Obviously, remove capitalizations. it's a
very short article so please check it
out.
"COLUMBIA, S.C. - With calls of emotional
blackmail from opponents, a measure
requiring women seeking abortions to first
review ultrasound images of their fetuses
advanced Wednesday in the South Carolina
Legislature."
"Some states make ultrasound images
available to women before an abortion, but
South Carolina would be alone in requiring
women to view the pictures."
"Critics consider the proposal a tool to
intimidate women who already have made an
agonizing decision.
"You love them in the womb but once they
get here, it's a different story," said
Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, a Democrat and a
social worker. "You're sitting here
passing judgment? Who gave you the
right?""
"The state's three abortion clinics
already perform ultrasounds, paid for by the
woman seeking the procedure, to
determine the fetus' age."
The article is so short I've almost quoted
the entire thing.
Anyway... WHy should a woman be forced to
look at an image? You can't force someone
to look at something they don't want to
see; that's an invasion of personal
rights. What would they do if a woman
refused to look; tape her eyes open?
refuse to let her abort just because she
won't look at a picture? Doesn't that seem
ridiculous to people?
Most women who abort already know what an
ultrasound looks like, they already know
what a fetus looks like. Most women do not
abort uninformed! South carolina already
requires that they be informed not only of
the current age of the fetus, but also
it's developmental state (which I'm sure
some clinics lie about and say the fetus
is capable of things it's not) and
abortion alternatives.
This is emotional terrorism. I feel for
these poor women; I'm sure they not only
have to walk through waves of protestors
who have no right to preach, but then they
have to face betrayal from within the
clinic.
Last edited by Tylanas on 03-23-07 00:32am; edited 1 time in total
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3962 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 126
Thanked:12
Posted: 03-23-07 00:06am
Great. More "you don't know what you're
doing because you're an fool" kind of
brainwashing crap.
I'm pretty sure women know what's in
there, and what's going on. Ding ding!
That's why they pick abortion!
I've got no problem if a woman wants to
see a scan, that's grand and fine. I'm
all for that. But actually forcing a
woman to see a scan? What are they doing
to do to enforce this? Probably sign a
form that says "I saw the scan"? I wonder
if they'll have to get out stopwatches and
say you have to look at this for sixty
seconds.
On the other hand...if a woman is so
unsure in her decision that seeing a scan
would sway her mind...then perhaps she
needs to reconsider her decision.
You've got to honestly ask yourself: If I
saw the scan before the abortion, would I
of changed my mind?
|
Meandering Away
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 535
Posted: 03-23-07 04:56am
deleted
Last edited by Meandering Away on 03-23-07 12:25pm; edited 1 time in total
|
Moo
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 20 Feb 2006 Posts: 1066 Location: London
Thanks: 21
Thanked:110
Posted: 03-23-07 05:23am
Birch
wrote:
I've got no problem if a woman wants to
see a scan, that's grand and fine. I'm
all for that. But actually forcing a
woman to see a scan? What are they doing
to do to enforce this? Probably sign a
form that says "I saw the scan"? I wonder
if they'll have to get out stopwatches and
say you have to look at this for sixty
seconds.
On the other hand...if a woman is so
unsure in her decision that seeing a scan
would sway her mind...then perhaps she
needs to reconsider her
decision.
I couldn't agree more!
Birch
wrote:
You've got to honestly ask
yourself: If I saw the scan before the
abortion, would I of changed my
mind?
I did before my abortion and it didn't
make any difference - I knew what age the
foetus was beforehand and I knew what was
happening development wise at that
gestation. Looking at it honestly didn't
do anything to me
|
Jules
Moderator
Joined: 19 Aug 2006 Posts: 3752 Location: Merrie Englande, UK
Thanks: 75
Thanked:65
Posted: 03-23-07 08:55am
I think women should be made to look at
the ultrasound because then they can't
turn round afterwards and say that they
didn't know what they were doing. If they
are having an abortion then why should it
bother them to see the foetus? Why is
there such an outcry about this? Is it
perhaps because if more women saw the
thing they were allowing to be killed they
might not want to abort after all...?
