Wisconsin lawmakers approve bill requiring ultrasound before abortion

Jun 14, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Fox News

The state Assembly has approved a Republican bill that would require women seeking an abortion to get an ultrasound of the fetus.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of174
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

Yes, they're sincerely trying to impose their own beliefs on women.

So, they're not only forcing her to undergo a medical procedure even when it is not necessary, but they ALSO don't want her insurance paying for it?

“ABORTION KILLS A HUMAN BEING”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

5

5

4

Bravo! If you are going to kill someone, you should at least have to look at them first. Maybe it will change some minds. Insurance should not have to cover it unless its a medical emergency. It would be an elective surgery in that case, and insurance does not have to pay if they choose not to.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

4

kaylayossi wrote:
Bravo! If you are going to kill someone, you should at least have to look at them first. Maybe it will change some minds. Insurance should not have to cover it unless its a medical emergency. It would be an elective surgery in that case, and insurance does not have to pay if they choose not to.
I was talking about insurance covering the ultrasound, Moron.

Laws regarding medical procedures should not be based on trying to manipulate the person having them.

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

kaylayossi wrote:
Bravo! If you are going to kill someone, you should at least have to look at them first. Maybe it will change some minds. Insurance should not have to cover it unless its a medical emergency. It would be an elective surgery in that case, and insurance does not have to pay if they choose not to.
Elective?

Wouldn't pregnancy be considered elective?

I mean really...you anti choicers always contend that the woman/girl choose to have sex thus chose to become pregnant so that amounts to elective. Why should pregnancy be covered?

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Southern Reaper wrote:
Aren't ultrasounds required for surgical abortion, to begin with? I thought they needed to perform them to determine how far along the woman is. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
With the part about pointing out the organs and features, how exactly are they going to force the woman to look, if she doesn't want to? Tape her eyelids open, like in "A Clockwork Orange"?
Being that she is simply a vessel I am sure they can grab her by the hair and shove her face to the monitor. Justifiable with an inanimate object.
Demystifying liberal myth

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

6

6

5

Southern Reaper wrote:
Aren't ultrasounds required for surgical abortion, to begin with? I thought they needed to perform them to determine how far along the woman is. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
From the Damn That Inconvenient Truth Department: Big Abortion will do ultrasounds. And it will fight with the desperation of the damned to avoid showing them to the pregnant women in its abortuaries. It knows that most women who see their babies will make the choice to let them live. When Big Abortion's employees with functioning consciences view ultrasound after ultrasound of the unborn babies their employers are on the verge of snuffing, there's a good chance they'll leave the abortion industry.

** In most cases, when ultrasounds are performed, women are not shown the images unless they specifically ask to see them, and sometimes not even then. Numerous former abortion providers have attested to this, including Dr. Joseph Randall, who was quoted saying:

"They [the women] are never allowed to look at the ultrasound because we knew that if they so much as heard the heart beat, they wouldn’t want to have an abortion."

** Former Planned Parenthood worker Catherine Anthony Adair said the following in an interview:
"At the time I worked for Planned Parenthood ultrasounds were only done if the woman was unsure of the dates of her last menstrual period, or if the doctor ordered one. Women were not given the option of viewing the ultrasound. We never discussed fetal development. The baby was referred to as the ”contents of the uterus” or a “clump of cells.” on the rare occasion a woman asked about the size of the baby, I would tell her it was about the size of the tip of my pencil, regardless of how many weeks into her pregnancy she was."

** In 2011, the Women's Choice Network assisted more than 1,500 women. Of the 172 who saw their sonogram when considering abortion, 123 continued the pregnancy.“We really leave it up to them, and we do have an occasional woman who doesn’t want to look,” Mrs. Scheuring said.“But almost every woman, most every boyfriend and almost every weepy grandma in the room looks at that screen. They want to see. And the most common response we hear is ‘We had no idea.’”

