…I do not think it says what you think it says:

“This fight, like virtually all abortion law fights, is about how much of a role religion and morality should play in regulating these procedures. Pro-choice activists seem to have no problem with ultrasounds, as long as they’re done for medical reasons. But the fact that ultrasounds tend to already be part of abortions isn’t enough for pro-life activists. They want the main purpose for the scans to be promoting the “culture of life.” The Virginia law would mandate doctors to display and describe the ultrasound to the patient. And the image could end up dissuading many women from going ahead with the abortion.”

stuck in the 1970′s, but that new (back then) diagnostic method called ultrasound was performed and it was by applying a gel to the belly and moving the instrument around on it and looking at a screen.

Why is that viewed as rape? It is not even close, and more like having a stethoscope applied to one’s chest, except without the gel.

… but after all these years I still don’t understand the motivation of the pro-abortionists.

And I distinguish between pro-choice and pro-abortion. Pro-choice to me simply means a woman’s right to choose whether or not to carry her child to term.

Pro-abortionist are those that actively pursue that as the only choice and are the ideological storm-troopers of the abortion industry.

I understand the former but not the latter. Anyone who does, please explain.

…unless I am misunderstanding:

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) – Hundreds of women stood mute, arm-in-arm, forming a human cordon through which legislators walked before Monday’s floor sessions to protest a wave of anti-abortion legislation coursing through the 2012 General Assembly.

<>

The protest was over bills that would define embryos as humans and criminalize their destruction, require “transvaginal” ultrasounds of women seeking abortions and cutting state aid to poor women seeking abortions.”

Does the bill require transvaginal ultrasounds, or is that the crock that I think it is?

You have to realize the difference. One ultrasound is required by the doctor…the other by the government.

Remember, an abortion is a decision between a woman and her ‘doctor’. Not the woman and her parents, clergy, partner, friend, or any other associate who may really care about the woman…but her ‘doctor’.

The ‘doctor’ is some all knowing, special being, whose only interest is what is best for the woman. The ‘doctor’ knows better than all those listed above. The doctor takes special care to look out for the woman’s interest, with NO interest in the financial gain received by the woman making the ‘right’ decision.

The government, on the other hand, needs to stay out of our bedroom…because they really need to be in our schools so that our children can have the lunch we sent replaced by the government approved lunch.

The government has no right to say that a 15 year old has to get parental approval before they can get an abortion, as long as they MUST get parental approval before being treated for a sprained leg.

That same government that has no business disrupting those dangerous occupiers from exercising their right to take over public and/or private property for an indefinite period, as outlined in SOME founding fathers document (maybe)as long as they prohit the tea partiers from peaceable assembly.

(This comment brought to you by The Spin Doctor, currently undergoing therapy with Sarcastics Anonymous)

maybe what these women against it meant to say is that that particular procedure (trans-vaginal ultrasound) is invasive? Is that the one required? Or is it just the old fashioned, and forgive my laymen terminology, but lube and tube ultrasound performed on the belly (non-invasive)? I think maybe women don’t want to HAVE TO be looked at if they know they are pregnant using less invasive means.

And those women who were made pregnant by unwarranted invasive means possibly don’t want to have it done again. I’m sorry, but in some cases, like in rape and others, etc., I’d have to agree that a woman should NOT be required to have an invasive sonogram.

If all that is required is the non-invasive one, then sorry ladies, but the choice would be clear. We just can’t have the government forcing women to have invasive procedures if they don’t want it.

when abortion was left to the states and did not create a vast Right-Left divide, except at state level in certain states, and even in those states, not so much.

Roe was a victory for everyone, in one appalling sense. By placing abortion beyond the reach of legislators, it spawned two hardened camps, each having financial supporters. It’s been a money maker.

Planned Parenthood would have done just fine financially without Roe. Roe has been manna to it. If Roe is ever repealed (I hope and wish), Planned Parenthood will do EVEN BETTER financially, from donations.

First of all, there are 2 different types of ultrasounds. One involves a procedure on the top of your stomach, the other involves inserting a probe inside one’s vagina and probing….one isn’t invasive at all and one is. But the biggest issue is one of consent. So, it is ok for the gov’t to force a woman to have a procedure she does not want, and to force a dr to order the same such procedure. That is not gov’t intrusion, right? But the health care act is massive gov’t intrusion? Wonder if all yall men who are prescribed viagra would be ok if you were forced to have a penile probe to get it?

of course but liberals follow rather than read and analyze facts. These people use impact messages hoping reading won’t give the facts a second thought. From my experience most libs don’t read whole articles, lazy and simply wanting read meat sound bytes rather than think for themselves.

people by the time you finish the ultrasound fight the child will be going to school.