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3962 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 126
Thanked:12
Posted: 03-23-07 10:33am
PurestGreen
wrote:
I think women should
be made to look at the ultrasound because
then they can't turn round afterwards and
say that they didn't know what they were
doing. If they are having an abortion
then why should it bother them to see the
foetus? Why is there such an outcry about
this? Is it perhaps because if more women
saw the thing they were allowing to be
killed they might not want to abort after
all...?
While I would hope that women know
exactly what they are doing before they
get to that point in the process, I will
assume that not all will. Therefore, I
support the option of viewing the scan.
That puts the ball in the woman's court.
If she wishes to continue without seeing
it, then either 1. The scan would make no
difference anyways (such as in my own
case) or 2. She chooses to continue 'in the
dark'. Support choice, yes?
Again, I really think that if a woman
would be so swayed by seeing a scan into
not aborting, than abortion may not be the
right answer for her. But if she chooses
to abort, and chooses to be ignorant (for
lack of a better word) that is her
decision, and who am I to say otherwise?
When I had my abortion, I was not scanned
so I did not hae the option of viewing a
scan. I was quite headstrong with my
decision, so it would not have made a
difference. I also read quite a bit
beforehand just what six weeks meant, and
felt fully comfortable with my decision.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-23-07 17:03pm
Birch
wrote:
PurestGreen
wrote:
I think women should
be made to look at the ultrasound because
then they can't turn round afterwards and
say that they didn't know what they were
doing. If they are having an abortion
then why should it bother them to see the
foetus? Why is there such an outcry about
this? Is it perhaps because if more women
saw the thing they were allowing to be
killed they might not want to abort after
all...?
While I would hope that women know
exactly what they are doing before they
get to that point in the process, I will
assume that not all will. Therefore, I
support the option of viewing the scan.
That puts the ball in the woman's court.
If she wishes to continue without seeing
it, then either 1. The scan would make no
difference anyways (such as in my own
case) or 2. She chooses to continue 'in the
dark'. Support choice, yes?
Again, I really think that if a woman
would be so swayed by seeing a scan into
not aborting, than abortion may not be the
right answer for her. But if she chooses
to abort, and chooses to be ignorant (for
lack of a better word) that is her
decision, and who am I to say otherwise?
When I had my abortion, I was not scanned
so I did not hae the option of viewing a
scan. I was quite headstrong with my
decision, so it would not have made a
difference. I also read quite a bit
beforehand just what six weeks meant, and
felt fully comfortable with my
decision.
I have no problem if a woman wants to
look at a picture, but forcing
her to do so is once again denying her
rights!!
I know that I have difficulty making hard
desicions, and I can be swayed to make a
desicion that I will later regret for th
rest of my life, with emotional drivvel. I
would want to kill the doctor that forced
me to see a scan, if that image made me
change my mind and not abort, and I then
regreted not aborting afterwards.
Such an invasion of privacy is
inexcusable, and constitutionally wrong.
You don't have to look at pictures of
appendixes when you get yours removed; you
always have the choice, but doctors do not
tape your eyes open and force you to see
an x-ray of your infected appendix, and
then force you to sign a sheet affirming
that you've seen it, before they let you
get the operation. No; appendicitis is an
emergency situation, the docs get you in
as fast as possible, explain the risks,
and as with any surgery, it is of course
elective.
Abortion is an emergency too; time is
always of the essence when deciding to
abort, and anything that causes a woman
more grief than it helps, is going against
the hippocratic oath!! Not the original
one, the one we have today. The
contemporary one that actually matters. DO
no harm to your patient? The mother is the
patient, the fetus is not. The fetus is
the foreign object that needs to be
removed.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 03-23-07 17:42pm
Eiri
wrote:
The contemporary one that
actually matters. DO no harm to your
patient? The mother is the patient, the
fetus is not. The fetus is the foreign
object that needs to be
removed.
The mother is healthy patient, she just go
to the hospital to kill the baby.
So sad when people call objects to human
beings.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-23-07 18:45pm
nightangel73
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
The contemporary one that
actually matters. DO no harm to your
patient? The mother is the patient, the
fetus is not. The fetus is the foreign
object that needs to be
removed.
The mother is healthy patient, she just go
to the hospital to kill the baby.
So sad when people call objects to human
beings.
The fetus is in no way a human
being/person. It is no more a whole human
that your chopped of finger is a whole
human.
|
Cambion
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 08 Nov 2005 Posts: 748
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-23-07 20:27pm
I wouldn't call a fetus a person or an
object, because it has characteristics of
neither. A person can breathe, think, eat,
walk and overlal function on their own
(most can anyway). An object doesn't move
unless force is applied to it, and it
doesn't breathe, eat or anything else I
listed previously. A fetus is simply a
living thing - not a person because it
can't do the things a person does, and not
a thing because it's alive. That being
said, living things die/are killed every
day, so why people get their panties in a
wad over killing a living thing that feeds
off a woman's body makes me scratch my
head.
As far as the original topic, I don't
think women should be forced to do
anything. Some women have to do a lot of
soul-searching to have an abortion - they
might really dearly want a baby, but can't
afford it or have health problems that
make them miserable, et cetera. In cases
like these, these women make the
responsible and selfless decision to abort
a child that would not have the best life
possible. Being forced to see that baby
that is so wanted will only cause women
grief and make them feel unnecessary
sorrow. For some women, the decision is
hard enough without having their noses
rubbed in it. For other women, they feel
totally indifferent - upon seeing that
creature living in their bodies, they may
feel more inclined to abort (I know I sure
would).
That all being said, I think women should
at least have the option of seeing the
scan, although the reasoning behind it
evades me.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 03-23-07 21:11pm
Eiri
wrote:
nightangel73
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
The contemporary one that
actually matters. DO no harm to your
patient? The mother is the patient, the
fetus is not. The fetus is the foreign
object that needs to be
removed.
The mother is healthy patient, she just go
to the hospital to kill the baby.
So sad when people call objects to human
beings.
The fetus is in no way a human
being/person. It is no more a whole human
that your chopped of finger is a whole
human.
my choppend finger doesn't have a beating
heart
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-23-07 22:07pm
nightangel73
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
nightangel73
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
The contemporary one that
actually matters. DO no harm to your
patient? The mother is the patient, the
fetus is not. The fetus is the foreign
object that needs to be
removed.
The mother is healthy patient, she just go
to the hospital to kill the baby.
So sad when people call objects to human
beings.
The fetus is in no way a human
being/person. It is no more a whole human
that your chopped of finger is a whole
human.
my choppend finger doesn't have a beating
heart
At an early enough age, neither does a
fetus.
To cambion: I agree, the woman should
always have the choice to view anything.
|
diamond splinter
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 611 Location: ,
Posted: 03-24-07 06:45am
murder suspects are forced to
veiw pictures of their victims i see no
difference here at all
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-24-07 07:07am
diamond splinter
wrote:
murder suspects are forced to
veiw pictures of their victims i see no
difference here at
all
Because this isn't murder,
that's why. This isn't illegal either. And
these women don't view it as murder
either, unless they've been lied to and
brainwashd by pro-lifers.
A murderer is shown pictures of
the victims in order to illicit a response
for a confession; and it is only done as a
form of emotional warfare to get him to
confess to the crime of murder,
and it is done after
s/he commits the crime, not to mention
they've already seen the victim, most
likely face-to-face, and talked to the
victim.
The pictures are not shown to a "potential"
murderer, because most of the
time murders are just senseless
violence, explainable only through
psychopathic explanations, and no one can
even expect them. Showing the pictures
would most likely not change a murderer's
mind anyway becuse s/he is most likely
crazy.
Women who abort are not crazy. They are
not psychopaths. They know, unlike (many)
pro-lifers, exactly what the fetus is and
where it stands in relation to the
mother's right to control her body and
make her own desicions. They are also not
commiting a crime, and god/whatever
willing, it will never be a crime.
They are already making a difficult
desicion, and being far more practical and
loving than a pro-lifer who simply wants
humans to breed like cats. There is no
reason to make the desicion harder; no
sense in it, just like there is no sense
in super-carefully explaining all of the
downsides to any surgery to a person, even
adding in a couple of lies, while only
lightly glazing over the benefits, and
even telling the person that these
benefits are horrible.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 03-24-07 09:07am
Eiri
wrote:
nightangel73
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
nightangel73
wrote:
Eiri
wrote:
The contemporary one that
actually matters. DO no harm to your
patient? The mother is the patient, the
fetus is not. The fetus is the foreign
object that needs to be
removed.
