The Dreaded Rear Admiral: AverageAmericanGuy: Kids who would have otherwise been aborted are not likely to grow up to be good little conservatives.

We really need to tone down the rhetoric here and let these harlots clean out their uteruses. Everyone will be happier in the long run.

Bears repeating too.

Everyone told my mother to abort me. She was 37, higher risk, etc. She seriously considered it, but decided to have me.

She's still pro-choice. I grew up to be the libbiest lib to ever lib lib. And pro-choice. If I had been aborted... I'd have been aborted. I wouldn't have a voice because I wasn't a person.

Ladies and gentlemen, Tim Tebow.

I don't know about you guys, but I've been learning how to perform back alley abortions so that when the shiat goes down I can make gangster level cash.

pxsteel: Wow, you farkers are idiots. You do realize that this is how it is figured. If you are pregnant, your last cycle is how they figure the age of the fetus and the due date for when the child will be born. "When was your last cycle" is the first question the doctor/nurse asks when you are pregnant.

But the problem with putting it into law is that 1) many people do not have regular cycles, 2) many people are on birth control which limits their periods to 4 times a year or less, & 3) many people have had previous children which may be suppressing their ovulation, and they haven't had a period yet.

So legally defining something that is at best a medical guess is only going to cause problems.

urbangirl: You don't get to impose your opinions and beliefs on my uterus. Sorry.

Well, actually if you've been paying any attention to politics, apparently we do. We shouldn't be able to, but apparently we can.

Slesfo: problem is, Liberals prefer feelings over facts. this bill doesn't declare that women are necessarily pregnant 2 weeks before conception, but, in doing the math to protect human life, uses the earliest estimate of when the child could have been conceived.

In the interest of fact-checking/keeping people honest:

Factually, we have methods of determining when an embryo was conceived. These have been independently tested and calibrated using cases where dates of conception were known, and while they're not perfect, they do give us a fairly narrow range of possible conception dates. For an estimation using transvaginal ultrasound, the 95% confidence interval has been reported as 4.3 days. (Link)

This bill requires physicians to add a number to the results of these methods. This is very different from simply taking the earliest date of conception from the reasonable range of possibilities produced by the existing methods (i.e. using the earliest medical estimate of when the child could have been conceived, as you stated). In fact, the definition of "gestational age" in this bill means that on average the start of gestation will be altered to before the earliest medical estimate of when the child could have been conceived, since the average time since the last normal menstrual cycle will be higher than 4.3 days.

mainstreet62: PsyLord: As a Floridian, I formally request that the Arizona have its own tag.

Overruled. For now.

Your state is still #1 in per capita Derp, but Arizona is getting there......

Rest assured, Arizona is working on a problem. Once the new motto takes hold, they're a shoo-in.



At first, I was disappointed. Then I realized, hey, they gotta start somewhere.

xanadian: basemetal: Two weeks before conception. Are they going after masturbation too?

Probably.

One thing I've noticed about the GOP and, especially, its fundie base, is that they're not really concerned about protecting unborn babies. If they were so concerned about the sanctity of life, they'd be against the death penalty. No, they're against people enjoying themselves. They're anti-sex, anti-alcohol, anti-fun. It's all from some misplaced belief that if you suffer here on Earth, you'll have rewards in Heaven.

Of course, I'm just preaching to the choir here.

I think it's more of a "don't look at me" guilt thing. For the GOP, the more they passionately hate something, the more likely they are doing it. That senator who screams from pulpit about how gays are going to hell? Yeah, he gets caught having sex with another man in the washroom. The congress person who yells how drugs are evil? Caught doing coke in his office. The GOP governor who roars about corruption in the Democrat house? Yeah, he's taking bribes.

So, I have to wonder all of these men and women stream rolling their way through women's reproductive rights. What are they hiding?

Seriously, they need their own tag. This shiat's hilarious.

JusticeandIndependence: pxsteel: Summer Glau's Love Slave: "Under Arizona's H.B. 2036, the state would recognize the start of the unborn child's life to be the first day of its mother's last menstrual period."

Wow, you farkers are idiots. You do realize that this is how it is figured. If you are pregnant, your last cycle is how they figure the age of the fetus and the due date for when the child will be born. "When was your last cycle" is the first question the doctor/nurse asks when you are pregnant.

/pro choice
//get it done by the end of the first trimester

What's this mean?

Your choice, your life, I don't care either way but make your choice by the end of the first trimester.

GOP Stragetist: There's is no war on women.

Chameleon: xrayspx: This seems to be a great vector for laws like "Women may not smoke or drink, ever!", since women are always considered "Arizona Pregnant", from the time they're 13 to the time they're 50, and smoking or drinking would be harmful to the ovum.

