Political Suicide....Has The GOP Written Off The Women's Vote?

Originally posted by Annee

I am NOT interested in your version of BELIEF.

Then you shouldn't have brought up your deluded version of the word.

There is ZERO unselfish reason for having a child.

Only to sustain civilization. Intelligent, caring individuals are serving the future of humanity by reproducing. Because of the narcissism, materialism, and lack of value placed on family in western culture, civil societies are dying out while third-worlders are reproducing and preserving the future of humanity.

There are plenty of unselfish reasons for not bringing a child or another child into this world.

Give me a break. That's just yet another excuse used by selfish abortion-mongers in an attempt to make it appear as if they give a damn about anyone other than themselves.

Would you then say it's justified for people (outside the womb) to be killed left and right to rid them of the woes of living on this earth? Would you buy into it if serial killers or war-mongers gave such an excuse?

Attempting to 'rid someone of their misery' is NOT an acceptable excuse for murder.

I am NOT interested in your version of BELIEF.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Then you shouldn't have brought up your deluded version of the word.

Your intended personal insults reflect on you. But have no effect on me.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is ZERO unselfish reason for having a child.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Only to sustain civilization.

Intelligent, caring individuals are serving the future of humanity by reproducing. Because of the narcissism, materialism, and lack of value placed on family in western culture, civil societies are dying out while third-worlders are reproducing and preserving the future of humanity.

How dramatic. We are in no danger of not sustaining our species.

Again - - having a child is Selfish. There is ZERO unselfish reason to have a child.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are plenty of unselfish reasons for not bringing a child or another child into this world.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Give me a break. That's just yet another excuse used by selfish abortion-mongers in an attempt to make it appear as if they give a damn about anyone other than themselves.

Provide ONE unselfish reason to have a child.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Charmed707

Would you then say it's justified for people (outside the womb) to be killed left and right to rid them of the woes of living on this earth? Would you buy into it if serial killers or war-mongers gave such an excuse?

Attempting to 'rid someone of their misery' is NOT an acceptable excuse for murder.

More dramatics. More hyperbole.

Cells are not a living being. They might form into one at some point - - but until they do - - they are just cells.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Charmed707

Originally posted by Annee

How dramatic. We are in no danger of not sustaining our species.

*sigh* You frequently show a lack of reading comprehension skills, but never as blatant as right now. I never said humanity was in danger of extinction. I said civilization as we know it in the west is headed in that direction.

Again with intended insults.

I did not miss anything - - including the "civilization".

I gave you the time and attention I meant to.

Done.

Originally posted by Annee

Again with intended insults.

What kind of response do you expect when you don't even know what you're reading? All I did was point out your poor reading comprehension ability.

I did not miss anything - - including the "civilization".

Going by your response, you missed the entire meaning of what I said.

I gave you the time and attention I meant to.

You meant to respond with a non-sensical, irrelevant reply so you could dodge the point? Got it.

civil societies are dying out while third-worlders are reproducing and preserving the future of humanity

Preserving humanity? We have seven freaking billion people on this planet, what the hell are you talking about? They are destroying humanity with overpopulation- millions starving, dying of disease, drought, poverty, etc.

reply to post by desert

Dear desert,

I used the word "routine." I was surprised when I saw it used in relationship to TVU, so I brought it forward to my post. Flatfish, who is vehemently against the law, posted links to a few articles which he believed were informative. one of them had a link to this: www.chron.com... You probably know that the Guttmacher Institute is Planned Parenthood's research arm.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, 88 percent of abortions occur during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Because the fetus is so small at this stage, traditional ultrasounds performed through the abdominal wall, "jelly on the belly," often cannot produce a clear image. Therefore, a transvaginal probe is most often necessary, especially up to 10 weeks to 12 weeks of pregnancy. The probe is inserted into the vagina, sending sound waves to reflect off body structures to produce an image of the fetus. Under this new law, a woman's vagina will be penetrated without an opportunity for her to refuse due to coercion from the so-called "public servants" who passed and signed this bill into law.

One might argue that since a sonogram using a transvaginal probe is already routinely conducted by abortion providers, a mandatory transvaginal ultrasound is not that different. (emphasis added)

Seems to me that unless something is really odd, a woman going in for an abortion is going to get a TVU anyway. What are the precise statistics? I don't know. Is it worth researching? "Routine" to me means every time unless something unusual and unanticipated pops up.

So just offer to show her the sonogram and the law's requirements have been met. No big deal.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


Thank you for the reply. I still am thinking that the tvu is not used 100% of the time in early abortions. If a sonogram is mandated for every abortion, and the tvu as the only way to get an accurate picture for 1st trimester abortion, then that is forcing a procedure to be done that is not medically necessary. Forcing a physician to use any sonogram where s/he may not have found it medically necessary before the bill is wrong.