First! Do you believe there is a G O D? If so, you should be aware that you will be called to give an account of what things you have voted on in our political arena.
Remember YOU will stand before HIM to give an account of what YOU did through life. View the SILENT SCREAM. This is what a child goes through during an abortion.

As I understand, the majority of citizens want to stop abortion.
Not only for the sense of murdering babies, but also as a financial thing.
How much DOES an abortion cost? That’s a good second thought; naturally the child should be the first.
I’m not a “pro-lifer” just anti abortion.
I think stopping a human heart is murder. We have been murdering these babies since 1973
Now multiply that by one and a half million, then multiply that by thirty seven years.
Next year that will be FIFTY EIGHT MILLION BABIES and how many dollars we will have to answer to GOD for.
We commit abortion at the desire of misguided women and we call it birth control.
How much money does an abortion cost? Now multiply that by one and a half million, then multiply that by thirty seven years.
Next year that will be FIFTY EIGHT MILLION BABIES and how many dollars we will have to answer to GOD for.
There’s no big noise about aborting children. If an individual kills another, that is the shedding of blood in Scripture, that’s called killing someone. “If man sheds another’s blood, then by man shall his blood be shed?
Lying, stealing and cheating seem to be all right too
“When the wicked bear rule, the people mourn but when the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice.” I don’t hear much rejoicing, politically, or financially.
Let me propose a bill to Congress;
Abortion must not be paid for from public money; it must be paid by:
1) The Planned Parenthood Corporation.
2) Private Donations of individuals (not taxpayers), so they can be proud that they helped.

B. Except in the case of a medical emergency, at least 2 hours before the performance of an abortion a qualified medical professional trained in sonography and working under the direct supervision of a physician licensed in the Commonwealth shall perform fetal ultrasound imaging and auscultation of fetal heart tone services on the patient undergoing the abortion for the purpose of determining gestational age. The ultrasound image shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community, contain the dimensions of the fetus, and accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable. Determination of gestational age shall be based upon measurement of the fetus in a manner consistent with standard medical practice in the community in determining gestational age. When only the gestational sac is visible during ultrasound imaging, gestational age may be based upon measurement of the gestational sac. A print of the ultrasound image shall be made to document the measurements that have been taken to determine the gestational age of the fetus.

C. The qualified medical professional performing fetal ultrasound imaging pursuant to subsection B shall offer the woman an opportunity to view and receive a printed copy of the ultrasound image and hear auscultation of fetal heart tone and shall obtain from the woman written certification that this opportunity was offered and whether or not it was accepted. A printed copy of the ultrasound image shall be maintained in the woman’s medical record at the facility where the abortion is to be performed for the longer of (i) seven years or (ii) the extent required by applicable federal or state law.

An abdominal ultrasound is indeed done before an abortion and there’s nothing wrong with that. The change that’s being proposed is the requirement to determine “the dimensions of the fetus” and “accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable” _no matter how early the pregnancy_ An abdominal ultrasound can’t do that in the case of very early pregnancies and so doctors will be required to do a transvaginal ultrasound even though it is medically unnecessary. And therein lies the controversy.

If Lithwick thinks an ultrasound is “rape,” I wonder what she’s going to call it when she goes in for a Colonoscopy?

But, this is so typical of Democrats. Whenever they oppose anything, or anyone, they automatically reach for the most pejorative possible rhetoric, no matter how outrageous. They are 100% dishonest in everything they say, and everything they do. They CAN’T be honest because it would then expose them for the fools they truly are. Thus, “Republicans want to take away your Social Security check” (they don’t), “Republicans want to put mercury and arsenic in your drinking water” (they don’t), “Republicans want Grandma to starve” (they don’t). But, it drags us down into the mud, where they want us, defending against these imbecilic and inane accusations. While you’re trying to explain that you don’t want to put arsenic in the drinking water, it deflects from the REAL issues (budget, fiscal management, energy policies, economic progress, etc.) And that’s the REAL purpose of the Democrats’ insane rhetoric. About the only Republican who seems to address that head on and take the fight back into the faces of the Democrats is Allen West. I sure wish he would run for President!!!

As for Lithwick, the proper response to her comments is a simple, “you’re an idiot.”