It has happened.

People are just wonderful...

Now that those discriminatory practices might be bolstered by actual on-the-books law, expect more of the same.

JusticeandIndependence: pxsteel: Summer Glau's Love Slave: "Under Arizona's H.B. 2036, the state would recognize the start of the unborn child's life to be the first day of its mother's last menstrual period."

Wow, you farkers are idiots. You do realize that this is how it is figured. If you are pregnant, your last cycle is how they figure the age of the fetus and the due date for when the child will be born. "When was your last cycle" is the first question the doctor/nurse asks when you are pregnant.

/pro choice
//get it done by the end of the first trimester

What's this mean?

it means that if you plan to abort, do it in the first three months. It gets harder and harder to argue that a fetus over 3 months gestation is anything other than a baby.

KatjaMouse: Kim Jong-il: "I would like to listen to the 50 million-plus children that have been aborted and killed since Roe v. Wade,'' the senator says."I would like to listen to what they think of this bill.''

Roe v. Wade was what, 39 years ago? That would mean more than 1.28 million abortions per year on average in the United States. I'm not calling BS (yet), but is that a realistic number? I find it hard to believe that there are that many abortions going on.

According to The Center for Bio Ethical Reform (sounds fishy right off) they have these numbers here:
Number of abortions per year: Approximately 42 Million
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 115,000

I got that link because it was the #1 hit on google for statistics on Abortion. This is our first real problem I think. Anyone trying to get honest information on abortion is going to see that before anything else.

This tidbit came from InfoPlease.com:
In 2000, 1.31 million abortions took place, down from an estimated 1.36 million in 1996. From 1973 through 2000, more than 39 million legal abortions occurred.

By doing math on the Info Please numbers that breaks down to an average of under 1.5 million a year and on a steady decline.
According to CBER, it's 42 million per year. Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.

Yeah, I just got another few free minutes and did some of my own searching...after filtering through the BS sites with an agenda, it does seem that abortions in the United States was up over 1.3 million/year back in the 80s, although it has been well under a million for the past 10 years or so. I am quite surprised the numbers were that high.

These folks in Arizona just don't seem to be getting it, though. What problems is outlawing abortion going to solve? I certainly believe that we should be endeavoring to reduce abortion as much as possible, but we should be focusing on ways to educate people so that they make choices that will not lead them to being in a situation where an abortion is being considered. I just don't see how outlawing abortion is going to make anything better.

My armchair solution: sex ed that emphasizes abstinence (for those students who will respond to the abstinence message, and there are some teens out there who will respond to that message), coupled with a comprehensive review and study of contraception (for those who are just going to have sex anyway).

Would CBER's numbers be for the world, and they are just conveniently not stating that?

Wyalt Derp: mcreadyblue: Does this mean in AZ we are all born 9 months old?

9 months and 2 weeks.

That better be reflected on my DL/ID, Selective Service Registration, voter registration, etc. I want (actual, sane) 17 year olds in boot camps, 15 year olds driving cars unsupervised, and college sophomores drinking legally sooner than usual.

Does this mean that the date listed on my birth certificate is 9 months and two weeks BEFORE I popped out of the womb? What if that confluence of months my mother is pregnant includes a leap year? They better include that in the calculations... if we can celebrate Jesus's ACTUAL REAL no-way-it-was-stolen-from-Saturnalia birthday, then damnit, mine had better be accurate too!

What if mom starts menstrating overnight, but fell asleep before midnight? Can you PROVE that she started after or before? What if she starts menstruating on a late night flight that crosses times zones? Or even the international date line? These lawmakers have obviously never seen Gremlins 2.

This is madness!

ManateeGag: They are really working on their own tag, aren't they.

Where are our usual derps to praise this law as they do with everything else the GOP conceives of.

they praised it 2 weeks ago, because it was an idea 2 weeks before conception.

frepnog: it means that if you plan to abort, do it in the first three months. It gets harder and harder to argue that a fetus over 3 months gestation is anything other than a baby.

Also, since you wont find out until about 5 weeks at the earliest in that you are even pregnant, make sure you live in a state that doesn't make you travel and wait, or you will be SOL because you might be in the second trimester when you find out.

pxsteel: JusticeandIndependence: pxsteel: Summer Glau's Love Slave: "Under Arizona's H.B. 2036, the state would recognize the start of the unborn child's life to be the first day of its mother's last menstrual period."

Wow, you farkers are idiots. You do realize that this is how it is figured. If you are pregnant, your last cycle is how they figure the age of the fetus and the due date for when the child will be born. "When was your last cycle" is the first question the doctor/nurse asks when you are pregnant.

