If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell, after being featured on The Daily Show for his support of the post-rape vaginal probe bill, would like to take some time to take a long, hard look at the issue and possibly reconsider his position   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 370
    More: Dumbass, Governor of Virginia, Bob McDonnell, Virginia, Virginians, abortions  
•       •       •

15082 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Feb 2012 at 10:44 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



370 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-22 01:39:44 PM

madgonad: You can't just bundle stuff together.


Maybe they shouldn't be able to, but apparently they can.
 
2012-02-22 01:40:19 PM

911Jenny: I cried the entire procedure- and I have an incredibly high pain tolerance. You would think they were gutting a damn pumpkin for Halloween. And that wand is HUGE. At one point I thought it was going to come out of my abdomen.


I admit, I shrinked a bit when I saw pictures of the wand and the diagram of it being used. When my boyfriend asked me exactly what the big deal was about this procedure and all the hubbub about it, all I had to do was find the images again and show them to him. He groaned and nodded "Ok. Yeah. That is a big deal then."
 
2012-02-22 01:40:22 PM

I drunk what: /don't worry i haven't disappeared
//just pausing a moment before the next post
///patience


Great, then perhaps next you'll address my question as to how many children (and particularly children with special needs) you have adopted so far, agreeing to pay the full cost of their care, including medical treatments and education as well as lifelong support. It must be at least a dozen, based on the strength of your apparent convictions.
 
2012-02-22 01:41:58 PM
I just can't farking believe we're even talking about this. I can't farking believe it. Between this "debate," the contraceptives
"debate," and all the other bullshiat that the GOP is insisting on manufacturing controversy for.. I just can't farking believe it.
 
2012-02-22 01:42:56 PM

I drunk what: but i can tell you what is right and what is wrong


So forcing a child into existence and then allowing it to starve because you won't raise taxes to pay for it is?
 
2012-02-22 01:43:17 PM

More_Like_A_Stain: I drunk what: and while we are pondering terms, here's a few:

embryo, fetus, baby, infant, toddler, child, teenager, adult

which ones of these are not human...

After dealing with more than a few teenagers over the years, I am not at all convinced that they are human.


don't even get me started on babies and infants, the little parasites

so how about toddlers? sure they seem human, but some of them have the most rotten attitudes, should that be factored in somehow?

annoyance can take on more forms than just financial burden or political responsibility...

let's open the flood gates, i mean it's already legal, who's gunna stop us?
 
2012-02-22 01:43:38 PM

BigView: So what is the level of invasiveness of an unltrasound compared to the level of invasiveness of an abortion?

You can make murder efficient and unobtrusive and you can even dehumanize the victim but it's not any less a murder.

Forget the arguments about not calling fetuses human. Babies are only 9 months more mature and there is no question they are human even though it may take 20 more years until they can be considered fully developed adults.

And this is a woman's choice? How interesting that we give this god-like authority to someone too incompetent to know when to cross her legs. (All I'm saying here is that it's not a woman's choice even if she becomes the vessel for the first 9 months of a human life -- the man also has the responsibility).

This is the debate and not the actions of some idiots.


People have the right to bodily autonomy. It really does not matter if a fetus is a person or not, because either way, it would have no right to use the mother's body and organs without her consent.

If someone was dying of kidney failure and your kidney was a perfect match for them, I imagine you would want to make the decision of whether you will give one of your kidneys to this person, right?

Would you really be okay with the doctors just strapping you to the operating table and taking your kidney by force?
 
2012-02-22 01:44:23 PM

GleeUnit: I just can't farking believe we're even talking about this. I can't farking believe it. Between this "debate," the contraceptives
"debate," and all the other bullshiat that the GOP is insisting on manufacturing controversy for.. I just can't farking believe it.


The American Tliban's plan is working.
 
2012-02-22 01:49:01 PM

CapnBlues: Great, then perhaps next you'll address my question as to how many children (and particularly children with special needs) you have adopted so far, agreeing to pay the full cost of their care, including medical treatments and education as well as lifelong support. It must be at least a dozen, based on the strength of your apparent convictions.


i was trying real hard to pretend to busy doing other things in respect to you, (since you seem to be more civil than most) perhaps you'd like to ponder the relevance those things have on the points being made and less about what difference it makes whether or not person X is doing what person Y thinks they should be doing...

/i'll wait a lil longer and hope you can resolve that without my response

i completely understand how frustrating hypocrisy is, believe me, however try not to allow that to cloud your judgement on what is right/wrong regardless of who is doing what other things (tangentially related)

i'd be happy to discuss with you what we OUGHT to do as society, once we have already clearly established what IS right and what IS wrong with society...

fair enough?
 
2012-02-22 01:49:45 PM

Smelly Pirate Hooker: RE Eddie Adams from Torrance
"Why don't they just cut to the chase and instead of an ultrasound, require the woman to sit in a room for 5 days while old white men parade through and tell her she's a whore."

This.


THIS.
 