** A woman who was considering abortion after a pregnancy resulting from rape agreed to a free ultrasound at a pregnancy center:

"She was blinking. She was just hanging out, looking around, sucking on her thumb.… It was so realistic, so lifelike. It looks like you can just reach right in there and pick up the baby. I know they have a heartbeat at 4 to 6 weeks, but it still doesn’t feel as real to you until you see a human. It amazed me.

She kept her baby.

“I never thought I could love or bond with a child [who] was conceived under such horrible circumstances, but that’s where we don’t give God enough credit,” Oliver said.“I look at her, and I don’t even see him. She’s beautiful and perfect.”

** Dr. Stuart Campbell performed abortions for years, but the new, vivid, 3-D ultrasound images changed his mind:

"Even a fetus lying there dead doesn’t convey the horror that one experiences seeing a baby moving its arms and legs, opening its mouth, sucking its thumb, and then thinking, gosh, somebody wants to, you know… It looks so vital. It has changed my view. I don’t think there’s any doubt about that."

Dr. Campbell no longer performs abortions.

Dr. Randall, quoted before, testified to the following:

"I think the greatest thing that got to us was the ultrasound. At that time, the ultrasound, or soundwave picture which was moving, called a “real-time ultrasound,” showed the baby on TV. The baby really came alive on TV and was moving. And that picture, that picture of the baby on ultrasound bothered me more than anything else[.]… We lost two nurses. They couldn’t take looking[.]

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

WOW.....excellent and unbiased reporting Dumbystifying!!!

Forgot to post your links did ya?

Let me help you out.....

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/02/07/78-of-preg...

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/07/10-very-su...

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/02/07/78-of-preg...

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/02/07/78-of-preg...

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/02/07/78-of-preg...

Oh and btw:

Religious Pro-Life Organizations

AudioGirl Ministries

Priests For Life

Deacons For Life

National Pro-Life Religious Council

ChristianAnswers.net

Presbyterians For Life

Lutherans For Life

Catholic Pro-Life Committee Of Noth Texas

Project Defending Life

United States Congress Of Catholic Bishops

Sisters Of Life

Baptists For Life

40 Days For Life

Knights Of Columbus

Helpers Of God’s Precious Infants

Human Life International

Human Life International - Spanish

Missionaries To The Preborn

Operation Save America

Pro-Life Action Ministries

CatholicCitizens.org

Orthodox Christians For Life

Children Of The Rosary

EWTN Pro-Life Resources

Heavan’s Friends

LEARN

National Committee For A Human Life Amendment

LifeTeen.com - For Catholic Teenagers

Stand True

Vital Signs Ministries

Anglicans For Life

Catholics United For Life

Seminarian Life Link

Laity For Life

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Southern Reaper wrote:
Aren't ultrasounds required for surgical abortion, to begin with? I thought they needed to perform them to determine how far along the woman is. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
With the part about pointing out the organs and features, how exactly are they going to force the woman to look, if she doesn't want to? Tape her eyelids open, like in "A Clockwork Orange"?
<Shudder>what a movie THAT was. I could only get through it once.

Ultrasounds are done depending on procedure, and that depends on when the woman says her last menstruation began. Still, that should be up to the physician to decide a case by case basis, not a politician for all cases ahead of time.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Southern Reaper wrote:
<quoted text>
I completely agree about the film. I've seen it twice in my life, but some scenes stick to my mind like glue even now.*shudder*
Thank you for clearing that up about the ultrasounds. I agree that it isn't up to politics or religion to decide when or if an ultrasound is necessary.
When I complained to a friend that the movie was "sick", he replied "but it's tastefully DONE sick". What a character :)
Ocean56

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

At last, my technical difficulties may be over. YAAAAAAAY!

For a long time I couldn't post due to my not being able to see the 4-digit number that was required before posting. For the first time in almost a month, I can see that number now. I'll keep my fingers crossed that this isn't just a one-time window.:-)

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Ocean56 wrote:
At last, my technical difficulties may be over. YAAAAAAAY!
For a long time I couldn't post due to my not being able to see the 4-digit number that was required before posting. For the first time in almost a month, I can see that number now. I'll keep my fingers crossed that this isn't just a one-time window.:-)
Ocean!!!!!!!!!!