/pro choice
//get it done by the end of the first trimester

What's this mean?

Your choice, your life, I don't care either way but make your choice by the end of the first trimester.

hmmm, interesting. Not all abortions are because people simply don't want a child. Some plan to have a child and something goes horribly wrong.

/happened to the wife and I.
//twice
///stopped trying.

Today's GOP:
Protecting you from your inner slut since a darkie invaded the white house.

foo monkey: The Dreaded Rear Admiral: AverageAmericanGuy: Kids who would have otherwise been aborted are not likely to grow up to be good little conservatives.

We really need to tone down the rhetoric here and let these harlots clean out their uteruses. Everyone will be happier in the long run.

Bears repeating too.

Everyone told my mother to abort me. She was 37, higher risk, etc. She seriously considered it, but decided to have me.

She's still pro-choice. I grew up to be the libbiest lib to ever lib lib. And pro-choice. If I had been aborted... I'd have been aborted. I wouldn't have a voice because I wasn't a person.

Ladies and gentlemen, Tim Tebow.

Gah! You're right!

Although I doubt he's as ardently atheist as I am, or his mom is as lapsed Catholic as my mom is.

/feels dirty now
//must wash Tebow stink off

Dammit Republicans. I know someone warned you this would happen.

You spent 30 years beating the abortion is evil drum. You got lots and lots of votes over the years, but you never did anything about abortion beyond halfhearted attempts you knew would never pass or stand up in court.

Now, after 2 generations of this constant plying of abortion as a wedge issue, you have "true believer" Republicans in state houses around the country and at the federal level that actually are doing something about it.

If you succeed in tearing down Roe V Wade with one of these laws used as a SCOTUS test case, prepare for a galvanized left, losing many women's votes for the next 30 years, and losing an issue you've frenzied your base with for decades.

Jake Havechek: So they get to stick a probe up your cooch whether you like or not?

Are there any women in the Republican Party?

very few now

raanne: pxsteel: Wow, you farkers are idiots. You do realize that this is how it is figured. If you are pregnant, your last cycle is how they figure the age of the fetus and the due date for when the child will be born. "When was your last cycle" is the first question the doctor/nurse asks when you are pregnant.

But the problem with putting it into law is that 1) many people do not have regular cycles, 2) many people are on birth control which limits their periods to 4 times a year or less, & 3) many people have had previous children which may be suppressing their ovulation, and they haven't had a period yet.

So legally defining something that is at best a medical guess is only going to cause problems.

Special circumstances is called life, it may suck, deal with it. 3 months is a long time when you are pregnant. I know there is the very rare exception but 98% of women know they are pregnant within 30 days. Most women know before they take the test, that's why they are taking the test. My wife knew in less than two weeks both times, her body was making changes and it was very noticeable to her.

urbangirl: frepnog: JusticeandIndependence: pxsteel: Summer Glau's Love Slave: "Under Arizona's H.B. 2036, the state would recognize the start of the unborn child's life to be the first day of its mother's last menstrual period."

Wow, you farkers are idiots. You do realize that this is how it is figured. If you are pregnant, your last cycle is how they figure the age of the fetus and the due date for when the child will be born. "When was your last cycle" is the first question the doctor/nurse asks when you are pregnant.

/pro choice
//get it done by the end of the first trimester

What's this mean?

it means that if you plan to abort, do it in the first three months. It gets harder and harder to argue that a fetus over 3 months gestation is anything other than a baby.

That is your belief, not a fact. I get to make my medical decisions based on my beliefs and my doctor's advice, not your belief.

I think you're getting a bit too emotional here, the basis of his point is sound. There is nothing magical about birth or your uterus. You seem to imply so, since your belief seems to be the moment before birth at 40 weeks, the fetus is not its own life form. The basis of his point is there is nothing magical, a 40 week old fetus before birth deserves rights and protections. He agreed 12 weeks for sure it's not its own life form. But starting at 12, as you get closer and closer to 40, it's harder and harder to argue it is not its own life form.

Your emotions have prevented you from seeing that. Relax, take a few moments and realize not everyone is coming from a place of hating women. Arizona and the politicians in the article are but the dude you are responding to doesn't seem to.

pxsteel: Summer Glau's Love Slave: "Under Arizona's H.B. 2036, the state would recognize the start of the unborn child's life to be the first day of its mother's last menstrual period."

Wow, you farkers are idiots. You do realize that this is how it is figured. If you are pregnant, your last cycle is how they figure the age of the fetus and the due date for when the child will be born. "When was your last cycle" is the first question the doctor/nurse asks when you are pregnant.