2012-02-22 01:50:02 PM

Thoroughly With Foil: ksjones: Thoroughly With Foil: ksjones: Thoroughly With Foil: : Can't afford it? Don't sit on a dick.


and that is something only women should have to worry about? it takes 2 to tango, bucko.

hear that all hetero men? don't you dare stick your dick in vag if you are ready and capable of supporting a child

Never said only women had to worry about it, I support your position on males as well. If you want to have sex, you should be fully prepared for the consequences of your actions - both men & women.


ah, see, now you're arguing personal responsibility... while trying to limit the extent that one can exercise their personal responsibility.


why should what anyone else does with their body concern you (or anyone else) at all?

Because my tax dollars are supporting agencies that perform these horrible procedures, which I truly believe are murder - despite what your secular viewpoint is.


Let me walk you through that just a bit, because I once believed as you did, grew up believing that in fact, and even marched every January holding up signs that said that.

Okay first, if you truly belive abortion is murder, then I assume you believe that abortion should be illegal?

and if you believe it should be illegal because it's murder, you also believe there should NOT be an exception in the case of rape or incest correct?

Because if you believe in a rape or incest exception then you don't really believe that abortion is murder. It is something Bad, but not murder, if you believe it is okay for rape victims, because the circumstances of the child's conception shouldn't affect thier legal right not be murdered should it?

Now assuming you DO believe there should be no exception, then the next question is should women who get abortions therefore be prosecuted for murder? And since an abortion is a premeditated act and therefore 1st degree murder, should doctors convicted of performing abortions be eligible to be sentenced to death or life without parole? (the only two sentences available for 1st degree murder in most states) and what about the mother? If abortion is murder, then at the very least the "Felony Murder" rule applies to her too and she's as guilty as the doctor, so death or life in jail for her too?

If not, why not? How can any other punishment or legal treatment be consistent with the claim that "abortion is murder"?

Finally I will leave you with a quote from noted libertarian and conservative Robert A. Heinlien to chew over:



"No man is an island--" Much as we may feel and act as individuals, our race is a single organism, always growing and branching -- which must be pruned regularly to be healthy. This necessity need not be argued, anyone with eyes can see that any organism which grows without limit always dies in its own poisons.

The rational question is whether pruning is best done before or after birth.
Being an incurable sentimentalist I favor the former of these methods -- killing makes me queasy, even when it's a case of "He's dead and I'm alive and that's the way I wanted it to be."

But this may be a matter of taste. Some shamans think that is better to be killed in a war, or to die in childbirth, or to starve in misery, than never to have lived at all. They may be right.

But I don't have to like it -- and I don't.

 
2012-02-22 01:59:06 PM

CheatCommando: So forcing a child into existence and then allowing it to starve because you won't raise taxes to pay for it is?


johnbarban.com

however, the choice to end a human life, IS a black and white issue

so then, OUGHT we to raise taxes to care for orphans?

i see no problem with that, though that is what my church teaches, so you'd be effectively combining, church-state

which doesn't bother me, if you're ok with it

/ok it bothers me a little, for reasons you don't want to hear me get into
//there is no short answer
 
2012-02-22 02:04:26 PM

I drunk what: CapnBlues: Great, then perhaps next you'll address my question as to how many children (and particularly children with special needs) you have adopted so far, agreeing to pay the full cost of their care, including medical treatments and education as well as lifelong support. It must be at least a dozen, based on the strength of your apparent convictions.

i was trying real hard to pretend to busy doing other things in respect to you, (since you seem to be more civil than most) perhaps you'd like to ponder the relevance those things have on the points being made and less about what difference it makes whether or not person X is doing what person Y thinks they should be doing...

/i'll wait a lil longer and hope you can resolve that without my response

i completely understand how frustrating hypocrisy is, believe me, however try not to allow that to cloud your judgement on what is right/wrong regardless of who is doing what other things (tangentially related)

i'd be happy to discuss with you what we OUGHT to do as society, once we have already clearly established what IS right and what IS wrong with society...

fair enough?


sorry, can't continue. found out my nephew's going in for some kind of cranial surgery.

take care

hugs
capn
 
2012-02-22 02:06:46 PM

God's Hubris: Magorn: yequalsy: Eddie Adams from Torrance: Why don't they just cut to the chase and instead of an ultrasound, require the woman to sit in a room for 5 days while old white men parade through and tell her she's a whore.

That's next year's bill. You see every year they need a new set of abortion restrictions in order to keep Pro-Life Inc. in operation. The point is not to ban abortion. Abortions are necessary to keep the contributions and votes pouring in to Pro-Life Inc. At the same time Pro-Life Inc. has to keep abortion as a salient issue while convincing their supporters out there -- those who contribute money and provide the votes -- that progress is being made against abortion. Thus the need each year for some incremental adjustment in law that won't actually reduce abortions, but fool the supporters into thinking it might. And, hey, if it humiliates the women then all the better. They're just whores after all. Right? Meanwhile Pro-Life Inc is getting worried that, gee, if the number of abortions do drop too much then we're out of business. Thus the growing attack on birth control. Birth control is the enemy of Pro-Life Inc. because birth control reduces abortions.

