SCOTUS Upholds Law Requiring Ultrasounds For Abortions

[Lysistrata]

How dare women be given information to make informed decisions!

Supreme Court leaves in place Kentucky abortion law mandating ultrasounds

Then the taxpayers should be forced to pay for them.

why?

Because these procedures are being forced by Big Government to take place regardless of the wishes of the patients. The taxpayers are responsible for the actions of their governments. Ever hear of an "unfunded mandate"? The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government. If the government wants to order a medical procedure, it should build and fund facilities to perform them. Some states require pregnant people to attend mandatory sessions at these "pregnancy crisis centers"? Why can't these procedures be performed there, with the government picking up the tab?

well don't have an abortion. that is still a choice right? don't spend the money I give two shits. but I do care about the heartbeat within. It means life. no matter how much you wish

So YOU pay for the ultrasound. The woman is there because she already has made a decision to terminate the pregnancy, so YOU pick up the extra tab. You should pay for your own beliefs that you want to force on others.

 

[g5000]

We agree with the District Court, 319 F.Supp. at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors --physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age -- relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

Doe v. Bolton

 

[pknopp]

Nearly half of all abortions are the result of no birth control being used during sex.

Another fifth are the result of improper or inconsistent use of birth control.

And that data is from the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion organization.


The obvious solution is to get people to regularly use birth control and use it properly.

I don't think repealing Roe v. Wade, or forcing women to watch an ultrasound, will have any impact on the rate of abortions in America. I do believe Roe v. Wade should be repealed as a matter of principle, however.

If Roe were reversed, some states would outlaw abortions, some states would legalize abortions. Most of the states which outlaw abortions would make exceptions for rape, incest, and "health of the mother".

That is the situation which existed prior to Roe.

What most people don't know is that there were about a million abortions a year BEFORE Roe v. Wade. That's because in states where abortion was illegal except for "the health of the mother", doctors were really lenient about what "health of the mother meant". It could be mental health as well as physical health.

Abortion-on-demand has been around so long that it will be impossible to put that genie back in the bottle.


The ONLY way to reduce abortions is to increase the usage of birth control.

That's just plain common sense.

Doe V Bolton states that "Health of the Mother" must include nearly every reason. It a woman states that she is not emotionally ready to be a mother a "health" exception would grant that.

That's what I'm saying. Those states which had a "health of the mother" exemption were really lenient about what that meant. It was a loophole which virtually provided abortion-on-demand.

So many states which technically outlawed abortion had quite a few abortions under that loophole.


I dug deep into the data many years ago and was surprised to learn that nearly a million abortions a year were occurring before Roe v. Wade. This upended all of my assumptions.

Before RvW abortions were performed largely in the same clinics that did them after RvW. They were just done after hours.

So as you note, overturning RvW will not stop many abortions. The things people don't consider is that it would also allow abortions that are banned today.

RvW would send the issue back to the states. States that wanted to allow late term abortions could then allow them.

 

[g5000]

Birth control is the answer to the abortion problem. This should be common ground upon which we can all stand.

 

[pknopp]

We agree with the District Court, 319 F.Supp. at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors --physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age -- relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

Doe v. Bolton

Correct. But by pointing that out, careful, someone will consider you pro-abortion.

 

[bendog]

That's a question I'd never considered. Has the scotus approved any state scheme that does not allow for post first trimester abortions if likely death or serious injury will result to the "mother."?

The scotus rational is that the State may regulate abortions even when the fetes (-: is not viable so long as the regulation has a valid purpose and does not pose an undue burden. Current Scotus rational is that there is, in reality, no regulation is an undue burden. But so far as I know, no state has tried the "God demands the slut must die" purpose.

 

[tyroneweaver]

How dare women be given information to make informed decisions!

Supreme Court leaves in place Kentucky abortion law mandating ultrasounds

Then the taxpayers should be forced to pay for them.

And you should be force to pay for my ar15 ammunition

 

[pknopp]

That's a question I'd never considered. Has the scotus approved any state scheme that does not allow for post first trimester abortions if likely death or serious injury will result to the "mother."?

The ban on Intact dilation and retraction method had no exemption and was upheld.

 

[Lysistrata]

How dare women be given information to make informed decisions!

Supreme Court leaves in place Kentucky abortion law mandating ultrasounds

Then the taxpayers should be forced to pay for them.

why?

Because these procedures are being forced by Big Government to take place regardless of the wishes of the patients. The taxpayers are responsible for the actions of their governments. Ever hear of an "unfunded mandate"? The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government. If the government wants to order a medical procedure, it should build and fund facilities to perform them. Some states require pregnant people to attend mandatory sessions at these "pregnancy crisis centers"? Why can't these procedures be performed there, with the government picking up the tab?

Unnecessary ultrasounds should be billed to the state directly.

"The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government."

Cool story bro. Now do Obamacare.

