponents of state eugenics such as yourself to use artificial incubators rather than forcibly using Chinese women&#39;s bodies as incubators. I think you&#39;d have to have an utter disregard for human rights and personal liberty to have any question about that.


People do not have to donate their uterus&#39; to the &#39;good of china.&#39;

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 23, 2007 06:51 pm
Do you want technolgically incubated females to become wards of the state or something?
Re technologically incubated people somehow "lesser"? :angry:

[freakazoid]

they should demand that doctors show christian women who want to go through with unplanned childbirth videos of women going through labour and childbirth and post-birth repair surgery, including all of the frequently occuring medical complications...so they can have full information and see what they&#39;re getting into and consider the alternatives

Do they not already do this?

[Mujer Libre]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 04:02 am

they should demand that doctors show christian women who want to go through with unplanned childbirth videos of women going through labour and childbirth and post-birth repair surgery, including all of the frequently occuring medical complications...so they can have full information and see what they&#39;re getting into and consider the alternatives

Do they not already do this?
Um, what?

Of course they don&#39;t. Women might be warned about some of the common complications associated with pregnancy, but they certainly aren&#39;t shown graphic depictions of them, or of birth in general.

In fact, birth and prenancy are romanticised in our society- something this archaic law is trying to harness.

[freakazoid]

Um, what?

Of course they don&#39;t. Women might be warned about some of the common complications associated with pregnancy, but they certainly aren&#39;t shown graphic depictions of them, or of birth in general.

In fact, birth and prenancy are romanticised in our society- something this archaic law is trying to harness.

I did not know that. I would just assume that they would show it to prepare the mother on what it would be like.