A simple question that no "Pro-life" person has ever been able to answer for me: In 2006 the GOP held both Houses of Congress, and the White House, and there was a clear conservative majority on the Supreme Court. How many laws either restricting abortion or overturning Roe v. Wade were passed or even proposed that year? (Zero) Why? Why are these bills only introduced when they stand only a snowball's chance in hell of getting them actually passed into Law?


They passed the "partial-birth" ban in '03.



Which rather precisely proves my point. Going into an election year, they "banned" the rarest possible form of abortion, one that was already illegal almost everywhere (3rd-trimester abortions can be banned outright under Roe v. Wade) except when the life of the mother was in danger, which the law kept legal. I think the procedure was used in 0.17% of all abortions performed and almost always to save a mother's life.

THAT was the sole "Pro-Life" accomplishment of several years of Republican control of all three branches of government (unless you count the theater they pulled to "save" a woman whose brain had turned to liquid a decade before). And yet "Pro-Life" voters continue to support the GOP with their votes and thier cash.
 
2012-02-22 02:07:32 PM

Magorn: and if you believe it should be illegal because it's murder, you also believe there should NOT be an exception in the case of rape or incest correct?


correct

Magorn: Because if you believe in a rape or incest exception then you don't really believe that abortion is murder. It is something Bad, but not murder, if you believe it is okay for rape victims, because the circumstances of the child's conception shouldn't affect thier legal right not be murdered should it?


indeed. reasonably and logically

Magorn: Now assuming you DO believe there should be no exception, then the next question is should women who get abortions therefore be prosecuted for murder?


yes. assuming the law had been changed and they were fully aware of their choice.

Magorn: And since an abortion is a premeditated act and therefore 1st degree murder, should doctors convicted of performing abortions be eligible to be sentenced to death or life without parole?


yup, and they can certainly afford not to be a burden on the state, for all of you that worry about politics-economics.

/again assuming the whole clearly changed law thing from above

Magorn: If abortion is murder, then at the very least the "Felony Murder" rule applies to her too and she's as guilty as the doctor, so death or life in jail for her too?


yes

Magorn: How can any other punishment or legal treatment be consistent with the claim that "abortion is murder"?


well i'm sure there would be those who would try to argue, about "manslaughter" and such things, however i agree with you 100%

Magorn: Let me walk you through that just a bit, because I once believed as you did


let me walk with you just a bit, since for some reason you no longer believe

may i ask why?
 
2012-02-22 02:08:32 PM

I drunk what: CheatCommando: So forcing a child into existence and then allowing it to starve because you won't raise taxes to pay for it is?

[johnbarban.com image 242x242]

however, the choice to end a human life, IS a black and white issue

so then, OUGHT we to raise taxes to care for orphans?

i see no problem with that, though that is what my church teaches, so you'd be effectively combining, church-state

which doesn't bother me, if you're ok with it

/ok it bothers me a little, for reasons you don't want to hear me get into
//there is no short answer


Would you answer the question please?
 
2012-02-22 02:08:58 PM

CapnBlues: sorry, can't continue


i pray for the best outcome
 
2012-02-22 02:09:40 PM

UseLessHuman: I'm living in VA right now so I can tell you that although these local republican politicians might look like ignorant pandering fascists, they are actually much worse.

Repubs believe this is a wedge issue and that the break on it will fall in their favor. I've made it my mission to convince them it will not, this November, by putting them on the farking street.


If you're in Loudon county we should have a beer and astrategy session sometime
 
2012-02-22 02:12:56 PM

Magorn: UseLessHuman: I'm living in VA right now so I can tell you that although these local republican politicians might look like ignorant pandering fascists, they are actually much worse.

Repubs believe this is a wedge issue and that the break on it will fall in their favor. I've made it my mission to convince them it will not, this November, by putting them on the farking street.

If you're in Loudon county we should have a beer and astrategy session sometime


I'd be up for looking for some new local legislators with you guys.
 
2012-02-22 02:17:25 PM
"Wait a minute, you guys told me that hating abortion would make me more popular!"

Yeah, and the kids on the short bus said they'd love you if you ate paste with them. Do you do it?
 
2012-02-22 02:19:23 PM

CheatCommando: Would you answer the question please?


the answer is that you are engaging in a false dichotomy, which means you are saying that there are only two outcomes to your problem which is not true

therefore i am not obliged to answer because the question is fallacious

1. ALL birth is forcing that person into existence, which becomes a rather complicated argument about whether or not ANY one should have babies. (you probably don't want to go there)

2. i am under no obligation to care for someone's child, just because they foolishly decided to bring that person into the world, this is where you're trying to drag me into your politics

3. taxes or no taxes, humans have found ways to feed their offspring since the beginning of time, so you'd do yourself a favor by not pretending that the presence of a govt. is required to sustain life. again with the politics *feeling sick*

4. all of this political jibbering is completely irrelevant to whether or not it is Good or Evil to terminate a HUMAN LIFE. which we call red herrings in the context of a debate. perhaps you should refrain from them in the future? you might even accidentally defend your point, instead of simply engaging with smoke/mirrors

now go and sin no more
 
2012-02-22 02:19:47 PM

I drunk what: Magorn: and if you believe it should be illegal because it's murder, you also believe there should NOT be an exception in the case of rape or incest correct?

correct


Do you also believe that the process of In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) should also be illegal. This process involves fertilizing several eggs, implanting only the most viable, and then disposing of or indefinitely freezing the rest...I guess you would consider this practice to be Mass Murder?
 
