house

http://www.charlotte.com/171/story/59229.html

Basically this says that a prereq of getting an abortion will require, by law, that the woman getting the abortion be shown the ultrasound

The bill passed roughly 4 to 1 (91-23)

What are some of your thoughts and opinions? I personally don't really have a problem with this.

3/22/2007 1:43:02 PM

seems like a silly law

let's waste money so that we can emotionally traumatize someone even more who has likely gone through a lot of grief already.

3/22/2007 1:44:46 PM

the georgia version of this bill passed the georgia house the other day. crossover day to the georgia senate is next tuesday

personally, i am not a fan, at all

3/22/2007 1:44:58 PM

it sounds pretty retarded to me.

3/22/2007 1:46:08 PM

I mean any law can be perceived as a waste of money.

However I don't really agree with your point about the trauma. If an abortion is a medical procedure, then like any other medical procedure there are risks, you have to sign forms, the doctor has to make you aware of the dangers, etc. How is showing the woman an ultrasound any more traumatizing than the decision to get an abortion?

3/22/2007 1:46:55 PM

I have no problem with this.

Abortion, war, and the death penalty are all forms of murder, people need to stop living in denial and accept this fact. This brings us one step closer. I'm not saying these should all be banned, I'm saying we should embrace the fact that our society condones murder, instead of pretending we're perfect.

3/22/2007 1:47:08 PM

^^ok. well then what do you see as the advantage to this provision?

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 1:48 PM. Reason : .]

3/22/2007 1:48:30 PM

Quote :

"How is showing the woman an ultrasound any more traumatizing than the decision to get an abortion? "

ask the people that are in favor of the bill. if it had no effect on the woman, why would they care if she looks at the picture or not?

3/22/2007 1:48:41 PM

Are some of you saying that the ultrasound will somehow persuade the woman to reconsider what she is doing?

Would you want to see an x-ray of some bone in your body before you got an operation?

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 1:51 PM. Reason : .]

3/22/2007 1:50:56 PM

thats the whole point of the bill

from your article:

Quote :

"Supporters of the measure hope that seeing the fetus will spur more women to forgo abortion. "

3/22/2007 1:52:09 PM

Will the ultrasound be paid for by the state? If so, I see no problem with this. Otherwise you're forcing a hardship on people for nothing.

Also, should they show pictures of dead bodies to legislators voting for war?

3/22/2007 1:52:33 PM

Quote :

"Will the ultrasound be paid for by the state? "

read the article:

Quote :

"The state's three abortion clinics already perform ultrasounds, paid for by women seeking abortions, to determine a fetus's age. Under the new measure, women would have to sign a form verifying they have seen the images. The state already has an informed-consent law, which requires doctors who perform abortions to tell women the likely age of their fetus and give them information about fetal development and abortion alternatives. Women must have at least an hour to consider that information before ending a pregnancy. "

women are already required to have ultasounds performed.

the only thing this law does is force a woman to look at it.

3/22/2007 1:53:50 PM

so the government is forcing the patient to look at the ultrasound?

sounds like some kind of commie mumbo jumbo to me.

3/22/2007 1:54:40 PM

^^^^^I think they're saying it can cause a woman to feel guilty, and guilt her in to having a child, which is not a sustainable way to change someone's mind. It breeds resentment.

On top of that, i'm not sure how legal it is to force someone to look at a picture as a provision of a treatment. And who is paying for the ultrasound? I think if the gov. paid for the ultrasound, and gave the woman a right to refuse to look at the picture, this would be a valid law. As it is, it seems overly vicious and vindictive.

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 1:55 PM. Reason : ]

3/22/2007 1:54:43 PM

it's obviously to emotionally manipulate the women when they're at their most fragile. bravo, SC

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 1:55 PM. Reason : ly]

3/22/2007 1:55:02 PM

Its a medical procedure...the ultrasound is relevant to the procedure...whats the problem?

Its not like they're showing her some doctored image of what the baby would look like in 5 years...they're simply hooking up a piece of equipment and showing her something thats actually there

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 1:56 PM. Reason : .]

3/22/2007 1:55:09 PM

Quote :

"TreeTwista10: I mean any law can be perceived as a waste of money. However I don't really agree with your point about the trauma. If an abortion is a medical procedure, then like any other medical procedure there are risks, you have to sign forms, the doctor has to make you aware of the dangers, etc. How is showing the woman an ultrasound any more traumatizing than the decision to get an abortion?"