/pro choice
//get it done by the end of the first trimester

That's a reasonable point, but perhaps a bit oversimplified. Naegele's Rule (developed in the 19th century and based on the date of the last normal cycle) is, as I understand, the most widely accepted method for estimating due date. It is known to be inaccurate, but the inaccuracies are not normally considered a big issue given the variability in the duration of pregnancies, and the extra effort involved in more accurate methods of estimation.

To my understanding there are some cases, such as medical complications, where embryonic/fetal age is important to know independent of due date, and sometimes important to know with more accuracy than Naegele's Rule provides. With ultrasound scans, more accurate (and precise) methods of estimating the date of conception become available, and since every woman seeking an abortion under this proposed law will have had an ultrasound, the gestational age could be estimated more accurately than via the use of the last cycle.

I could be wrong on this, and am ready to be corrected, but so far it seems to me that this bill is legally requiring the use of a method which is less accurate than other guaranteed available methods and which is biased toward increasing the estimated age of the fetus. It may not be sinister, but it seems to be at least a little bit lazy and potentially convenient for those who would wish to effectively restrict abortions to the earliest possible time frame.

Jake Havechek: So I expect to see executions of the mother following miscarriages and stillbirths.

We're up to incarceration and trial for miscarriages, stillbirths, and neonatal death while still in the hospital, so...

Stefanwulf: Slesfo: problem is, Liberals prefer feelings over facts. this bill doesn't declare that women are necessarily pregnant 2 weeks before conception, but, in doing the math to protect human life, uses the earliest estimate of when the child could have been conceived.

In the interest of fact-checking/keeping people honest:

Factually, we have methods of determining when an embryo was conceived. These have been independently tested and calibrated using cases where dates of conception were known, and while they're not perfect, they do give us a fairly narrow range of possible conception dates. For an estimation using transvaginal ultrasound, the 95% confidence interval has been reported as 4.3 days. (Link)

This bill requires physicians to add a number to the results of these methods. This is very different from simply taking the earliest date of conception from the reasonable range of possibilities produced by the existing methods (i.e. using the earliest medical estimate of when the child could have been conceived, as you stated). In fact, the definition of "gestational age" in this bill means that on average the start of gestation will be altered to before the earliest medical estimate of when the child could have been conceived, since the average time since the last normal menstrual cycle will be higher than 4.3 days.

Huh. So I guess the transvaginal ultra-sound requirement isn't "medically unnecessary." Thanks.

Biological Ali: frepnog: bullshiat and you know it. Otherwise in murder cases (or wrongful death/injury) where a pregnant woman was killed (or injured causing the death of the fetus), the perp could not be charged with the murder of the unborn child.

You're going to defend a law that doesn't make sense by referring to other laws that don't make sense?



Also, a fetus is not a parasite. Not in any way.

What do you think a parasite is?

that makes no sense. I simply drew a parallel between 2 laws. abortion is legal, fine. that means that abortion is legally not murder. fine. then why can a perp be charged with the murder of the unborn? after all, it isn't a baby, right? well, either it is or it isn't. much like the bible, too many contradictions.

what do i think a parasite is? one species attaching itself and living off of another species. don't be obtuse, you full well know that a fetus is not a parasite and a simple google search will show you why.

I am against abortion on demand simply because it is genocide. there are ALWAYS exceptions and in many cases abortion is not only needed but necessary... however, 50 million abortions since r v w point to one thing - convenience.

Convenience should not be a good reason to murder someone.

Rann Xerox: Since Arizona considers that clutch of two-week-old dividing cells a person, can a woman declare it as a dependent on her tax return?

From my reading of the bill, it would actually classify a secondary oocyte as a person, even before ovulation has occurred.

All this is going to accomplish is to get women to lie about the date of their last period.

Besides, if we can agree that it is ok to terminate life in the case of brain death - which most people can - it seems to me that we can terminate life before brain activity begins. That's a fair place to start abortion discussion if there really must be some. Personally, I'm all for state funded abortions on demand, no questions asked. If fundies don't like that, they can invent technology which transfers an embryo or fetus painlessly from one host to a more willing one.

Additionally, most prenatal care doesn't even begin until after you think you're 12 weeks pregnant - you haven't had any prenatal care so you don't actually know if you're 12 weeks pregnant or not. So, there is no genetic testing done before then. Parents cannot make decisions to abort based on fetal health & development before then. So, there must always be a window after 12 weeks for euthanasia. You can do it with Fido and Gramma, you should be able to do it with an unborn child that hasn't had a coherent thought. If you value the life of your mother more than the potential of an unborn proto-child, then there must always be a window of abortion opportunity through out the pregnancy to save the life of the mother.