2012-02-22 02:20:22 PM

johnnyrocket: BFletch651: As it stands, there are about 5M live births in this country in a year, and about 1.2M abortions. Thats a lot of abortions

A lot of abortions? What that's mean? How many miscarries ( natural or accident ) are there, is that too many too? Why 'regulate' abortions? It's a legal medical procedure, it's no one's business but the patient and the doctor.

Move on to jobs and reducing pollution, idiot politicians! It's as if the government all of a sudden wants to reduce the incidence of sneezing in the country. It's not relevant to me or society as a whole.

Abortion is settled, legal, and should be left alone. End of story.


Miscarriages: As of 2004, 900,000 to 1 million out of 4.4 million confirmed pregnancies.

That would be more, now that there are more people and more pregnancies in the US.

Since miscarriages (after confirmation) are about 1/4 to 1/3 of confirmed pregnancies, then we'd be talking about abortion being about as common/uncommon as natural miscarriage.

If you want to be like the most profound pro-lifers and consider life beginning at conception, then you have to go back farther in counting up miscarriages. Estimates are that, including pregnancy loss before a pregnancy test confirmation, 40% of conceptions end in miscarriage.

That roaring sound you hear is the rush as everyone in the funeral and memorial industry falls all over themselves converting to Catholicism. :-/

I still wish we would solve abortion as an issue by stopping yelling at each other, taking half the money we're spending yelling at each other and spending it on reproduction technology to develop artificial wombs that can be worn kangaroo-pouched on volunteer surrogates.

There are a lot of women who couldn't physically carry a transplanted pregnancy for all sorts of medical reasons, who are healthy enough to carry around the weight of a pregnancy. A lot of the biggest concerns about an artificial womb's sterile disconnection from the humanity of a mother is relieved if that womb rests as a pouch on the belly of a "mother" for that baby--probably the baby's to-be adoptive mother.

I wish we'd take the other half of that money and work on understanding the pathology of rapists and the genetic risk factors, and how to do gene therapy. If an embryo/fetus is the result of rape, it's morally innocent, but may be carrying "bad seed" genes for all that. (There's real good evidence that violent crime comes from a mix of genetics and environment.) If we were able to fix just those genes, safely, it would be a blessing.

(As for what to change the genes to, where you have a known bad gene from the rapist father, just let the kid get both genes for that spot from his or her mother. If it's a gene on the Y chromosome, replace the bad gene with the most common "normal" gene in the general population, or with whatever her dad's got--her choice. You're not making Frankenkid, just sticking with the kid's own family/community.)

But part of the reason we still lack the technology to do any of those things, or that we're not farther along towards getting the technology to do those things, is that we'd rather yell at each other and be "right" than quit yelling, realize we're at an impasse and nobody is ever going to "win," and realize that the only way to "win" this argument is to change the playing field so that everybody on both sides who is not being disingenuous wins.

The losers in my "technology" scenario are the "pro-lifers" who are really anti-sex, and the "pro-choicers" who are really "I don't want there to be a child out there with my genes."

The pro-lifers who are really about the fetus living, and the pro-choicers who are really about the woman getting her body back, win.

Link (new window)
 
2012-02-22 02:21:23 PM

I drunk what: 4. all of this political jibbering is completely irrelevant to whether or not it is Good or Evil to terminate a HUMAN LIFE. which we call red herrings in the context of a debate


Calling a fertilized egg a HUMAN LIFE is something that we call "begging the question" in the context of the debate.
 
2012-02-22 02:24:15 PM
I have never been so proud to be a Virginian...welcome to the new inquisition, folks...we will torture you if we think you are a turrist...we will be taking turns looking into the vagina of every woman in America to make sure that she is making babies with every egg in the basket.

THIS is the America that you want?!

W.
T.
F!
 
2012-02-22 02:25:54 PM

factoryconnection: BigView: This is the debate and not the actions of some idiots.

So you're saying that abortion merely needs to be banned, an any law that works in that direction, no matter how poorly conceived or invasive, is thus a good law?

Thank you for adding more credence to my analysis of this law: nothing to do with medicine, everything to do with banning abortion.


You clearly misunderstood my comment and my comment has nothing to do with law.

BTW: It's interesting how many people are concerned with law in this thread -- maybe because they need the law to make up their mind for them?

Anyway, I beleive that abortion is not a matter for the law but a matter of family and personal responsibility. The law should no more get involved with abortion than it should get involved with removing an inflamed appendix. With this being said, it does not mean that abortions are the right things to do simply because they are legal.

