My Sonogram Can Beat up Your Sonogram

This sonogram illustrates how I feel about the pre-abortion requirement.

Texas’ Dueling Sonogram Bills Could Delay Law

Which sonogram bill will make it to the governor’s desk?

House Version:

  • 24-hour wait period
  • Would listen to a description of fetal development and heartbeat
  • May decline viewing the sonogram
  • but she won’t be told she has the option (of course)

Senate Version:

  • 2-hour wait period
  • May decline viewing the sonogram or listening to heartbeat
  • Would still have to listen to a description of fetal development
  • unless she is a rape or incest victim or there is serious fetal abnormality

I suppose the Senate version is the least insensitive. We’re still talking about a forced medical procedure. One of them is going to end up on the governor’s desk. I guess we can hope for the least crappy one?


26 responses to “My Sonogram Can Beat up Your Sonogram

  • Terrance H.

    What is wrong with insuring that women know precisely what is they’re doing?

    With all the pro-abortion “it’s only a mass of cells” misinformation floating around, it’s not unreasonable to assume that many women simply do not know what’s going on.

    • lbwoodgate

      Yes Terrance, information is good but whose going to pay for these sonograms and the transportation costs to get to them?

      If this is imposed on young teen moms who have no job or low paying ones, would you favor the state cover this costs – during these state budget fights?

      And by imposing this cost onto the pregnant woman isn’t this like the health insurance mandate that people on your side are opposed to? Forcing people to pay for something they may not want.

      • Terrance H.

        That’s your only concern, woodgate? Cost? Why, let’s set the burden firmly on the tax payers. I’m sure you would laud such an idea.

        And they don’t have to pay for the ultrasound, because nobody is forcing them to obtain an abortion.

        See how logic works?

      • SpinnyLiberal

        Cost is an issue if they barely have enough for the abortion. Are they still figuring out who is going to pay for it?

        Understanding the Sonogram Bill Is Hard

        If the state doesn’t pay, I wonder if the doctor can use any sonogram and put it in the patient’s chart to “prove” they did it. That could be a way around it.

      • Terrance H.

        It should be included in the price of the abortion, period. If they can’t afford it, then, well, too bad. Not sure what to tell you.

        When I was young, I couldn’t afford the car insurance I was forced to buy, but I knew that was the price I had to pay for CHOOSING to drive on public roads.

        It’s hardly different in this instance. If I choose to obtain an abortion, I must meet the legal requirements, period. It’s not a forced mediprocedurecure, because you are choosing to explore abortion as a means to deal with your pregnancy. It’s included in that procedure, per legal requirements. End…Of…Story.

      • SpinnyLiberal

        Of course it’s forced. A sonogram isn’t needed to have an abortion. The TX legislators are still trying to figure out who’s going to pay for it. While you think it should be the woman, others don’t. We’ll have to wait and see.

    • SpinnyLiberal

      Forced medical procedure. Consent is part of a patient’s bill of rights.

    • greengeekgirl

      Um, it is only a mass of cells. You and I are only masses of cells, we just happen to be able to live without surviving off of another human being.

      I think it’s absurd to think that every woman doesn’t understand that what is inside of her, if it grew to term, would become a baby–unless the woman is severely mentally ill, we otherwise have a pretty good grasp on that concept. Most of us have seen babies, held babies, smelled babies, played with babies, been around babies, and we’ve all been babies and children. We know it would be a baby if left to grow–that’s why many choose not to have the baby, because once it is born, that’s a *real life* that you have responsibility toward, not some abstract morality construct.

      Where do you pro-lifers go after the baby is born? Are you helping those mothers who choose not to have abortions because of emotional appeals? Because I’ve never heard of such a program–pro-lifers actually supporting that life that they demanded be brought into the world, either financially or through physical assistance (child care, medical care, psychological care, et cetera).

      • SpinnyLiberal

        Nicely put. Thanks for commenting! Man, the food on your site looks soooo good!!

      • Terrance H.

        So then we should be allowed to slaughter infants, right, because they depend on other human beings for survival? Makes sense.

        Do you think it’s absurd? I mean, really? Perhaps all the pro-abortion nonsense floating around – and all the lies Planned Parenthood tells regarding fetal development – has polluted female minds. I can provide video evidence of Planned Parenthood flat-out lying to women, courtesy of LiveAction.

        It’s a real life before it travels a mere eight-inches down the birth-canal. What you people want is to make humanity conditional on location, level of development, size, and dependency. How absurd, and a clear attempt to force your own personal opinions and morality. Quite absurd, in fact.

        Yet again we have another unthinking pro-abortionist yammering on about perceived conservative hypocrisy, as its exsistence – rather real or imagined – nullifies the pro-life message. Absurd.

        When are you far-left loons going to wake up and greet reality?

        BTW, I’m TerranceH. Nice to meet you!

      • SpinnyLiberal

        Hey Terrance – nice BTW introduction at the end. Next time, try to make it the first sentence. I don’t think I would have made it past “unthinking.”

      • greengeekgirl

        Terrence H, thanks for taking the time to go find my blog–the one that isn’t linked up there. I must have really put a bug up your butt, eh?

        It’s not a living being until it can live on its own outside of the womb. If it can’t live, it’s not a baby. Perhaps your mind is the one that has been polluted, because your ideas surely are not based on science or medicine. Science is objective; it is you who is trying to force definitions and opinions where they don’t fit.

