Virgina Ultrasound Bill Passes

dolfette

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Posts
11,303
Media
0
Likes
108
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
you could show her a clip of any baby at X weeks.
insisting it be her own is an obvious attempt at emotional torture.
 

Guy-jin

Legendary Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Posts
3,836
Media
3
Likes
1,367
Points
333
Location
San Jose (California, United States)
Sexuality
Asexual
Gender
Male
It's like saying you can only buy pepperoni if you're willing to have it shoved up your ass first.

Guess what? I'm just going to go to the next state over and buy my pepperoni. Or buy it on the black market where it's probably made out of cat entrails, used tires and human hair.

It's especially apalling if you think about rape victims. "Oh hi, you were raped? Yeah, we're just going to shove this thing in your ravaged genitals and show you what your rapist spawned inside you against your will... or you can give birth to it regardless of whether you're ready for children or want to give birth to your rapist's spawn."
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
Since the Republicans had the presidency, the House, and the Senate for eight years and didn't do this nonsense back then, I don't think that this bill will ever be implemented.

Eight years ago there was no Tea Party. The Tea Party is marching the Republican Party off the cliff. Virginia deserves this for giving the Republicans both houses and the governorship. All the speed breaks are off now.
 

dolfette

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Posts
11,303
Media
0
Likes
108
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
Guest Post: A Doctor on Transvaginal Ultrasounds

I do not feel that it is reactionary or even inaccurate to describe an unwanted, non-indicated transvaginal ultrasound as “rape”. If I insert ANY object into ANY orifice without informed consent, it is rape. And coercion of any kind negates consent, informed or otherwise.

the words of a doctor.
 

NotSoDumb_Blonde

Sexy Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Posts
765
Media
18
Likes
34
Points
263
Age
49
Location
US
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Female
Absolutely a great find. I hope it's proven unconstitutional. Gah, it makes me sick. I seriously give thought to moving to another country. Ours has been in hell for almost 10 years. 8 of those run by a dumbass that probably couldn't navigate the snot out of his nose, let alone a legal document like a budget....or bill...or his mail. Shit, sucks, sucks, sucks. And it's wicked scary too. I mean, what next? We're delusional if we think they'll stop with this. Or even women.

Okay, gotta stop. Can't think about politics without getting all kinds of stressed out. Ugh. I need some Cherry Garcia!
 

Not_Punny

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Posts
5,464
Media
109
Likes
3,056
Points
258
Location
California
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
I guess I am alone in thinking it is a good bill. I think it will prevent a lot of later-term abortions. Maybe if they see the heart beating, a woman and her doctor will consider a birth-adoption route.

I know people who have aborted viable fetuses and who thought nothing of it. THEY are the ones who are disgusting.

There is a fine line between pro-choice and murder.

No wonder I don't post here anymore.
 
Last edited:

Guy-jin

Legendary Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Posts
3,836
Media
3
Likes
1,367
Points
333
Location
San Jose (California, United States)
Sexuality
Asexual
Gender
Male
I guess I am alone in thinking it is a good bill. I think it will prevent a lot of later-term abortions. Maybe if they see the heart beating, a woman and her doctor will consider a birth-adoption route.

I know people who have aborted viable fetuses and who thought nothing of it. THEY are the ones who are disgusting.

There is a fine line between pro-choice and murder.

No wonder I don't post here anymore.

Who do you know who did that?

There is a fine line, but it's not that fine. It's certainly somewhere between abortions of convenience and vaginally probing rape victims and minors.
 

D_Judith K Rantz

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2011
Posts
378
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
53
Sexuality
No Response
I guess I am alone in thinking it is a good bill. I think it will prevent a lot of later-term abortions. Maybe if they see the heart beating, a woman and her doctor will consider a birth-adoption route.

I know people who have aborted viable fetuses and who thought nothing of it. THEY are the ones who are disgusting.

There is a fine line between pro-choice and murder.

No wonder I don't post here anymore.
Too bad, you got a nice ass there. :naughty:

And yes, you seem to be the only one (or ones, if there are others who feel the same and haven't posted) who has this opinion.
 

NotSoDumb_Blonde

Sexy Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Posts
765
Media
18
Likes
34
Points
263
Age
49
Location
US
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Female
Not punny. Viable. What an odd choice of words. Why did you use that, I wonder?

A bill that invades the privacy of a woman, that allows her constitutional rights to be taken away because of someone else's beliefs is wrong. No one should be able to force anyone else to submit to a vaginal probe. No one. Period. Your personal beliefs on another person's life should not be in consideration. You aren't that person, you don't know what they've been through, nor what their thinking is when they make such a personal choice. I know I sure don't, so I can't even think how others can 'allow' or 'not allow' someone to make such a decision.
 

sanpeixiaojie

Experimental Member
Joined
May 12, 2012
Posts
87
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
43
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Female
WOW!! incredible govt forcing women to have a invasive procedure in a attempt to guilt trip them into changing their mind.
My guess is this is a way to get around Roa vs Wade, by attempting to make the women feel too guilty to abort.
Pretty despicable tactic in my view.
 