Whoever thought up these bills had an Aha moment, where it was realized that the anti-abortion movement could take advantage of a procedure inside a medical building, where before the movement was constrained to outside the building. Outside, a woman could try to not see the visuals shoved her way, but inside she had to sign a legal state mandated document to be sure she wouldn't be subject to visuals.

Originally posted by desert
Forcing a physician to use any sonogram where s/he may not have found it medically necessary before the bill is wrong.

Forcing is wrong - period!

Originally posted by charles1952

So just offer to show her the sonogram and the law's requirements have been met. No big deal.

You really just said "No Big Deal"?

How about we FORCE Males to have something stuck up their privates to prove their Government controlled sperm is up to snuff.

reply to post by Annee

I hear you Annee, but there are two views in this debate that are never going to end.

Those that put a fetus before all else, before the mother most obviously, before personal freedom, before the horribly overburdened earth, they typically don't mind killing others in war, or turning a blind eye to the impovershed or foster situations, they typically put those biological cells on a pedestal above all else.

The other side, takes a more pragmatic approach. They don't put those cells, that small fetus on a pedestal above all others. They typically believe in many different things that they don't think need to be legislated by our courts. They don't neccessarily have less love in their hearts, but believe there are situations that prohibit another human being brought into this world.

It's really two fundamental belief systems at odds here, and one I think will be fought forever.

Originally posted by desert
reply to post by charles1952

 

Thank you for the reply. I still am thinking that the tvu is not used 100% of the time in early abortions. If a sonogram is mandated for every abortion, and the tvu as the only way to get an accurate picture for 1st trimester abortion, then that is forcing a procedure to be done that is not medically necessary. Forcing a physician to use any sonogram where s/he may not have found it medically necessary before the bill is wrong.

Whoever thought up these bills had an Aha moment, where it was realized that the anti-abortion movement could take advantage of a procedure inside a medical building, where before the movement was constrained to outside the building. Outside, a woman could try to not see the visuals shoved her way, but inside she had to sign a legal state mandated document to be sure she wouldn't be subject to visuals.

It is my belief that you are correct in your assumption that TVUs are not utilized 100% of the time in 1st trimester abortions and I believe that the procedure commonly known as a D&C or "Dilation and Curettage," is a perfect example to support that argument.

I could be wrong but it's my understanding that a D&C is a commonly used procedure, (especially is cases of rape and/or incest) that does not routinely utilize the TVU procedure. While I understand that there are several reasons for utilizing the D&C procedure, in some cases, it could easily be considered an "early stage abortion," if in fact it isn't already classified as such.

www.medicinenet.com...

If the patient is pregnant or thinks that she could be pregnant, she should not have the operation unless the D&C is for the purpose of an abortion.

With that said, I feel that it's important to emphasize what I believe to be the most important part of your response to charles1952, which is; Forcing a physician to use any sonogram where s/he may not have found it medically necessary before the bill is wrong.

I would even tweak that statement just a little to state that; Forcing a physician and or their patient to utilize any procedure whatsoever, where he/she may not have found it medically necessary is wrong, period.

That fact that this particular procedure only targets pregnant women should not just be seen as a renewed attack against a woman's right to choice as currently established via the Roe v. Wade supreme court decision, but also as a much larger, first salvo of attacks to have government get into the decision making process that takes place between a doctor and his/her patient.

My point by making this thread was to emphasize just how hypocritical this type of legislation is, especially seeing it promoted exclusively by the same political party that professes to stand for the preservation of individual rights. What an absolute joke they have become and more specifically, how they are committing political suicide in the process.

reply to post by SunnyDee


Love your post - - Star for You.

Extremists tend to be extreme in all things. Which often results in being hypocritical and illogical.

I live in the real everyday world. The "location" under my Avatar says: "Standing on the Moon". What better place to observe the "whole"? The entire world/earth - - the "whole" of humanity.

Until every already living human has the Basics of Life (food - shelter - purpose - education - companionship) - - - irresponsible procreation to term should be taken very seriously as a detriment to humanity. Cells are just cells.

LESS is MORE.

Originally posted by Flatfish

My point by making this thread was to emphasize just how hypocritical this type of legislation is, especially seeing it promoted exclusively by the same political party that professes to stand for the preservation of individual rights. What an absolute joke they have become and more specifically, how they are committing political suicide in the process.

Originally posted by Annee

Extremists tend to be extreme in all things. Which often results in being hypocritical and illogical.

I live in the real everyday world. The "location" under my Avatar says: "Standing on the Moon". What better place to observe the "whole"? The entire world/earth - - the "whole" of humanity.

I can remember a time when there were liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats. Now, anyone left in the GOP who is to the left of their most extreme fringe (and even they vie for title of Severest Conservative) gets disparagingly called liberal. Such craziness.

I've often thought that if you take the political continuum and bend it into a circle, both ends would meet... and be almost indistinguishable. This is why there were both LaRouchies and extreme right groups joining Tea Party rallies.