The mother is healthy patient, she just go
to the hospital to kill the baby.
So sad when people call objects to human
beings.
The fetus is in no way a human
being/person. It is no more a whole human
that your chopped of finger is a whole
human.
my choppend finger doesn't have a beating
heart
At an early enough age, neither does a
fetus.
Yeah 21 days, 3 weeks when the woman
realizes she is pregnant.
|
nightangel73
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 2487 Location: ,
Thanks: 14
Thanked:10
Posted: 03-24-07 09:13am
Eiri
wrote:
They are already making a difficult
desicion, and being far more practical and
loving than a pro-lifer who simply wants
humans to breed like cats. There is no
reason to make the desicion harder; no
sense in it, just like there is no sense
in super-carefully explaining all of the
downsides to any surgery to a person, even
adding in a couple of lies, while only
lightly glazing over the benefits, and
even telling the person that these
benefits are
horrible.
I don't see why it is a difficult decision
if the fetus is just an object. If the
fetus actually meant something then i can
see where it would be a difficult
decision.
|
Jules
Moderator
Joined: 19 Aug 2006 Posts: 3752 Location: Merrie Englande, UK
Thanks: 75
Thanked:65
Posted: 03-24-07 10:34am
nightangel73
wrote:
I don't see why it is a difficult decision
if the fetus is just an object. If the
fetus actually meant something then i can
see where it would be a difficult
decision.
This is a very interesting point actually;
if the foetus really is 'not a person' and
of no more consequence than a tumour, then
why is it such a hard decision for many
(not all) women to make to have it killed?
|
Birch
Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005 Posts: 3962 Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 126
Thanked:12
Posted: 03-24-07 11:12am
PurestGreen
wrote:
nightangel73
wrote:
I don't see why it is a difficult decision
if the fetus is just an object. If the
fetus actually meant something then i can
see where it would be a difficult
decision.
This is a very interesting point actually;
if the foetus really is 'not a person' and
of no more consequence than a tumour, then
why is it such a hard decision for many
(not all) women to make to have it killed?
Yup, good point. If it is so hard to
decide (this is different than hard to do)
then abortion may not be the right choice
for a woman?
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 03-25-07 00:43am
Birch
wrote:
PurestGreen
wrote:
nightangel73
wrote:
I don't see why it is a difficult decision
if the fetus is just an object. If the
fetus actually meant something then i can
see where it would be a difficult
decision.
This is a very interesting point actually;
if the foetus really is 'not a person' and
of no more consequence than a tumour, then
why is it such a hard decision for many
(not all) women to make to have it killed?
Yup, good point. If it is so hard to
decide (this is different than hard to do)
then abortion may not be the right choice
for a woman?
Because. A woman may be in a situation
where she cannot physically or
economically care for a child; and she may
also not believe in adoption because of
how she views the current adoption system
and how full it is. For her, abortion is
the best desicion; but even the right
desicion can be painful.
The right desicion isn't always flowers
and cupcakes. The right desicion can hurt,
and if you believe the right desicion is
always easy, then you are deluded and
naive.
|
Jules
Moderator
Joined: 19 Aug 2006 Posts: 3752 Location: Merrie Englande, UK
Thanks: 75
Thanked:65
Posted: 03-25-07 04:30am
Eiri
wrote:
Birch
wrote:
PurestGreen
wrote:
nightangel73
wrote:
I don't see why it is a difficult decision
if the fetus is just an object. If the
fetus actually meant something then i can
see where it would be a difficult
decision.
This is a very interesting point actually;
if the foetus really is 'not a person' and
of no more consequence than a tumour, then
why is it such a hard decision for many
(not all) women to make to have it killed?
Yup, good point. If it is so hard to
decide (this is different than hard to do)
then abortion may not be the right choice
for a woman?
Because. A woman may be in a situation
where she cannot physically or
economically care for a child; and she may
also not believe in adoption because of
how she views the current adoption system
and how full it is. For her, abortion is
the best desicion; but even the right
desicion can be painful.
The right desicion isn't always flowers
and cupcakes. The right desicion can hurt,
and if you believe the right desicion is
always easy, then you are deluded and
naive.
And what does that make the person who has
their foetus killed even though they
believe it to be more than 'just cells'?