Essentially, abortion must always be available if you value life and the quality of that life.

meat0918: You spent 30 years beating the abortion is evil drum. You got lots and lots of votes over the years, but you never did anything about abortion beyond halfhearted attempts you knew would never pass or stand up in court.

That's just completely false. You need to wake up and pay attention, the right has been eroding abortion rights consistently and constantly for years and years.

Here's a fun one - Virginia passed a law a year ago that considered abortion clinics "hospital facilities." That meant abortion clinics had to be up to hospital standards and codes. You think that was about patient safety?

urbangirl: my uterus

Remember, it's u-ter-US, not u-ter-YOU. We only want to help.

Slesfo: keylock71: What the f*ck is wrong with these people?

Don't like abortion? Then mind your own f*cking business and don't have one.

Don't like murder? Then mind your own f*cking business and don't do any. People at like it's about womens' "rights" to their own bodies when the real issue is that you have another human being whose life you are ending. that is an incontrovertible fact. intentionally ending another human being's life is murder. again, another incontrovertible fact.

problem is, Liberals prefer feelings over facts. this bill doesn't declare that women are necessarily pregnant 2 weeks before conception, but, in doing the math to protect human life, uses the earliest estimate of when the child could have been conceived.

You have no farking idea what a fact is, do you?

Troll elsewhere.

KatjaMouse: PlatinumDragon: We're up to incarceration and trial for miscarriages, stillbirths, and neonatal death while still in the hospital, so...

Which is why women, who even want to keep their babies, are having huge legal problems. There are even cases where women who wish to birth vaginally despite bizarre ordinances that every birth needs to be done via c-section are getting arrested if they opt for a home delivery because of this over inflated idea of personhood applications to fetuses and unborn babies. Or mothers being arrested if there's a stillborn.

wat? where?

/cousin had her second kid last week
//c-section, her choice afaik
///go ahead, ask me about the c-section scar on my face

lennavan: meat0918: You spent 30 years beating the abortion is evil drum. You got lots and lots of votes over the years, but you never did anything about abortion beyond halfhearted attempts you knew would never pass or stand up in court.

That's just completely false. You need to wake up and pay attention, the right has been eroding abortion rights consistently and constantly for years and years.

Here's a fun one - Virginia passed a law a year ago that considered abortion clinics "hospital facilities." That meant abortion clinics had to be up to hospital standards and codes. You think that was about patient safety?

That bill wouldn't even have been possible to pass 10 years, which is what I am trying to say. They would propose such bills, but they would be shot down, vetoed, or kicked out of the courts as unconstitutional.

So, maybe they've just gotten smarter in their attacks?

pxsteel: raanne: pxsteel: Wow, you farkers are idiots. You do realize that this is how it is figured. If you are pregnant, your last cycle is how they figure the age of the fetus and the due date for when the child will be born. "When was your last cycle" is the first question the doctor/nurse asks when you are pregnant.

But the problem with putting it into law is that 1) many people do not have regular cycles, 2) many people are on birth control which limits their periods to 4 times a year or less, & 3) many people have had previous children which may be suppressing their ovulation, and they haven't had a period yet.

So legally defining something that is at best a medical guess is only going to cause problems.

Special circumstances is called life, it may suck, deal with it. 3 months is a long time when you are pregnant. I know there is the very rare exception but 98% of women know they are pregnant within 30 days. Most women know before they take the test, that's why they are taking the test. My wife knew in less than two weeks both times, her body was making changes and it was very noticeable to her.

I'm assuming your wife was trying to get pregnant. The symptoms of early pregnancy are easily dismissed as just being tired (the only symptom I ever had). If I wasn't trying to get pregnant, there is no way that I would have ever thought that I was. And as I stated earlier in the thread, by the LMP method, If I got pregnant today, I am legally 14 months pregnant. Those aren't really "special circumstances" - they are pretty damn normal circumstances.

My point is that 3 months isn't 3 months. those 3 months include 2 weeks before you are even pregnant, and 3 weeks before a pregnancy test can confirm you are pregnant or not. So at the earliest possible knowledge, you have 2 months, not 3. People who are not trying to get pregnant are probably not paying attention to ever single signal their body gives them. Also, around 10% of women have irregular cycles, meaning it could normally be 7 or 8 weeks between periods, not the typical 4, and they aren't going to notice a late period right away. Not to mention those people would get the double-whammy of having to count 6 weeks before they got pregnant into the mix instead of the normal 2 weeks.