Legal and right are separate things. Just becasue abortions are legal does not make them right or make fetuses less than human. Do you understand?

A person may chose to have an abortion and it's a personal thing. The decision to terminate a life because you know you cannot take care of the child or that you know it's going to be retarded, or if you know that you cannot ever love the child because of rape or if it will kill the mother -- and all those situations -- are all personal things between the family and the doctor. To go into ramblings about fetuses not being human and abortions being routine medical things -- it's just not right.

Imagine the decision to "KILL" your mother who is lying in pain in her bed full of bed sores and only having machines to keep her alive. She even wants you to pull the plug. This is also a personal thing that you as a repsonible human need to decide on. It's not the law that makes the decision for you.

In both cases, abortion and pulling the plug, it's not the law that makes it right or wrong. It's your self, experience, family, faith -- and these things should never be tied to the law.

And if anyone asks, religious leaders should be teaching responsibility and to not use abortion as contraception, instead of trying to prohibit all cases though the law. Enforcing right and wrong with the law relieves religious leaders of their responsibility to teach right from wrong.
 
2012-02-22 02:27:35 PM

I drunk what: this thread again? the last one hasn't even died yet


We better stick a wand up its vagina to be sure. No, it's not optional. Now try put your feet in the stirrups and slide as close to the end of the table as you can. And try to relax.
 
2012-02-22 02:29:28 PM

Razzed: BigView: So what is the level of invasiveness of an unltrasound compared to the level of invasiveness of an abortion?

You can make murder efficient and unobtrusive and you can even dehumanize the victim but it's not any less a murder.

Forget the arguments about not calling fetuses human. Babies are only 9 months more mature and there is no question they are human even though it may take 20 more years until they can be considered fully developed adults.

And this is a woman's choice? How interesting that we give this god-like authority to someone too incompetent to know when to cross her legs. (All I'm saying here is that it's not a woman's choice even if she becomes the vessel for the first 9 months of a human life -- the man also has the responsibility).

This is the debate and not the actions of some idiots.

People have the right to bodily autonomy. It really does not matter if a fetus is a person or not, because either way, it would have no right to use the mother's body and organs without her consent.

If someone was dying of kidney failure and your kidney was a perfect match for them, I imagine you would want to make the decision of whether you will give one of your kidneys to this person, right?

Would you really be okay with the doctors just strapping you to the operating table and taking your kidney by force?


You make a good point. I agree.
 
2012-02-22 02:29:38 PM

CapnBlues: hugs
capn


Hugs, positive thoughts.
 
2012-02-22 02:32:46 PM
Transvaginal ultrasounds for some, miniature American flags for others!

img96.imageshack.us
 
2012-02-22 02:33:13 PM

The Homer Tax: I drunk what: 4. all of this political jibbering is completely irrelevant to whether or not it is Good or Evil to terminate a HUMAN LIFE. which we call red herrings in the context of a debate

Calling a fertilized egg a HUMAN LIFE is something that we call "begging the question" in the context of the debate.


than beg the question

i'm ready when you are

The Homer Tax: Do you also believe that the process of In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) should also be illegal.


I do. Unless they can figure out a way not to dispose of any...

The Homer Tax: .I guess you would consider this practice to be Mass Murder?


the frozen ones aren't dead (yet), the rest yes

i hope that helps

/i'm certainly not going to increase my popularity on this subject
 
2012-02-22 02:33:22 PM

Walker: My state of Virginia is becoming so f*cked up. All this anti-abortion stuff, trying to ban it by making laws that shut down clinics for not meeting absurd rules like hallway widths. Also making laws specifically designed to harass women going for a legal procedure. For a state that voted for Obama it seems to be getting redder by the day. I need to move to a more liberal state, as this one certainly doesn't represent my views, nor the views of most in Northern VA. I wouldn't move across the river to Maryland though, they are too liberal. They are providing free college tuition for illegal immigrants. If you were born and raised in Maryland no free college for you. Pay up slacker! Plus they have a bag tax, toilet tax, and are adding even more crazy taxes. Move to DC? No thanks, I don't want Mayor Crackhead Barry on my city council.


F*cking O'Malley. And I'm a flaming liberal. I HATE O'MALLEY
 
2012-02-22 02:34:34 PM

I drunk what: than beg the question


then spell korrectly!!1!

/facepalm
 
2012-02-22 02:38:34 PM

ExcaliburPrime111: Woah... I think I just got my Boobies censored while on Fark. It does not show up in this thread anymore nor is it in my history.

Anyway, I will post again, just in case I did something silly:

1. Trans-vaginal ultrasounds will not be required for everyone, only for the small minority of patients for whom a regular abdominal ultrasound cannot definitively identify the age of the fetus.

2. Trans-vaginal ultrasounds are not "rape." They are a form of painless medical diagnostic procedure, with a long track record of use in medical diagnostics.

3. Virginia's purpose in passing this legislation is clearly to create hurdles for people who want abortions. That is not necessarily a bad thing. Terminating a pregnancy should not be a casual decision, and a person who is determined to have an abortion could easily jump over these hurdles in order to get a legal abortion.