The ACA ("Obamacare") never forced any medical procedure on anybody, so there is no comparison. It isn't like the ACA forced anyone to have their prostate checked.

 

[jc456]

How dare women be given information to make informed decisions!

Supreme Court leaves in place Kentucky abortion law mandating ultrasounds

Then the taxpayers should be forced to pay for them.

why?

Because these procedures are being forced by Big Government to take place regardless of the wishes of the patients. The taxpayers are responsible for the actions of their governments. Ever hear of an "unfunded mandate"? The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government. If the government wants to order a medical procedure, it should build and fund facilities to perform them. Some states require pregnant people to attend mandatory sessions at these "pregnancy crisis centers"? Why can't these procedures be performed there, with the government picking up the tab?

Unnecessary ultrasounds should be billed to the state directly.

"The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government."

Cool story bro. Now do Obamacare.

The ACA ("Obamacare") never forced any medical procedure on anybody, so there is no comparison. It isn't like the ACA forced anyone to have their prostate checked.

sure they did, they said you had to have insurance. mandate, show me I'm wrong.

 

[MisterBeale]

How dare women be given information to make informed decisions!

Supreme Court leaves in place Kentucky abortion law mandating ultrasounds

Then the taxpayers should be forced to pay for them.

why?

Because these procedures are being forced by Big Government to take place regardless of the wishes of the patients. The taxpayers are responsible for the actions of their governments. Ever hear of an "unfunded mandate"? The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government. If the government wants to order a medical procedure, it should build and fund facilities to perform them. Some states require pregnant people to attend mandatory sessions at these "pregnancy crisis centers"? Why can't these procedures be performed there, with the government picking up the tab?

well don't have an abortion. that is still a choice right? don't spend the money I give two shits. but I do care about the heartbeat within. It means life. no matter how much you wish

So YOU pay for the ultrasound. The woman is there because she already has made a decision to terminate the pregnancy, so YOU pick up the extra tab. You should pay for your own beliefs that you want to force on others.

Why not just side step the whole problem, use birth control. If you refuse to use it, then there is no abortion on demand. Either have the child and take care of it, or put it up for adoption.

Easy peasy beautiful....

I am sure, you would probably even get a majority of the nation to fund birth control as a compromise for having no abortion.

It seems simple enough to end the mass murders. . .

 

[Lysistrata]

Birth control is the answer to the abortion problem. This should be common ground upon which we can all stand.

The majority of us are for prevention and the use of available knowledge and technological know-how to do it. It's so nuts that many of the same people who are against abortion also insist on preventing the disbursal of knowledge about contraception and of availability of contraception. It is so ridiculous to think that a person would prefer a surgical or chemical procedure to terminate a pregnancy to never having been pregnant in the first place. A major effort aimed at spreading knowledge of, and accessibility to contraception would so decrease the need for abortion.

One of the oddballs on this thread just commented "Keep your legs shut and you don't have to worry about it, cupcake." He apparently is emotionally disturbed by the thought of heterosexuals having sex, though having sex has been popular among heterosexuals for millennia. I don't know where the "cupcake" thing came from. People like him seriously confuse the situation. I suspect that it is a cult thing.

 

[pknopp]

Then the taxpayers should be forced to pay for them.

why?

Because these procedures are being forced by Big Government to take place regardless of the wishes of the patients. The taxpayers are responsible for the actions of their governments. Ever hear of an "unfunded mandate"? The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government. If the government wants to order a medical procedure, it should build and fund facilities to perform them. Some states require pregnant people to attend mandatory sessions at these "pregnancy crisis centers"? Why can't these procedures be performed there, with the government picking up the tab?

well don't have an abortion. that is still a choice right? don't spend the money I give two shits. but I do care about the heartbeat within. It means life. no matter how much you wish

So YOU pay for the ultrasound. The woman is there because she already has made a decision to terminate the pregnancy, so YOU pick up the extra tab. You should pay for your own beliefs that you want to force on others.

Why not just side step the whole problem, use birth control. If you refuse to use it, then there is no abortion on demand. Either have the child and take care of it, or put it up for adoption.

Easy peasy beautiful....

I am sure, you would probably even get a majority of the nation to fund birth control as a compromise for having no abortion.

It seems simple enough to end the mass murders. . .

If birth control worked and it largely does and you wanted to stop abortions, I would think you would want to fund it as opposed to demanding some sort of compromise.

 

[g5000]

why?

Because these procedures are being forced by Big Government to take place regardless of the wishes of the patients. The taxpayers are responsible for the actions of their governments. Ever hear of an "unfunded mandate"? The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government. If the government wants to order a medical procedure, it should build and fund facilities to perform them. Some states require pregnant people to attend mandatory sessions at these "pregnancy crisis centers"? Why can't these procedures be performed there, with the government picking up the tab?

well don't have an abortion. that is still a choice right? don't spend the money I give two shits. but I do care about the heartbeat within. It means life. no matter how much you wish

So YOU pay for the ultrasound. The woman is there because she already has made a decision to terminate the pregnancy, so YOU pick up the extra tab. You should pay for your own beliefs that you want to force on others.

