Ohio Governor John Kasich Signs Extreme Anti-Abortion Measures

[zeke]

You dont have to convict a woman of murder, you just make the procedure illegal. Class A misdemeanor or low level felony and be done with it.

You are conceding that the fetus is not a person if you do that. It's either murder or it isn't;

we don't charge women with misdemeanors for killing their born children.

You are assuming I consider it murder. I don't, I consider it wrong, but again my libertarian leanings make me want to leave it to the state legislatures to decide.

What I know is that its a seperate organism and it dies when an abortion is performed.

You must be fuking kidding. YOU don't consider it murder. Yet you are all hung up about abortion.

Wtf is wrong with you people? Why don't you mind your own fuking business?

 

[martybegan]

You are conceding that the fetus is not a person if you do that. It's either murder or it isn't;

we don't charge women with misdemeanors for killing their born children.

You are assuming I consider it murder. I don't, I consider it wrong, but again my libertarian leanings make me want to leave it to the state legislatures to decide.

What I know is that its a seperate organism and it dies when an abortion is performed.

You must be fuking kidding. YOU don't consider it murder. Yet you are all hung up about abortion.

Wtf is wrong with you people? Why don't you mind your own fuking business?

My concern is that Roe V Wade created a right in the consitution, where no right really exists. Abortion is not mentioned in the document, therefore it is a matter for the State Legislatures.

I'm not hung up about it, I'm hung up on judges making shit up in the consituiton to fit thier social agendas.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You are assuming I consider it murder. I don't, I consider it wrong, but again my libertarian leanings make me want to leave it to the state legislatures to decide.

What I know is that its a seperate organism and it dies when an abortion is performed.

You must be fuking kidding. YOU don't consider it murder. Yet you are all hung up about abortion.

Wtf is wrong with you people? Why don't you mind your own fuking business?

My concern is that Roe V Wade created a right in the consitution, where no right really exists. Abortion is not mentioned in the document, therefore it is a matter for the State Legislatures.

I'm not hung up about it, I'm hung up on judges making shit up in the consituiton to fit thier social agendas.

So you reject:

1. that there is a right to privacy in the Constitution

2. that the Ninth Amendment has any meaning

??

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Taxpayer money shouldn't be used for abortions. He should have cut all federal funding.

 

[martybegan]

You must be fuking kidding. YOU don't consider it murder. Yet you are all hung up about abortion.

Wtf is wrong with you people? Why don't you mind your own fuking business?

My concern is that Roe V Wade created a right in the consitution, where no right really exists. Abortion is not mentioned in the document, therefore it is a matter for the State Legislatures.

I'm not hung up about it, I'm hung up on judges making shit up in the consituiton to fit thier social agendas.

So you reject:

1. that there is a right to privacy in the Constitution

2. that the Ninth Amendment has any meaning

??

What do you base the right to privacy on? The 4th amendment search prohobition without a warrant?

What the 9th means is that other rights CAN be added, or covered under the STATE consitutions. If a right, however is important enough it needs to be added as an amendment to make it a consitutional right, not an inherent right.

I dont see where the 9th says "the supreme court can make up rights as it see's fit"

 

[Dot Com]

Are the Repubs going out of their way to lose seats in 2014? Looks like it.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Are the Repubs going out of their way to lose seats in 2014? Looks like it.

By stopping taxpayer funded abortions they're going to lose seats? Lol.

 

[Stephanie]

Are the Repubs going out of their way to lose seats in 2014? Looks like it.

By stopping taxpayer funded abortions they're going to lose seats? Lol.

I'm beginning to wonder if she is robot

 

[kwc57]

So, maybe the woman wants to make a different choice for her uterus. You want to take away her freedom to make a choice.

I am not for abortion, prostitution, or drug abuse. I am for a person being able to make choices regarding their own bodies. You know... freedom? The thing that wingnuts claim to be for, but are always trying to take away bit by bit?

REALLY, who is taking away ABORTION?
that is the lie you all like to push

You Bible thumping right wingers are. You make it incrementally more and more difficult to obtain one through regulations that are purposely difficult if not impossible to meet until only a few places remain that will perform them. Then you picket and protest those places, publish doctor's home addresses, and encourage zealots to murder them. Of course, once the kid is born, nobody gives a damn any longer.

So is that where the leftists draw the line? It's OK to kill a baby, but not a doctor? What about garbage collectors? Their job is important, but doesn't carry the same worth as a doctor. Is it OK to kill them too? Maybe the homeless? That could take care of the problem of those unwanted people as well. What prevents you lefties from making the jump from babies to older people?