/Not a supporter of this legislation, but I also don't think that Roe v. Wade is a good way of settling the issue. States should have the power to legalize/regulate/outlaw abortions as they see fit.


RvW came about BECAUSE states were allowed to legalize/regulate/outlaw abortion as they saw fit.

It was a form of discrimination because rich women could travel to states which allowed it.And it generally violated a few clauses in the Constitution about states recognizing all citizens' rights.

After that, it gets complicated.
 
2012-02-22 02:51:27 PM
I've had an internal ultrasound. It's not a lot of fun having a huge rod shoved around in you hoo ha.


Maybe if it vibrated......
 
2012-02-22 02:54:06 PM

oakleym82:

edited for brevity:

"VA has a law that restricts abortion only to embryos (e.g. less than 8 weeks, thank you theorellior). The age of the embryo/fetus has to be verified before an abortion will be administered. How else can the OB/GYN / Planned Parenthood verify this independently of the patient?"

An HCG Quantitative.

 
2012-02-22 02:56:54 PM

I drunk what: than beg the question

i'm ready when you are


Google it. "Begging the question" doesn't mean what you think it means.

I drunk what: I do. Unless they can figure out a way not to dispose of any...


Hey cool at least you're consistent. I respect your consistency even though I disagree with you.

It's like racists. I respect racists who acknowledged that they're racists orders of magnitude more than I respect racists who pretend like they're not.

I drunk what: the frozen ones aren't dead (yet), the rest yes


Sure, but at the very least the indefinite cryogenic stasis of a human life would be kidnapping then, right? I mean, I'm not allowed to take someone and lock them in a freezer against their will, why should I be able to do that to an embryo.
 
2012-02-22 02:59:20 PM

Walker: My state of Virginia is becoming so f*cked up. All this anti-abortion stuff, trying to ban it by making laws that shut down clinics for not meeting absurd rules like hallway widths. Also making laws specifically designed to harass women going for a legal procedure. For a state that voted for Obama it seems to be getting redder by the day. I need to move to a more liberal state, as this one certainly doesn't represent my views, nor the views of most in Northern VA. I wouldn't move across the river to Maryland though, they are too liberal. They are providing free college tuition for illegal immigrants. If you were born and raised in Maryland no free college for you. Pay up slacker! Plus they have a bag tax, toilet tax, and are adding even more crazy taxes. Move to DC? No thanks, I don't want Mayor Crackhead Barry on my city council.


Then why don't you go to hell?
 
2012-02-22 03:00:08 PM

alfuso: oakleym82:

edited for brevity:

"VA has a law that restricts abortion only to embryos (e.g. less than 8 weeks, thank you theorellior). The age of the embryo/fetus has to be verified before an abortion will be administered. How else can the OB/GYN / Planned Parenthood verify this independently of the patient?"

An HCG Quantitative.


Yeah, they even have home pregnancy tests now that will tell you about how far along you are.
 
2012-02-22 03:00:25 PM
Agggh I see there are people posting here who take the tack that no woman ever takes abortion seriously (unless it's the poster herself).

Abortion is painful, expensive and emotionally traumatizing. You really think 99.999% of women having abortions DON'T agonize over the situation? I mean yeah there are a few morons who consider abortion as after-the-fact birth control but the vast majority of women don't consider abortion a party or a trip to the manicurist.

The reason why the Onion article on the Abortionplex was so funny, is because it's so far from the truth, yet so close to the delusions of conservatives.
 
2012-02-22 03:01:46 PM

I drunk what: Magorn: and if you believe it should be illegal because it's murder, you also believe there should NOT be an exception in the case of rape or incest correct?

correct

Magorn: Because if you believe in a rape or incest exception then you don't really believe that abortion is murder. It is something Bad, but not murder, if you believe it is okay for rape victims, because the circumstances of the child's conception shouldn't affect thier legal right not be murdered should it?

indeed. reasonably and logically

Magorn: Now assuming you DO believe there should be no exception, then the next question is should women who get abortions therefore be prosecuted for murder?

yes. assuming the law had been changed and they were fully aware of their choice.

Magorn: And since an abortion is a premeditated act and therefore 1st degree murder, should doctors convicted of performing abortions be eligible to be sentenced to death or life without parole?

yup, and they can certainly afford not to be a burden on the state, for all of you that worry about politics-economics.

/again assuming the whole clearly changed law thing from above

Magorn: If abortion is murder, then at the very least the "Felony Murder" rule applies to her too and she's as guilty as the doctor, so death or life in jail for her too?

yes

Magorn: How can any other punishment or legal treatment be consistent with the claim that "abortion is murder"?

well i'm sure there would be those who would try to argue, about "manslaughter" and such things, however i agree with you 100%

Magorn: Let me walk you through that just a bit, because I once believed as you did

let me walk with you just a bit, since for some reason you no longer believe

may i ask why?