Why not just side step the whole problem, use birth control. If you refuse to use it, then there is no abortion on demand. Either have the child and take care of it, or put it up for adoption.

Easy peasy beautiful....

I am sure, you would probably even get a majority of the nation to fund birth control as a compromise for having no abortion.

It seems simple enough to end the mass murders. . .

If birth control worked and it largely does and you wanted to stop abortions, I would think you would want to fund it as opposed to demanding some sort of compromise.

I don't think a lack of funding is the cause of so many people not using contraception.

 

[g5000]

Unmet Need for Contraception in Developing Countries: Examining Women’s Reasons for Not Using a Method

Demographic and Health Surveys in 52 countries between 2005 and 2014 reveal the most common reasons that married women cite for not using contraception despite wanting to avoid a pregnancy. Twenty-six percent of these women cite concerns about contraceptive side effects and health risks; 24% say that they have sex infrequently or not at all; 23% say that they or others close to them oppose contraception; and 20% report that they are breast-feeding and/or haven’t resumed menstruation after a birth.

<snip>

Among sexually active never-married women with unmet need, infrequent sex is the most common reason given for nonuse (cited by 41%), followed by the reason “not married” (29%). Women may give the latter reason because they are not having sex regularly or they believe it would be socially unacceptable for them to obtain contraceptives, or because family planning providers deny contraceptive services to unmarried women.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

How dare women be given information to make informed decisions!

Supreme Court leaves in place Kentucky abortion law mandating ultrasounds

Then the taxpayers should be forced to pay for them.

No, you can make the choice to have unprotected sex or not, so you are responsible for your own mistake and not the taxpayer...

 

[colfax_m]

Because these procedures are being forced by Big Government to take place regardless of the wishes of the patients. The taxpayers are responsible for the actions of their governments. Ever hear of an "unfunded mandate"? The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government. If the government wants to order a medical procedure, it should build and fund facilities to perform them. Some states require pregnant people to attend mandatory sessions at these "pregnancy crisis centers"? Why can't these procedures be performed there, with the government picking up the tab?

well don't have an abortion. that is still a choice right? don't spend the money I give two shits. but I do care about the heartbeat within. It means life. no matter how much you wish

So YOU pay for the ultrasound. The woman is there because she already has made a decision to terminate the pregnancy, so YOU pick up the extra tab. You should pay for your own beliefs that you want to force on others.

Why not just side step the whole problem, use birth control. If you refuse to use it, then there is no abortion on demand. Either have the child and take care of it, or put it up for adoption.

Easy peasy beautiful....

I am sure, you would probably even get a majority of the nation to fund birth control as a compromise for having no abortion.

It seems simple enough to end the mass murders. . .

If birth control worked and it largely does and you wanted to stop abortions, I would think you would want to fund it as opposed to demanding some sort of compromise.

I don't think a lack of funding is the cause of so many people not using contraception.

It can be a cause of not using the most effective means.

An IUD is a high upfront cost which low income individuals can have a hard time affording but lasts a long time and is not nearly as subject to error.

 

[pknopp]

Because these procedures are being forced by Big Government to take place regardless of the wishes of the patients. The taxpayers are responsible for the actions of their governments. Ever hear of an "unfunded mandate"? The individual should not be forced to bear to cost of a decision mandated by government. If the government wants to order a medical procedure, it should build and fund facilities to perform them. Some states require pregnant people to attend mandatory sessions at these "pregnancy crisis centers"? Why can't these procedures be performed there, with the government picking up the tab?

well don't have an abortion. that is still a choice right? don't spend the money I give two shits. but I do care about the heartbeat within. It means life. no matter how much you wish

So YOU pay for the ultrasound. The woman is there because she already has made a decision to terminate the pregnancy, so YOU pick up the extra tab. You should pay for your own beliefs that you want to force on others.

Why not just side step the whole problem, use birth control. If you refuse to use it, then there is no abortion on demand. Either have the child and take care of it, or put it up for adoption.

Easy peasy beautiful....

I am sure, you would probably even get a majority of the nation to fund birth control as a compromise for having no abortion.

It seems simple enough to end the mass murders. . .

If birth control worked and it largely does and you wanted to stop abortions, I would think you would want to fund it as opposed to demanding some sort of compromise.

I don't think a lack of funding is the cause of so many people not using contraception.

It's not the complete cause. It is a cause.

 

[g5000]

"Infrequent sex" is a main cause of the non-use of contraception. Even for married women!

Fellas, you aren't doing your part to help these women.

 

[bendog]

That's a question I'd never considered. Has the scotus approved any state scheme that does not allow for post first trimester abortions if likely death or serious injury will result to the "mother."?

The ban on Intact dilation and retraction method had no exemption and was upheld.

But late term abortions of non-viable fetuses or when the life of the mother is implicated can be done with a different procedure.