What does the woman seeing the ultrasound have to do with the medical procedure?

This is the whole point of the new law:

Quote :

"Supporters of the measure hope that seeing the fetus will spur more women to forgo abortion. Critics say it's a tool to intimidate women who have already made an agonizing decision."

And some more stuff:

Quote :

"The state already has an informed-consent law, which requires doctors who perform abortions to tell women the likely age of their fetus and give them information about fetal development and abortion alternatives. Women must have at least an hour to consider that information before ending a pregnancy."

Can a playa just get a fucking abortion? Jesus.

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 1:56 PM. Reason : TreeTwista10, don't play dumb.]

3/22/2007 1:55:18 PM

Quote :

"Its a medical procedure...the ultrasound is relevant to the procedure...whats the problem?"

is the patient performing the procedure?

3/22/2007 1:56:00 PM

Seems like a waste of legislative energy.

Quote :

"[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 1:56 PM. Reason : TreeTwista10, don't play dumb.]"

ROFL. This might come as a surprise to some people, but....







HE ISN'T PLAYING?!!!!11one

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 2:07 PM. Reason : a]

3/22/2007 1:56:34 PM

Quote :

" How is showing the woman an ultrasound any more traumatizing than the decision to get an abortion?"

It seems they are FORCING them to look at the pictures. That is not acceptable in our free society.

3/22/2007 1:57:32 PM

so if you go in for Lasik, the doctors shouldnt even be required to tell you the risks?

Seems to me like the opponents of this new law either:

1. Think its a waste of money

or

2. Think an abortion is "no big deal"

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 1:59 PM. Reason : .]

3/22/2007 1:58:36 PM

how is telling someone the risks comparable to showing someone a picture of a fetus?

3/22/2007 1:59:26 PM

what does that have to do with looking at a picture?

3/22/2007 1:59:45 PM

^^^Being forced to look at the ultrasound has nothing to do with being informed of the medical risks.

Quote :

"Supporters of the measure hope that seeing the fetus will spur more women to forgo abortion."

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 2:00 PM. Reason : ]

3/22/2007 2:00:06 PM

Quote :

"Seems to me like the opponents of this new law either: 1. Think its a waste of money or 2. Think an abortion is "no big deal" "

nice, i was waiting for when you were going to start putting words in our mouths.

3/22/2007 2:00:33 PM

care to elaborate?

of course you dont

Quote :

"let's waste money"

someone who thinks its a waste of money

Quote :

"Can a playa just get a fucking abortion? Jesus. "

sounds like someone who thinks its "no big deal"

want to tell me how i'm putting words in your mouth troller46an3?

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 2:02 PM. Reason : .]

3/22/2007 2:01:35 PM

Quote :

"sounds like some kind of commie mumbo jumbo to me."

Dentaldamn ftw

3/22/2007 2:03:41 PM

i will thank you:

1. i dont think its a waste of money becase ultrasounds are already required
2. i do think that abortions are a big deal....in fact, i think they are such a big deal that there is no need to put anymore more emotional stress on the patient (which has already been confirmed by your article), which is why i am against this bill.


so once again, you are putting words in peoples mouths.

3/22/2007 2:03:44 PM

^

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 2:04 PM. Reason : at first i didn't realize ultrasounds were already required.]

3/22/2007 2:03:55 PM

Quote :

"so if you go in for Lasik, the doctors shouldnt even be required to tell you the risks?"

Viewing the ultrasound has no bearing on the medical risks associated with the procedure. And an abortion is different than lasik, isn't it?

3/22/2007 2:04:04 PM

Quote :

"Having to look at an ultrasound will just put her through more undue trauma. make her more aware of what she is about to do"

3/22/2007 2:05:24 PM

^^^^^^^"Sounds like"

Explain to us how forcing a woman to look at a picture of the ultrasound has anything to do with informing the patient of the risks of the medical procedure. Cause you are the only person in the entire world who is trying to argue that. Everybody else admits it's to try and get the woman to rethink her decision.

^She can look at the ultrasound if she wants to already. This law forces her to see it.

And I think the ladies are more than aware of what they are about to do. But you wouldn't understand that.

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 2:07 PM. Reason : sss]

3/22/2007 2:06:09 PM

so whats wrong with getting her to rethink her opinion?

like i said, its not like they're showing her some made up doctored image...they're simply showing her whats there

whats wrong with making her more informed about a risky procedure she is about to have?

