Measures passed in congress. He is 1 for 620 trys.
Rallys aren't votes.
I REALLY wish you would quit blathering about medical stuff. ANY procedure done against the will of the patient is assault. Vaginal penetration under duress is rape. Forced transvaginal ultrasound is assault, and could very well be construed as rape.Originally Posted by zukiphyle
Last edited by zukiphile; 04-05-2012 at 04:29 PM.
If conveying to girls and women that they're ending a life if they abort isn't getting the message across, could it hurt to promote to them that there are waiting lists of good people and families ready to adopt and raise their child?
Obviously I'm not in the shoes of a girl/woman with an unwanted pregnancy, but every argument I hear is about 'for' or 'against' abortion and nothing about promoting alternatives. It's at least a possibility that awareness isn't there, that they think they'd be giving up the child to a depressing orphanage or that the child will be abused by adoptive parents instead of cared for.
There's at least one organization I know of that seems to have this M.O., but I've never really heard much about them:
...any girl or woman regardless of age, race, creed, marital or economic status, who feels distressed by an unplanned pregnancy.
BIRTHRIGHT IS THERE
...for every woman who calls for help. Whether that call is for nothing more than an anonymous pregnancy test or for friendship and support lasting through the delivery and beyond, Birthright is there. Every woman is special and deserves to be treated as an individual.
...for every woman and does not pass judgment on the "quality" of life or circumstances of a pregnancy. It does not dwell on the past. Birthright instead asks, "How can we help?" No matter how difficult a situation may seem, Birthright helps each woman plan constructively for her future.
...each woman to ask questions and to explore her options without pressure and without passing judgment.
BIRTHRIGHT DOES NOT
...use "scare tactics" or pressure.
...show abortion slides or pictures.
...picket or harass abortion clinics.
...lobby for legislative changes or engage in the public debate on abortion.
It isn't rape, it is (or would be) a government mandate to have one invasive procedure prior to being allowed to have the procedure you were seeking. I find it distasteful and rediculous to include it as a matter of law or a condition of having a legal abortion. I can't fathom an acutal doctor advising this as important for the patient, nor can I understand how adding unnecessary procedures to the bill helps reduce medical costs.
It isn't rape, though. No one is holding anyone down and forcibly anything anywhere. It would be a condition of a legal medical procedure, i.e. you lay down and do x, in order to get y. Which is big time BS, in my opinion.
The argument against these laws is that doctors have no duty, even in the face of statutes, to give accurate information to patients about the procedures they seek.
People who complain about rape where a state's law requires informed consent before undergoing a medical abortion need to breath into a bag until they've regained control of themselves.
Last edited by zukiphile; 04-05-2012 at 03:54 PM.
I note that couples who can't have children and want to adopt are turned inside out emotionally and financially. Typically, by the time they have given up on having their own, they are deemed to old to adopt an american child, and they go overseas to effectively buy one. It's a horror.
It might be possible that a girl could imgaine her child would go to an orphanage. Have you ever seen an orphanage? I don't believe I have.
It is interesting to note that up until the Virgin Islands vote, the MSM would declare the candidate with the highest popular vote totals the winner. Then when Ron Paul wins the popular causus vote, the criteria for victory changes and Ron Paul now loses because of delegate allocation. If delegate allocation is the benchmark (which it is), Paul has a much better chance than people think. The MSM is certianly underreporting his numbers. These odds increase as the idea of a brokered convention becomes more possible.
But as long as Ron Paul continues to not accrue the caucus votes, the MSM will stay on that as being the criteria for winning and not delegate allocation.
I may be wrong in spotting a bias here, but I haven't seen this tactic employed when Santorum or Gingrich win the caucus vote.
The MSM is jumping the gun to push the Romney victory story.
It's almost as if a Trudeau cartoon isn't the most reliable way to learn about the law.
Last edited by zukiphile; 04-05-2012 at 04:26 PM.