MysticMedusa

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Posts
853
Media
1
Likes
100
Points
128
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
you could show her a clip of any baby at X weeks.
insisting it be her own is an obvious attempt at emotional torture.

Absolutely! Forcing a woman to carry the mental image (for the rest of her life) of the child she chose to abort is psychological violence. Indeed there is a small percentage of women who seem to use abortion as a form of birth control and it is very sad.. but they certainly are a minority.

Most women who decide to move forward with aborting a pregnancy are already tremendously hurting and struggling with accepting their choice as is. It is not a flip the coin kind of decision. If anything making them "see" the little one will only result in getting their psychological state to an even lower place than it already is. Possibly even scarring them irreversibly.

My own grandmother who is 96 years old still carries the weight of her abortion. Not more than a month ago she was talking to me about it. I can only imagine if she had been forced to see an image of the foetus.

I can't help but wonder what will be next when in this day and age a supposedly civilized "1st world country" creates such a bill which in essence robs women of their human rights while it simultaneously traumatizes them.

Very sad.
 
Last edited:

sbat

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Posts
2,295
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
73
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Most of the discussion in this thread seems to come without having actually read the bill in its final form.

Here is the main summary straight from the VA legislature archives:
Abortion; informed consent. Requires that, as a component of informed consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the abortion. The medical professional performing the ultrasound must obtain written certification from the woman that the opportunity was offered and whether the woman availed herself of the opportunity to see the ultrasound image or hear the fetal heartbeat. A copy of the ultrasound and the written certification shall be maintained in the woman's medical records at the facility where the abortion is to be performed. The ultrasound is not required if the woman is the victim of rape or incest and the incident was reported to law enforcement. This bill incorporates

Note that women are not forced to view the ultrasound, but given the opportunity to do so if they so desire. Additionally, rape and incest victims are exempted from the ultrasound if the crime was reported. Additionally, the rest are given a transabdominal ultrasound, not transvaginal.

If there's going to be debate about the Virginia Ultrasound Bill, at least debate the bill itself and not some anti-abortion strawman.
 

molotovmuffin

Experimental Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Posts
7,449
Media
0
Likes
9
Points
183
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
Most of the discussion in this thread seems to come without having actually read the bill in its final form.

Here is the main summary straight from the VA legislature archives:
Abortion; informed consent. Requires that, as a component of informed consent to an abortion, to determine gestational age, every pregnant female shall undergo transabdominal ultrasound imaging and be given an opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the abortion. The medical professional performing the ultrasound must obtain written certification from the woman that the opportunity was offered and whether the woman availed herself of the opportunity to see the ultrasound image or hear the fetal heartbeat. A copy of the ultrasound and the written certification shall be maintained in the woman's medical records at the facility where the abortion is to be performed. The ultrasound is not required if the woman is the victim of rape or incest and the incident was reported to law enforcement. This bill incorporates

Note that women are not forced to view the ultrasound, but given the opportunity to do so if they so desire. Additionally, rape and incest victims are exempted from the ultrasound if the crime was reported. Additionally, the rest are given a transabdominal ultrasound, not transvaginal.

If there's going to be debate about the Virginia Ultrasound Bill, at least debate the bill itself and not some anti-abortion strawman.

It is VERY hard NOT to see an ultrasound, much less NOT to HEAR it.

Regardless, it's a law for men and a way to control women. Fuck that shit.:mad:

I get pissed everything I read this crap. :mad::mad::mad:
 

sbat

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2010
Posts
2,295
Media
0
Likes
28
Points
73
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
There is a very interesting article in the economist that describes the current debate between the liberal philosophical tradition and state paternalism. Abortion rights are one of the major battlegrounds of this debate.

Some here view this as a gender battle - men trying to control women. But men aren't alone in the desire to control others' behavior. Has anyone had or met a controlling, or protective, or domineering mother? Or that female executive who grabs the world by the balls with an iron grip? You may say men are more often execs, but I'll counter with you'll find more female mothers than male, while female executiveship is on the rise. Hell, it's normal in much of the "Third World" for women to be the head of state or government.

Perhaps the debate is broader than that and encompasses issues that often, men and women agree on - on both sides of the argument. One example is the maternal nature of the state - how much should the government provide to citizens to ensure some basic quality of life? Or what can the state do to correct the healthcare cost problem generated by the free market? And of course, what social behaviors are acceptable, and what behaviors are criminal?

It seems that debates to resolve these issues becomes less and less constructive as the tactic of first resort when one side puts something forward by either side is to demonize and dehumanize the other. That promotes instinctive distrust and an inability to collectively make decisions about things that affect everyone. Look at how the debt ceiling issue is continually resolved - only at the last second, when decision deadline draws near, a short term patchwork is put in place which results in the drama unfolding again and again.

Why do we all lose our minds when it comes to politics?