 

[kwc57]

No, it is about the woman's right to decide what to do with her life. It is not your decision. And if you want to MAKE it your decision, then YOU own that decision. And YOU must pay ALL the bills for a woman's special needs during a pregnancy. YOU must pay for her frequent visits to her doctor and gynecologist. YOU must pay for her special nutrition and vitamins. YOU must pay for her new wardrobe. YOU must make sure she quits smoking. YOU must cover her lost wages. And if her FORCED pregnancy goes wrong and debilitates the mother, YOU must support her the rest of her life.

If you unwilling to take on those responsibilities, then you really need to mind your own business.

We used to have this old fashioned notion of personal responsibility and that actions had consequences. Sad that the left always resorts to the mulligan.

A woman having the right to choose is the VERY DEFINITION of personal responsibility. That PERSON, that INDIVIDUAL decides what SHE wants to do, or not do.

You turds want to make YOUR choice HERS whether she likes it or not.

I never would have believed that one person could be such a ******* dolt, but you are proof positive. She made a choice that got her pregnant. Bad choice perhaps, but a choice none the less. Personal responsibilty would have been preventing an unwanted pregnancy to begin with. Personal responsibility is accepting the consequences of your actions when you do get pregnant. Personal responsibility is not murdering a baby. Personal responsibility has nothing to do with taking a mulligan over a human life. But you knew all of that and still don't care. Sad.

 

[kwc57]

What is wrong about counseling rape victims about abortion? They have the option to abort, surely the lifers don't want to force them to have a rape baby?

Oh wait - they do.

What is a "rape baby"? Is that somehow not the same a baby?

Not a baby that a woman always looks forward to having. Removing her option of abortion, which may help her recover is sickening. But then, lifers are known to be sick freaks who get off on forcing women to have babies.

They probably think that the woman enjoyed the rape.

So every abortion is because of rape? Is that really the argument you want to make? Are you educated?

Here, let me use your logic. But then, "choicers" are known to be sick freaks who get off on killing babies. See how that works?

 

[Borillar]

maybe you right to lifers can start a fund to take care of unwanted babies, and pay the woman that was going to have an abortion a certain amount of money to go through with child birth.

Or maybe people can stop running away from their responsibilities and step up instead of making every excuse under the sun to avoid it.

For many women, abortion IS the responsible choice.

 

[sfcalifornia]

Hufferpost should banned from this site they are nothing but liars and spread hate..

there is nothing extreme about this procedure..women have a cold shiny thing that looks like a duck bill used on them all the time for a frikken PAP SMEAR

And it's a woman's CHOICE to have a PAP Smear.

Damn, you're thick.

I think you're the one being thick here. Sure, no law says we have to go get a physical each year. Obamacare might change that, who knows.

Thing is, if you go to the doctor with symptoms of heart trouble, it is your choice to have tests done before the doctor treats you, but you won't get treated unless the tests are done.

Just because a woman wants an abortion doesn't mean everything is fine. It could be a tubal pregnancy or other problems could be present, so why should the doctor go in blind?

If they don't want the test, then they must not want an abortion.

If you don't want the x-ray, maybe you don't want your broken leg put in a cast.

If you don't want an MRI or other tests, then you must not want your health problem addressed.

You don't want dental x-rays, then you must not want your tooth fixed.

You don't just go in and say give me this or that procedure. Doctors should do whatever is necessary to ensure the abortion is done safe and that means looking for potential risks or other conditions.

What part of that don't you get?

Would you prefer that women risk their health or their lives over an abortion? It's a matter of being safe and nothing more. Damn near every medical test or procedure can be deemed intrusive. Get over it. You want abortions, let the doctors do tests beforehand and avoid tragedies and lawsuits.

If it was medically necessary to have an ultrasound performed before an abortion and then wait 24 hours before the abortion is performed, then it would be a requirement already.

An ultrasound is not medically necessary. An ultrasound is not going to reveal anything new to a doctor or a patient. Abdominal ultrasounds can't even pick up and embryo until 5-6 weeks of pregnancy anyway. If an embryo was ectopic, chances are the woman would be feeling the excruciating pain already.

And it's nice sentiment to insist the ultrasound is simply for the safety of the pregnant woman but that is not the intention at all.

The ultrasound requirement as well as the waiting period is being legislated as a barrier to abortion thinly disguised as concern for the woman's health. It's bullshit.

