Pennsylvania House bill would require...

Pennsylvania House bill would require ultrasounds for women seeking abortions

There are 7 comments on the PennLive.com story from Feb 29, 2012, titled Pennsylvania House bill would require ultrasounds for women seeking abortions. In it, PennLive.com reports that:

The battle over abortion rights, never far from center stage in Pennsylvania's cultural wars, has returned to the spotlight.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at PennLive.com.

conservative crapola

Orefield, PA

#1 Feb 29, 2012
PA cons are now the vagina party
cjrian

United States

#2 Feb 29, 2012
Any ethical Physician would perform an ultrasound prior to performing ANY invasive procedure if the patient may be pregnant.

Urine and blood tests are not as accurate as a visual confirmation. The Doctor need to actually verify that the patient actually is pregnant

The Doctor needs to see the location of the fetus
Performing a D&C does nothing for an ectopic pregnancy

The Doctor needs to see the location, position, and size of the fetus and look for other potential complications

And if some women have a change of heart after seeing their child's features and heartbeat, so much the better. After all, the fetus IS a child.
pbfa

Scottsdale, AZ

#3 Feb 29, 2012
Wrong, the fetus is (wait for it) a fetus, not "a child".
Ann

Jarrettsville, MD

#4 Mar 1, 2012
Why doesn't the government get out of people's lives? Women are capable of making their own life choices. Stop treating women like children and demeaning them on their choices.
cjrian

United States

#5 Mar 1, 2012
Ann wrote:
Why doesn't the government get out of people's lives? Women are capable of making their own life choices. Stop treating women like children and demeaning them on their choices.
If you want to be treated like an adult, start acting like one

At first, Welfare was for Widows with children, only, and we can buy that

Then, the Permanently disabled could receive benefits, and we were ok with that.

Then, ANY single female with children became Welfare eligible (and fathers were ejected from the family home)

Then, single females could add to their benefits when they had additional children, and benefits became lifelong

Then, people with self-induced "disabilities" (alcoholism, addiction) became eligible benefits

Then, government began giving abortion clinics funding

And now, the taxpayer is expected to supply birth control?
Two, presumably, consenting ADULTS are too infantile to supply their own sexual aids, expecting OTHERS to pay? Who's getting screwed here? Certainly not the people dilly-dallying around!

It's not that anyone is peering into peoples bedrooms, its that these so-called adults are getting their jolly's and phukin' everybody else. People need to start being responsible for their own actions, and quit picking other peoples pockets!

And when a small thing like an ultrasound is required, which it should be for this type of invasive procedure, that's just too much? Any ethical Physician would perform this procedure. They don't set broken bones without an X-Ray. They don't perform knee replacements without CAT scans. Blood and urine tests have margins of error that an ultrasound does not.

Want to be treated as an adult?
Act like one!
cjrian

United States

#6 Mar 1, 2012
pbfa wrote:
Wrong, the fetus is (wait for it) a fetus, not "a child".
Remember that "slippery slope" that was pooh-poohed when the Roe decision was handed down?

Roe stated that first trimester abortions were a matter of "privacy"

Then, second-trimester abortions were given approval

Then, third trimester abortions were given the nod

Then, partial birth abortions were deemed acceptable

Then, viable babies who survived abortion were left to die of exposure and neglect.

With the advent of ultrasound and other modern medical devices, children are now aborted for abnormalities (which would inconvenience the parents), and gender selection.

Now, a couple of "medical ethicists" (Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva) have published a treatise in the Journal of Medical Ethics, which posit that since babies are only 'potential persons', and not 'actual persons','capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value',and therefore not ‘subject of a moral right to life’. Their argument is, "The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual."

In other words, they are attempting to justify infanticide
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/...

It seems that there is no end to this bloody slope of murder.

Since: Nov 11

Gastonia, NC

#7 Mar 2, 2012
cjrian wrote:
Any ethical Physician would perform an ultrasound prior to performing ANY invasive procedure if the patient may be pregnant.
Urine and blood tests are not as accurate as a visual confirmation. The Doctor need to actually verify that the patient actually is pregnant
The Doctor needs to see the location of the fetus
Performing a D&C does nothing for an ectopic pregnancy
So we'll let the doctors decide who they use their equipment instead of the politicians. Got ya'.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Bob McDonnell Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Former congressman seeks to delay prison term a... Jan '17 Battle Tested 3
News Judge won't toss corruption charges against Sum... Dec '16 Walkin Boss 1
News Ex-Virginia Gov. McDonnell guilty on 11 corrupt... (Sep '14) Oct '16 seo arab 47
News Why Hillary Clinton's shadiness won't be fatal (Aug '16) Sep '16 tina anne 181
News Why is Jeb Bush Courting Pat Robertson? (Oct '15) Aug '16 Tea bag suicide c... 24
News News Supreme Court set to close out current ter... (Jun '16) Jun '16 woodtick57 51
News Panhandling at Stop Lights Raises Enforcement Q... (May '13) Jun '16 DEVGOD 136
More from around the web