chikenwing
Guest
- Feb 18, 2010
- 7,387
- 836
- 190
Across the country, Republicans and Democrats are wrangling over proposed changes to state abortion laws. On Tuesday, the Ohio House of Representatives voted on a measure that has the power to transform the states and the nations abortion dialogue. In a landmark move, the House voted 54 to 43 to ban abortions after a fetal heartbeat becomes detectable to doctors.
The measure, known as the Heartbeat Bill, has been touted by Republicans in the state, with the majority of them voting affirmatively for its passage. There has been no shortage of controversy surrounding the proposal, as a heartbeat can be detected as early as six weeks (by some accounts, it can be found even earlier). Also, the measure does not include exemptions for rape or incest, but it does include one for the health of the mother. Reuters has more about this intriguing legislative initiative:
Should Abortion Be Illegal Once a Heartbeat Is Detectable? | Breaking news and opinion on The Blaze
Demagoguery at its finest. Did the 'moral' majority who voted in the affirmative also guarantee other rights after birth? Clean water, clean air, proper healthcare, a good educaton, a safe neighborhood, two parents who nurtured and didn't abuse and maintain a sober & clean home and offer proper nutrition?
Did they provide for free contraceptives to any women of child bearing years? Proper sex education in the schools so that young girls and boys understand the dangers of STD and methods to prevent pregnancy?
Do these same autocrats who deny women the right to chose also provide funding for providing women with an understanding of domestic violence, power and control and how a child makes extricating themselves from such a relationship much more dangerous for she and her children?
Did they fund shelter's for women and children? Did they fund the court system so prosecutors and probation officers are trained on victimology and domestic violence? Is there funding to treat offenders for substance abuse and anger management while in custody and after release. Are Probation and Parole Officers funded to supervise caseloads of DV offenders with numbers low enough to assure enforcement of stay away and restraining orders?
Of course not, there is no revenue to offer any of these services. And anyway, when I suggest such services doesn't that make me a "statist' or defender of 'nanny statism"?
And not one of the above has a thing to do with the bill,but nice deflection.