I have SO missed you!!

Good to see you and I hope all is well!!

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Southern Reaper wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, the "art is tasteful even when it's crap" attitude. I'm afraid I never could get on board with that. A turd wrapped in packaging labeled "art" is still a turd to me.
Uh...the movie I have always hated and was much loved by many was "The Godfather".....that horse head did me!

the Godfather was out on about the same time as The Exorcist. the Exorcist did not scare me but the Godfather did!!

One of my favorite scenes in a movie!

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

"""I've seen the Exorcist about 167 times, and it keeps getting funnier, every single time I see it..."" LOL!!

“And the Horse You Rode in On”

Since: Sep 08

Minneapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Southern Reaper wrote:
<quoted text>
Haha! My mother actually came close to sending me to a shrink when she found me laughing at the part in "The Exorcist" where the little girl's head turns around on her shoulders, but then I explained to her that it was the special effect that made me laugh. Frankly, the only part of that movie that disturbed me was the crucifix rape.
I forgot about that part!

The head spin was fun and realistically she would have been a goner at that point...thats what ran through my head at the time.!!

I thought the makeup was don well by Richard Smith.....great makeup artist!

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Southern Reaper wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, the "art is tasteful even when it's crap" attitude. I'm afraid I never could get on board with that. A turd wrapped in packaging labeled "art" is still a turd to me.
Me too :)
America Wake Up

Terre Haute, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

This is how that vote went and I think every true American and Wisconsin citizens need to tell this Ellis nazi how democracy works in this country. This is horrible and ludicrous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
zef

Hemet, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Southern Reaper wrote:
Aren't ultrasounds required for surgical abortion, to begin with? I thought they needed to perform them to determine how far along the woman is. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
With the part about pointing out the organs and features, how exactly are they going to force the woman to look, if she doesn't want to? Tape her eyelids open, like in "A Clockwork Orange"?
Just place the picture of the baby she wants to kill where she can see it, force her remove any protective eyewear that might prevent her from seeing her victim, than accuse her of staring at her victims. Maybe that will shame her into respecting the life of her baby. If that fails you could always threaten her with robbery, or torture, or mayhem. This is America after all. And that is what americans do now, isn't it.
zef

Hemet, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jun 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Southern Reaper wrote:
<quoted text>
So you're in favor of forcibly strapping women into chairs, taping their eyes open and shoving media of your chose into their faces. Never mind these women's civil rights, they seem to take a back seat to your personal desires.
Pardon me, but you are pathologically ill.
Women can go to some country that doesn't care what people might be looking at to kill their babies. If they choose to kill their baby in America, we must know and approve of what they are staring at.
Ocean56

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Jun 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ocean!!!!!!!!!!
I have SO missed you!!
Good to see you and I hope all is well!!
Thanks, Morgana! I've missed you guys too, and I'm glad to be back. I doubt I could catch up after all this time, so I'll just go from here. lol
Ocean56

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Jun 16, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Southern Reaper wrote:
I don't believe we've met before, but I recall seeing your older posts when I joined. I'm glad to see the issue has cleared up for you. Welcome back!
Thanks, SR, good to be back. Technical question for everyone; what is another good internet software package to use?
Ocean56

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Jun 16, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
Elective?
Wouldn't pregnancy be considered elective?
I mean really...you anti choicers always contend that the woman/girl choose to have sex thus chose to become pregnant so that amounts to elective. Why should pregnancy be covered?
Yep, I have no doubt that the anti-choicers would pitch a fit if the insurance companies decided NOT to cover the costs of carrying a pregnancy to term.

After all, the medical costs of pregnancy are a lot higher than the fee for a one-time abortion would be, especially if the pregnancy causes more medical issues during the nine months.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of174
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••