A victory for Virginia women, "personhood" bill defeated

[koshergrl]

The vast majority of abortions aren't medically necessary. Do you oppose them?

 

[koshergrl]

PS..if you don't, then you're a liar.

Big whoop.

 

[uscitizen]

Doesn't matter. They aren't asking for the ultrasound and the government has no right to force it on them. You people all bitched about the government forcing Catholic charities to pay for contraception, and rightly so, but then you turn around and have no problem with them forcing an ultrasound up a woman's cooch. See the hypocrisy here?

Nope,kinda hard to be a hypocrite and save lives at the same time.

The real tragically hypocritical angle,is that so many deny what they once were and what would and will be. Its always a human,be it boy or girl,never anything else,but are more than willing to kill their offspring for a long list of lame excuses ,but mostly just convenience.

Actually, it's more about forcing the abortion industry to be more accountable for what they do. They already are appallingly under-regulated. This is about making THEM provide the sort of care they claim they are all about...forcing THEM to be honest with their clients, forcing THEM to share information and provide women with options.

If "invasive" procedures are to be restricted, then we shouldn't allow abortions in the first place. Again, this isn't about the abortion industry and pro-abortionists protecting women. It's about exploiting them, refusing to provide them with the information they need to make informed decisions, and withholding knowledge from them, and stats from those who would monitor THEM. They don't want the world to know exactly how many late term babies they're cutting up and hiding.

so you are for bigger more intrusive government and it's regulations?

 

[JustSomeGuy]

Nope,kinda hard to be a hypocrite and save lives at the same time.

The real tragically hypocritical angle,is that so many deny what they once were and what would and will be. Its always a human,be it boy or girl,never anything else,but are more than willing to kill their offspring for a long list of lame excuses ,but mostly just convenience.

Actually, it's more about forcing the abortion industry to be more accountable for what they do. They already are appallingly under-regulated. This is about making THEM provide the sort of care they claim they are all about...forcing THEM to be honest with their clients, forcing THEM to share information and provide women with options.

If "invasive" procedures are to be restricted, then we shouldn't allow abortions in the first place. Again, this isn't about the abortion industry and pro-abortionists protecting women. It's about exploiting them, refusing to provide them with the information they need to make informed decisions, and withholding knowledge from them, and stats from those who would monitor THEM. They don't want the world to know exactly how many late term babies they're cutting up and hiding.

so you are for bigger more intrusive government and it's regulations?

Smaller government does not mean no government or the absolute smallest government possible. It means the smallest government possible needed to ensure and uphold the rights of everyone under it's jurisdiction.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

There is no need to perform the majority of abortions.

The point is, pro-abortionists don't give a shit about invasive procedures. They don't want women to see their babies, because they might make an informed choice and choose not to kill it.

Horrors. Choice. The one thing the progressives despise.

Forcing women to see their fetus as an attempt to coerce...

that's really all this is. roe v wade won't be overturned so they're looking for ways to guilt women into doing what they think is right.

 

[koshergrl]

Nope,kinda hard to be a hypocrite and save lives at the same time.

The real tragically hypocritical angle,is that so many deny what they once were and what would and will be. Its always a human,be it boy or girl,never anything else,but are more than willing to kill their offspring for a long list of lame excuses ,but mostly just convenience.

Actually, it's more about forcing the abortion industry to be more accountable for what they do. They already are appallingly under-regulated. This is about making THEM provide the sort of care they claim they are all about...forcing THEM to be honest with their clients, forcing THEM to share information and provide women with options.

If "invasive" procedures are to be restricted, then we shouldn't allow abortions in the first place. Again, this isn't about the abortion industry and pro-abortionists protecting women. It's about exploiting them, refusing to provide them with the information they need to make informed decisions, and withholding knowledge from them, and stats from those who would monitor THEM. They don't want the world to know exactly how many late term babies they're cutting up and hiding.

so you are for bigger more intrusive government and it's regulations?

I am for oversight of the abortion industry to at LEAST the extent that the rest of the "medical" establishment suffers oversight.

That means they keep numbers, they inform their patients, and they account for the ages of the babies they're killing. If there has to be a law forcing them to give ultrasounds before they kill babies and victimize women, then yes, I'm okay with that. I believe the one job the government should undertake is the job of protecting life. It comes before liberty or the pursuit of happiness.

 

[uscitizen]

There is no need to perform the majority of abortions.

The point is, pro-abortionists don't give a shit about invasive procedures. They don't want women to see their babies, because they might make an informed choice and choose not to kill it.

Horrors. Choice. The one thing the progressives despise.

Forcing women to see their fetus as an attempt to coerce...

that's really all this is. roe v wade won't be overturned so they're looking for ways to guilt women into doing what they think is right.

And why would they need to regulate abortion considering this is a christian nation?
I guess it isn't really after all?

Just let god judge all those christians who get abortions.

 

[koshergrl]

God will judge everybody, and murderers among them, when we stand before God.

Until then, we have laws to protect ourselves from murder. Even murder done in the name of "science" and "health" and "women's rights".

 

[geauxtohell]

The vast majority of abortions aren't medically necessary. Do you oppose them?