Well I give you full credit for at least having internally consistent beliefs, even if I disagree with them. So to answer your question, I don't believe that abortion is murder because I couldn't answer yes to that same chain of questions.

For example, I've worked with rape victims extensively and while pregnancy is extremly rare from rape, it DOES happen, and I've come to realize that the trauma of being forced to carry such a child term would be very much like putting the woman through a second 40-week long rape, and I cannot believe that is a "moral" thing to do.

I don;t believe it because not only am I a Catholic but I've studied church doctrine, history, and dogma extensively. In studying I learned that the idea that life begins at conception and abortion is always a sin is a relatively recent one in the Church's history. Abortion used to be completely acceptable until "the quickening" or when the child could be felt to move in the womb. This ties into the old catechistic idea that "The intellect is the repository of the soul" which suggests we are not fully "human" until our intellect and reason begin to form

I don't believe it because I have seen the abomination that is an Anacephalic baby first hand- and the gut-wrenching sight of a committed "pro-life" parent of such a "child" believing that her baby will "get better" and is "improving" (and since this one was born with a functioning brain-stem, but nothing else, this horror-show went on for YEARS.) I simply cannot believe that child was "meant" to be born or that anyone was better off for its existence

But mostly, as a parent myself, and someone who had an extended "pregnancy scare" with my now wife at the worst possible time for both of us, I know that I value life, and my own personal ethics would neve allow me to ask or encourage anyone to have an abortion, and it saddens me deeply that they occur, particularly as a means of after the fact birth control.

BUT I also know that those are MY beliefs and ethics, and absent harm to me, I firmly believe I have no right, particularly in a pluralistic society such as ours, to enforce my morals on another. What I WANT is one thing, what the law should ALLOW or forbid is quite another
 
2012-02-22 03:04:40 PM

The Homer Tax: "Begging the question" doesn't mean what you think it means.


i know, my version is way more fun, i prefer to resolve our differences than to fence with debate terms at each other

/en garde

The Homer Tax: I respect your consistency even though I disagree with you.


ditto, and thanks for the reminder, sometimes we like to file certain unpleasant realities in the nether regions of our minds

like i said, i'm definitely not gaining any popularity, but i will always consistently follow any beliefs i have to their logical and reasonable conclusions

yay me

[foreveralone.jpg]

The Homer Tax: Sure, but at the very least the indefinite cryogenic stasis of a human life would be kidnapping then, right? I mean, I'm not allowed to take someone and lock them in a freezer against their will, why should I be able to do that to an embryo.


that's why we have politicians, to determine such things, i can only tell you what is right and wrong, you guys really don't won't to know how i would rule the world, my politics are too awesome for the average human to withstand

snark aside, i don't think belittling the topic will simply make things go away

/woe unto our convenience
//thinkn is hard
 
2012-02-22 03:08:12 PM
"Many of the bill's supporters were apparently unaware of how invasive the procedure could be, one of the officials added."

And that right there is one of the biggest problems with out completely farked in the head government. It's run by people who are more than willing to make sweeping legal changes without the vaguest understanding of what the fark it is they're actually forcing people to abide by. Either that, or they do know but they think that feigning ignorance is preferable to outing themselves as power-mad assholes who don't give a shiat about the people they're governing. Either one is about as bad as the other.
 
2012-02-22 03:08:14 PM

BigView: So what is the level of invasiveness of an unltrasound compared to the level of invasiveness of an abortion?

You can make murder efficient and unobtrusive and you can even dehumanize the victim but it's not any less a murder.

Forget the arguments about not calling fetuses human. Babies are only 9 months more mature and there is no question they are human even though it may take 20 more years until they can be considered fully developed adults.

And this is a woman's choice? How interesting that we give this god-like authority to someone too incompetent to know when to cross her legs. (All I'm saying here is that it's not a woman's choice even if she becomes the vessel for the first 9 months of a human life -- the man also has the responsibility).

This is the debate and not the actions of some idiots.


It's a lot more complicated than "cross her legs" B.S. You know there is a lot of pressure out there for people to have sex. There is a lot of misinformation and abstinence-only education that leaves people ignorant about their own biological processes. You know that most humans have a built-in drive to have sex. The world is overpopulated. Not everyone can handle raising 1, 2, 6 children.

There is no scientific proof for the existence of a soul so how is it murder to dispose of a 3 month old fetus with no thought processes? Every year hundreds of thousands of dogs and cats are euthanized in this country, they obviously have more brain function than a 3 month old fetus - why aren't you upset about that?

On another note, "God given right"? Why does God cause so many miscarriages? Why so many deformed fetuses, so many babies born with severe genetic problems?

I heard from the daughter of a nurse that a fairly common type of miscarriage results in a pear-shaped fetus with hair and teeth. In the afterlife, do deformed pear-shaped fetuses zoom around with angel wings and halos?
 
2012-02-22 03:09:13 PM

I drunk what: 3. taxes or no taxes, humans have found ways to feed their offspring since the beginning of time, so you'd do yourself a favor by not pretending that the presence of a govt. is required to sustain life. again with the politics *feeling sick*


No, lots of children have starved to death. That has decreased significantly since governments assumed the responsibility that churches and charities either refused to do, or did not have sufficient resources for, or simply did not exist to do.
 