I can remember a time when the right derogatorily accused the far left of "the ends justifying the means". Bills like the above are the far right's means to justify their ends. Thus hypocricy and illogic do prevail indeed. Just as ridiculous is "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" is individual rights are paramount, unless I want the state to usurp yours.

Annee, I loved what you said about your location. Those who are able to go outside of themselves to see the whole, the "other" besides their self, live with courage and without fear, as did the good Samaritan. Those who cannot or refuse to see the whole beyond their world are doomed to live in a fearful, smaller world. A world where prayer is like the Pharisee's, who thanked God for who he wasn't, the other.

Ladies and Gentleman,

What a nimble-footed explorer you must think of me if you expect me to follow on the path you have set out.

At first you point out "Look there. There is a new bill requiring transvaginal ultrasounds." So, I climb to that hill and see that there isn't any such bill, just one that requires some form of ultrasound.

Then you steer me to the valley of violated Doctor-patient privelege. Alas, not there.

Then to a small clearing that points out that TVUs are routinely done anyway for abortions. The women are going to get one whether there is a law or not. And by going to the abortionist they're getting a consensual TVU.

Even though the women routinely get TVU's you point me to a small pond that says they're not medically necessary, therefore all the TVUs done by abortionists are really rapes. (I notice another sign there saying there are all sorts of procedures done daily that aren't medically necessary, but they are advisable for better diagnosis or whatever.)

Then you take me to an overlook to see that this sort of thing is unconstitutional, but on the other side of the hill is a sign saying a District Court has ruled that it is acceptable.

And finally, as we approach the lodge, you point out that it's not an abortion, it's a DNC. Well if it isn't an abortion, it's not covered by the law. And if it is an abortion, why pretend it's something else?

I AM NOT TRYING TO PUSH AN AGENDA. I'm trying to follow where you are leading me. I'm beginning to think I'm not the only one lost.

Unselfish reason for a baby. I displayed by love for my wife, she displayed hers for me. There's the baby.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by desert
Forcing a physician to use any sonogram where s/he may not have found it medically necessary before the bill is wrong.

Forcing is wrong - period!

It is wrong, these yahoo clown pretend they are for liberty, but all they are for is the rich,

causing war, and sticking the government inside of women.

Originally posted by charles1952
Ladies and Gentleman,

What a nimble-footed explorer you must think of me if you expect me to follow on the path you have set out.

At first you point out "Look there. There is a new bill requiring transvaginal ultrasounds." So, I climb to that hill and see that there isn't any such bill, just one that requires some form of ultrasound.

Then you steer me to the valley of violated Doctor-patient privelege. Alas, not there.

Then to a small clearing that points out that TVUs are routinely done anyway for abortions. The women are going to get one whether there is a law or not. And by going to the abortionist they're getting a consensual TVU.

Even though the women routinely get TVU's you point me to a small pond that says they're not medically necessary, therefore all the TVUs done by abortionists are really rapes. (I notice another sign there saying there are all sorts of procedures done daily that aren't medically necessary, but they are advisable for better diagnosis or whatever.)

Then you take me to an overlook to see that this sort of thing is unconstitutional, but on the other side of the hill is a sign saying a District Court has ruled that it is acceptable.

And finally, as we approach the lodge, you point out that it's not an abortion, it's a DNC. Well if it isn't an abortion, it's not covered by the law. And if it is an abortion, why pretend it's something else?

I AM NOT TRYING TO PUSH AN AGENDA. I'm trying to follow where you are leading me. I'm beginning to think I'm not the only one lost.

Unselfish reason for a baby. I displayed by love for my wife, she displayed hers for me. There's the baby.

Well I agree you might have been lead down some unnecessary roads, but at the end of the road, it's about legislating my body. Please stay clear of the wet and slippery road.

Originally posted by caladonea
reply to post by Flatfish

 

I think not only has the GOP written off the women's vote...but also the gay vote...and the poor (in money) peoples vote...as well as the senior citizen votes.

...and blacks and hispanics.

Looks like another Diebold election to me.

reply to post by SunnyDee

Dear SunnyDee,

Thank you, thank you. You promise a straight and simple path. May I follow for a bit? I'm following you that you don't want legislation dealing with your body. Is that because it's illegal and unconstitutional, or you just don't like it?

So far, the Court that has heard it has said it's not illegal or unconstitutional, so I suppose we'll have to wait for appeals.

I don't want to sound like I'm trivializing anything, but do you think that our government under Obamacare isn't going to legislate things all over your body like vaccinations, mammograms, etc.? Just saying you don't like it isn't going to carry much weight if the courts say it's ok and the system is closing in on you.

With respect,
Charles1952



Well I agree you might have been lead down some unnecessary roads, but at the end of the road, it's about legislating my body. Please stay clear of the wet and slippery road.

Originally posted by charles1952
rUnselfish reason for a baby. I displayed by love for my wife, she displayed hers for me. There's the baby.

I like you.

But - hey! Still a selfish reason.