But the woman still wants it, as opposed to something a woman doesn't want that is also not medically relevant to her procedure.

 

[geauxtohell]

God will judge everybody, and murderers among them, when we stand before God.

Until then, we have laws to protect ourselves from murder. Even murder done in the name of "science" and "health" and "women's rights".

Yes. God will judge us. Not you. Glad we could get tha straightened out.

 

[koshergrl]

No, wrong. Just because God will judge us all doesn't mean we don't judge murderers now. Just as we judge all other monsters and criminals.

God will take care of the mass murderers, the child molesters, the batterers, the serial rapists....in his time. That doesn't mean we give them a pass here and now, though I understand there are a lot of people motivated to change that.

 

[geauxtohell]

No, wrong. Just because God will judge us all doesn't mean we don't judge murderers now. Just as we judge all other monsters and criminals.

God will take care of the mass murderers, the child molesters, the batterers, the serial rapists....in his time. That doesn't mean we give them a pass here and now, though I understand there are a lot of people motivated to change that.

Tough nuts for you. Abortion is "murder" in your opinion only.

The rest, to include your own inequities, are up to God.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

God will judge everybody, and murderers among them, when we stand before God.

Until then, we have laws to protect ourselves from murder. Even murder done in the name of "science" and "health" and "women's rights".

Yes. God will judge us. Not you. Glad we could get tha straightened out.

That's no kind of compelling argument. In fact, vaguely remember that Stephen Douglass once tried arguing that people should be able to decide the issue of slavery for themselves as they were only accountable to God and their posterity; not to society.

I do not discuss the morals of the people of Missouri, but let them settle that matter for themselves. I hold that the people of the slaveholding States are civilized men as well as ourselves; that they bear consciences as well as we, and that they are accountable to God and their posterity, and not to us. It is for them to decide, therefore, the moral and religious right of the slavery question for themselves within their own limits.

Isn't it nice to see that after 150 years Democrats are still hiding behind "God" to justify actions which are morally questionable in nature? I wonder if I'd be able to rob a few (hundred) banks and then claim that no one can judge me other than God and get off. I would try, but I'm afraid I'd just end up in prison

 

[Si modo]

There is no need to perform the majority of abortions.

The point is, pro-abortionists don't give a shit about invasive procedures. They don't want women to see their babies, because they might make an informed choice and choose not to kill it.

Horrors. Choice. The one thing the progressives despise.

I don't want to force women to look at their fetus. We also don't oppose procedures. I oppose procedures that aren't medically necessary.

Forcing women to see their fetus as an attempt to coerce is not medically necessary.

The personhood bill in Virginia has nothing to do with ultrasound.

The bill to amend the statute on elective abortions in Virginia does. It passed. And, nothing - absolutely nothing - in that bill requires a woman to look at her ultrasound results. Someone told you it did and they were wrong.

 

[koshergrl]

No, wrong. Just because God will judge us all doesn't mean we don't judge murderers now. Just as we judge all other monsters and criminals.

God will take care of the mass murderers, the child molesters, the batterers, the serial rapists....in his time. That doesn't mean we give them a pass here and now, though I understand there are a lot of people motivated to change that.

Tough nuts for you. Abortion is "murder" in your opinion only.

The rest, to include your own inequities, are up to God.

No, not in my opinion "only".

"Six men and six women convicted Peterson Friday of the first-degree murder of his wife, Laci, and the second-degree murder of the fetus she was carrying."
Peterson convicted of murder - US news - Crime & courts - msnbc.com

Psst..just for your edification..I'm pretty sure if a fetus isn't a human, it wouldn't be considered "murder" to kill him.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There is no need to perform the majority of abortions.

The point is, pro-abortionists don't give a shit about invasive procedures. They don't want women to see their babies, because they might make an informed choice and choose not to kill it.

Horrors. Choice. The one thing the progressives despise.

Choice is exactly what was not being offered here. The ultrasound was a mandate.

 

[Si modo]

There is no need to perform the majority of abortions.

The point is, pro-abortionists don't give a shit about invasive procedures. They don't want women to see their babies, because they might make an informed choice and choose not to kill it.

Horrors. Choice. The one thing the progressives despise.

Choice is exactly what was not being offered here. The ultrasound was a mandate.

Indeed, the unltrasound IS a mandate for elective abortions in Virginia. THAT bill passed, as it should have. And, contrary to what you've been told by others, no woman is required to look at her ultra sound. I'd link to the bill, but frankly, I'm tired of doing so. Few bother to do their own thinking.

However, the personhood bill was put off for over next year - moved by a Dem from Fairfax, VA and seconded by the Republican leader. That is a different bill. I hope it never passes.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

Until then, we have laws to protect ourselves from murder. Even murder done in the name of "science" and "health" and "women's rights".

if that's the case, why aren't women who have abortions tried as murderers?

 

[koshergrl]

You tell me. It makes zero sense.

 

[Chris]

God will judge everybody, and murderers among them, when we stand before God.

Until then, we have laws to protect ourselves from murder. Even murder done in the name of "science" and "health" and "women's rights".

Certainly you will be judged very severely for being pro child abuse.