 

[kwc57]

maybe you right to lifers can start a fund to take care of unwanted babies, and pay the woman that was going to have an abortion a certain amount of money to go through with child birth.

Or maybe people can stop running away from their responsibilities and step up instead of making every excuse under the sun to avoid it.

For many women, abortion IS the responsible choice.

Yes, because two wrongs always make a right.

 

[Coyote]

Yet, late term abortions are indeed part of the "choice" argument.......aren't they?

They have to be from the point of view that if they are banned entirely, the mother could lose her life or health or be forced to carry a baby to term that will die at birth.

Being part of the "choice" argument does not equal being elective.



How many pro-choice people want elective late term abortions legalized?



How are they trying to define that line?

Soooo, they do support late term abortion. They just try to not admit it.

Bad logic. Try again.

Lack of understanding on your part does not equate to bad logic on my part. If you argue the "right to choose", then you defend the right to choose regardless of when the decision is made.

I disagree. Once viability is reached, it's no longer one person's rights and the right to choose is weighed with the baby's right to live.

The only cutoff the left ever acknowledges is once the baby is born. Until then, it is a parasitic part of the women's body and she has a right to decide whether to kepp it or remove it. That is the argument.

No, most acknowledge viability of the fetus as a line.

The left always tries to steer the conversation away from late term abortions, but they never actually draw the line of distinction, because it takes away from their "right to choose" argument. So since you think it is bad logic......when would you say she loses the right to choose?

Viability unless her life or health are in danger. Maybe severe fetal defects, but like I said - that can be a grey area.

End of the first trimester? Second? All the way thru the 3rd? I mean, if you're for choice, you're for choice or you're a hypocrite. Choice or not?

I'm for choice in the same way pro-lifers are for life - it's not an unlimited choice.

Using your logic - pro-lifers would want abortion banned in all cases, even if the mother's life is in danger.

 

[Borillar]

Or maybe people can stop running away from their responsibilities and step up instead of making every excuse under the sun to avoid it.

For many women, abortion IS the responsible choice.

Yes, because two wrongs always make a right.

No, but three lefts do.

 

[kwc57]

They have to be from the point of view that if they are banned entirely, the mother could lose her life or health or be forced to carry a baby to term that will die at birth.

Being part of the "choice" argument does not equal being elective.



How many pro-choice people want elective late term abortions legalized?



How are they trying to define that line?



Bad logic. Try again.

Lack of understanding on your part does not equate to bad logic on my part. If you argue the "right to choose", then you defend the right to choose regardless of when the decision is made.

I disagree. Once viability is reached, it's no longer one person's rights and the right to choose is weighed with the baby's right to live.



No, most acknowledge viability of the fetus as a line.

The left always tries to steer the conversation away from late term abortions, but they never actually draw the line of distinction, because it takes away from their "right to choose" argument. So since you think it is bad logic......when would you say she loses the right to choose?

Viability unless her life or health are in danger. Maybe severe fetal defects, but like I said - that can be a grey area.

End of the first trimester? Second? All the way thru the 3rd? I mean, if you're for choice, you're for choice or you're a hypocrite. Choice or not?

I'm for choice in the same way pro-lifers are for life - it's not an unlimited choice.

Using your logic - pro-lifers would want abortion banned in all cases, even if the mother's life is in danger.

Viability of the fetus? Why do pro-choice advocates stay so silent on late term abortions? To them it is about the right to choose over the right on an unseen baby to live.

In case you haven't seen it, you should watch Morgan Freeman's "Through the Wormhole on Science channel. They repeated their episode on "when life begins" last night and it is an interesting watch. Believe it or not, scientists can't seem to agree. One thinks it is at conception. One thinks it is when a baby becomes concious of their surroundings and self. Another thinks it is when they become aware of how they are perceived by others.

When Does Life Begin? : Videos : Science Channel

Season 4 Episodes : Science Channel

 

[kwc57]

For many women, abortion IS the responsible choice.

Yes, because two wrongs always make a right.

No, but three lefts do.

Three lefts makes a circle jerk.

 

[Stephanie]

Yes, because two wrongs always make a right.

No, but three lefts do.

Three lefts makes a circle jerk.

oh yes it does, and not a pretty one

 

[Agit8r]

What is wrong about counseling rape victims about abortion? They have the option to abort, surely the lifers don't want to force them to have a rape baby?

Oh wait - they do.

Yep, these psychos are intent on rolling back the 20th century