2012-02-22 03:09:37 PM

Dictatorial_Flair: And that right there is one of the biggest problems with out ourcompletely farked in the head government.


FTFM. Stupid sleep.
 
2012-02-22 03:10:20 PM

I drunk what: theorellior: Would you legislate these decisions on all parents? Or would you trust in their adult decision-making skills?

if i have not made this painfully obvious by now, clearly i'm doing something wrong :(

yes i believe we should legislate decisions concerning the protection of human life, no i do not trust the average "adult's" decision-making skills


Wow, this is the first time I have heard a conservative actually speaking in support of government death panels.

that's pretty impressive.
 
2012-02-22 03:12:35 PM
YOUR

Seriously tho, I'm getting tired of wrinkled old men telling me what I do and do not get to do with my body. It's none of their farking business.
 
2012-02-22 03:13:29 PM

BFletch651: Koalaesq: meanmutton: BFletch651: My legislative program for dealing with the abortion debate:

1. Abortion is legal nationwide up to viability (6 months, mol)
2. No government money for it and no insurance requirement for it.
3. Minimize unwanted pregnancies by providing free birth control to everyone nationwide and federal expense.
4. Encourage domestic adoption by (a) increasing federal adoption tax credit to $25,000, which is close to the actual cost, and (b) making it easier to terminate parental rights of birth parents, particularly unidentified fathers.All via federal legislation.

All 100% reasonable, a very good way to deal with the issues, which is why no one will ever accept it.

Can you explain this one to me in the context of how it would impact abortion? In NJ, for example, there is no right to terminate your parental rights short of the state government doing it through DYFS or through the adoption by a step-parent.

Not a lawyer, but here's my thinking.

Pregnant and single woman doesn't want baby. Would like to take it to term and give it up for adoption. Give her the right to unilaterally terminate the parental rights of both herself AND THE FATHER. He has no appeal. The easier process would encourage more pregnancies to be carried through, ratherh than aborted. Father has no veto over an abortion now. Also encourages adoption by giveing adoption parents "clear title".


Why should the state/fed encourage women to have and give up babies they don't want? Why the hell should any of us have to take on the responsibility for their little bundle of not so much joy?

Can you explain to me, rationally, why an "unwanted" pregnancy should EVER be carried to term? BTW, rationally excludes things like "because it's a life". Just to be clear.
 
2012-02-22 03:17:20 PM

Magorn: Thoroughly With Foil: ksjones: Thoroughly With Foil: ksjones: Thoroughly With Foil: : Can't afford it? Don't sit on a dick.


and that is something only women should have to worry about? it takes 2 to tango, bucko.

hear that all hetero men? don't you dare stick your dick in vag if you are ready and capable of supporting a child

Never said only women had to worry about it, I support your position on males as well. If you want to have sex, you should be fully prepared for the consequences of your actions - both men & women.


ah, see, now you're arguing personal responsibility... while trying to limit the extent that one can exercise their personal responsibility.


why should what anyone else does with their body concern you (or anyone else) at all?

Because my tax dollars are supporting agencies that perform these horrible procedures, which I truly believe are murder - despite what your secular viewpoint is.

Let me walk you through that just a bit, because I once believed as you did, grew up believing that in fact, and even marched every January holding up signs that said that.

Okay first, if you truly belive abortion is murder, then I assume you believe that abortion should be illegal?

and if you believe it should be illegal because it's murder, you also believe there should NOT be an exception in the case of rape or incest correct?

Because if you believe in a rape or incest exception then you don't really believe that abortion is murder. It is something Bad, but not murder, if you believe it is okay for rape victims, because the circumstances of the child's conception shouldn't affect thier legal right not be murdered should it?

Now assuming you DO believe there should be no exception, then the next question is should women who get abortions therefore be prosecuted for murder? And since an abortion is a premeditated act and therefore 1st degree murder, should doctors convicted of performing abortions be eligible to be sentenced to death or life without ...


I believe that if we are truly as enlightened & intellectual of a society as we claim to be, than there should be no need for such a thing (though, sadly we are not).

If I could abolish abortion, I would do so without retribution - vengeance does not belong to me. Besides, any abortions performed prior to their abolishment would have been done so within the confines of the law.

In the case of commission of an abortion in the hypothetical post-abolishment, I would not necessarily support incarceration. Each instance would need to be handled on a case-by-case basis (no zero tolerance, no mandatory minimums) with penalties ranging from community service (to be performed in orphanages or with adoption assistance, big-brother/big-sister programs) to fines & counseling. I would also support stiffer (no pun intended) penalties for the fathers involved, should it be found they were complicit, since they would obviously not have to experience the pregnancy. This would also apply to any Doctors or other parties involved in the actual attempt.

I do not support the death penalty.

I do believe that every attempt should be made (regardless of the circumstances) to carry each pregnancy to term.
 
Displayed 50 of 370 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report