3/22/2007 2:07:39 PM

Quote :

"whats wrong with making her more informed about a risky procedure she is about to have?"

how is this law making that happen?

3/22/2007 2:08:33 PM

LOOK AT YOUR BAAAAAAABBBBBBBYYYYYYY

LOOK AT IT!!!!!!!

IM GOING TO SUCK OUT ITS BRAAAAAAINS IN ABOUT 5 SECONNNNNDSSSSSSSS

WHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

3/22/2007 2:09:36 PM

Quote :

"Quote : "Seems to me like the opponents of this new law either: 1. Think its a waste of money or 2. Think an abortion is "no big deal" " nice, i was waiting for when you were going to start putting words in our mouths."

I can imagine this was a TrollTwista comment.

Seems like that is all the guy does.

Reads a post or two.

Makes some misinformed judgement based on that.

Diverts the thread away from any reasonable discussion.

Insult here insult there.

Rinse and Repeat

3/22/2007 2:09:46 PM

i think we should make a bill forcing treetwista to be more aware about how dumb his arguments usually are.

3/22/2007 2:09:51 PM

Quote :

"TreeTwista10: so whats wrong with getting her to rethink her opinion?"

They already do that...

Quote :

"The state already has an informed-consent law, which requires doctors who perform abortions to tell women the likely age of their fetus and give them information about fetal development and abortion alternatives. Women must have at least an hour to consider that information before ending a pregnancy."

3/22/2007 2:10:36 PM

dentaldamn they dont show her a picture of a baby

they simply show her whats there

whats wrong with that?

oh noes the trauma!

3/22/2007 2:11:40 PM

There's nothing wrong with that, IMO.

What's wrong is FORCING it upon her. It seems the current set up is designed to give the patient lots of info and time to rethink their decision. And i've never had an abortion, but I can't imagine it's an easy task to begin with. There's no medical reason to force the viewing of the ultrasound, it's purely psychological, and the gov. shouldn't be legislating that kind of think. Think of the precedence it sets. What if we started making people watch documentaries on smoking/drinking/eating habits if they had to go in for procedures for these things? It seems like a good idea, but it's idiotic to put the power in the gov.'s hands to legislate something like this.

You seem to be under the impression, which I think (but don't know) is probably false, that women that get abortions are all happy-go-lucky about it, when i'm sure that's not the case 99% of the time.

3/22/2007 2:11:56 PM

i wont even touch on my other gripe where the father has pretty much zero say in the matter

yet if the kid is born, the father must do his part

3/22/2007 2:12:33 PM

I thought doctors tried to avoid trauma.



Doctor: hey im going to stick this shit in your and you will most likely die.

patient: WHAT!

Doctor: tough shit bitch

3/22/2007 2:12:59 PM

Quote :

"What's wrong is FORCING it upon her"

nobody is FORCING her to get an abortion

3/22/2007 2:14:09 PM

exactly, so she shouldnt be forced to look at the pictures.

if she wants to, thats fine, if not, who cares?

its her decision to get the abortion, so it should be her decision if she wants to look at the pictures or not.

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 2:16 PM. Reason : d]

3/22/2007 2:15:43 PM

The gov. is forcing her to look at the picture of her ultrasound though. I can't believe that you can't see why this is wrong, on the mere principles the Republican and Libertarians hold on controlling gov. power.

3/22/2007 2:16:36 PM

^^nobody is forcing me to get a drivers license

so why am i forced to take a test to get my license

^so? they're forcing her to sign insurance forms too...they'll then force her into anesthesia (sp?)...etc

[Edited on March 22, 2007 at 2:18 PM. Reason : .]

3/22/2007 2:17:11 PM

Quote :

"^^nobody is forcing me to get a drivers license so why am i forced to take a test to get my license "

\

holy shit that is dumb

WOW, even for you that is fucking terribly retarded

3/22/2007 2:18:35 PM

with your logic you should have to pass a test or something to have children, otherwise they're aborted or given up for adoption.

try to be consistent in your arguments plz.

3/22/2007 2:18:49 PM

Quote :

"I personally don't really have a problem with this."

3/22/2007 2:19:29 PM

Quote :

"nobody is forcing me to get a drivers license so why am i forced to take a test to get my license "

wow, i repeat:

Quote :

"i think we should make a bill forcing treetwista to be more aware about how dumb his arguments usually are."

3/22/2007 2:21:07 PM