      • greengeekgirl

        And, also, thanks for popping over to my blog, SpinnyLiberal! ^_^ I enjoyed reading your blog and will come back for more!

      • Terrance H.

        Terrence H, thanks for taking the time to go find my blog–the one that isn’t linked up there. I must have really put a bug up your butt, eh?

        As I explained over on my blog, it was pure coincedence. I use the tag surfer to find silly pro-abortion arguments to respond to. Yours came up.

        It’s not a living being until it can live on its own outside of the womb.

        Perhaps you could direct me to the medical textbook or website which supports this contention?

        If it can’t live, it’s not a baby. Perhaps your mind is the one that has been polluted, because your ideas surely are not based on science or medicine. Science is objective; it is you who is trying to force definitions and opinions where they don’t fit.

        Really?

        Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being.

        Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2

        Really?

        The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.

        Sadler, T.W. Langman’s Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3

        Really?

        Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)…The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.

        Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3

        You were saying? My opinions aren’t based on…what, again? Science?

        Go read a book.

      • SpinnyLiberal

        Sure, greengeekgirl! I like your cake tips.
        Yes, please come by, hang out, and spin. 🙂

  • lobotero

    Not a surprise…after all it is Texas…..

  • dcmartin

    Just wondering, Terrance H., since it is quite clear that you believe wholeheartedly that life begins at conception – do you believe that in cases where it is a medical certainty that the woman will DIE if she carries through the pregnancy it is acceptable to terminate the pregnancy? And if not, why? How do you personally come to the conclusion that a woman MUST forfeit her life in favor of the baby.
    And if a baby takes a life in the birthing process, is that perhaps “justifiable homicide”, or is it a “murder” to be tried when the child reaches majority?
    Honestly curious what your thoughts are on that.

    SpinnyLiberal, I’m enjoying your blog.

    • SpinnyLiberal

      Thanks dcmartin!! Your blog just cracks me up. And so do the tag categories. 😉

    • Terrance H.

      Yes, I believe it is acceptable, because that sounds an awful lot like justifiable homicide.

      I do not believe a woman must forfeit her life; I believe the woman should take responsibility for her actions, and that abortion should only be allowed when and only when an imminent danger to her life is there.

  • dcmartin

    Thanks for the reply Terrance H.
    My only quibble with your stance would be with this part -“I believe the woman should take responsibility for her actions, and that abortion should only be allowed when and only when an imminent danger to her life is there.”
    What about rape cases, Terrance? Should a woman have to bear the responsibility for someone else’s illegal, unconscionable act? I don’t ask that lightly……I have worked as a rape crisis counselor, and have seen firsthand the absolute devastation it brings. I admire the women who can make the choice to bear the child, but I completely understand those who don’t. I do not think that is a choice that should be legislated away, and it is insulting to women to think that the choice is just made on a whim by the majority who make it. Excessive waiting periods and forced sonograms are not going to make the abortion rate drop – better sex and contraception education, ESPECIALLY of males, will, along with better parity for women on insurance coverage. Men can get viagra covered at the drop of a hat, but women still struggle to get coverage for the pill, depo, and other forms of contraception.

    • Terrance H.

      What about rape cases, Terrance?

      I support the availability of of some form of a morning-after pill at an affordable price. That way if a woman is raped, she doesn’t have to embarrass herself by receiving medical attention if she doesn’t want to. She can simply purchase the pill, take it, and be done with the worry. She can then focus on fixing herself after what I’m sure is a very traumatic experience.

      That’s all I’ll say on the matter, because I will not allow the debate to be hijacked with this argument. It’s patently absurd to justify 99% of abortions using a circumstance which is responsible for less than 1% of all abortions. It’s an indefensible position.

      One shouldn’t be allowed a legal choice to murder, period.

      • dcmartin

        I think it’s patently absurd and indefensible to ignore the need for better sex education across the board in this country when it comes to contributing factors for the abortion rate.
        “That way if a woman is raped, she doesn’t have to embarrass herself by receiving medical attention if she doesn’t want to. ” While I’m sure you meant well with that statement, that is a perfect example of the typical attitude towards rape victims that makes rape one of the more under-reported crimes in this country, and it is why your 99/1% “statistic” would be laughable if it were not so deadly serious. If you really want to educate yourself on the subject, volunteer at a rape crisis center for a good six months, if you’ve got the stomach for it. It will be a real eye-opener, I guarantee you.

        “One shouldn’t be allowed a legal choice to murder, period.”
        So I take it you support the Illinois Governor’s deciscion to ban the death penalty ….good to know.

  • Terrance H.

    I think it’s patently absurd and indefensible to ignore the need for better sex education across the board in this country when it comes to contributing factors for the abortion rate.

    It’s a good thing I didn’t ignore it then.

    I don’t think there was anything wrong with my statement, or the factual statistic. Women are raped, and that’s terrible. Some get pregnant, but most don’t. Regardless, to attempt to rationalize 99% of abortions using a less than 1% circumstance is patently absurd and indefensible. Rape resulting in pregnancy is terrible, but rare, and certainly not justification enough to be pro-choice.

    And, yes, I do support the move in Illinois. I’m pro-life across the board. Nice try, though.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: