Apparently rape is okay as long as the State is doing it....

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/02/virginia_ultrasound_law_women_who_want_an_abortion_will_be_forcibly_penetrated_for_no_medical_reason.html


....The New Virginia State Flag....



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

What will Bob "The Commander" McDonnell do if this law comes to his desk?



...I know....



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

It's great to see thar these small-government, freedom-loving conservatives are finally focusing on jobs & the economy.

Ohs Noes. McDonnell's approval rating might slip a bit and only 55% of the voters would support him.

Moral of the story: Obama would kill his first born for McDonnell's approval rating.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ....The New Virginia State Flag....
>
>


Pretty ironic to post that flag considering you drool over a fool that wants to introduce the government in all aspects of healthcare. All seeing eye indeed.

look at me Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ....The New Virginia State Flag....
> >
> >
>
>
> Pretty ironic to post that flag considering you
> drool over a fool that wants to introduce the
> government in all aspects of healthcare. All
> seeing eye indeed.

Where in ObamaCare does it mandate shoving a probe up a women's vagina against her will?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

yet... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ohs Noes. McDonnell's approval rating might slip a
> bit and only 55% of the voters would support him.
>
> Moral of the story: Obama would kill his first
> born for McDonnell's approval rating.


If McDonnell has half a brain, he won't sign this piece of shit legislation. I can just imagine the howls coming out of the economic development groups over this. Women do make decisions at Fortune 500 companies, you know. This shit will not fly with Corporate America.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Virginia is going to be so fucked up with republican religious laws.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> yet... Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ohs Noes. McDonnell's approval rating might slip
> a
> > bit and only 55% of the voters would support
> him.
> >
> > Moral of the story: Obama would kill his first
> > born for McDonnell's approval rating.
>
>
> If McDonnell has half a brain, he won't sign this
> piece of shit legislation. I can just imagine the
> howls coming out of the economic development
> groups over this. Women do make decisions at
> Fortune 500 companies, you know. This shit will
> not fly with Corporate America.


Corporate America won't give a shit. Thinking otherwise is foolish.

Just curious, do yo actually believe what you write, or is it some attempt to pull one over on people?

57% of Virginia women support this legislation.

They make decisions at home, you know, and they vote.

20 states have ultrasound provisions.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> look at me Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > ....The New Virginia State Flag....
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Pretty ironic to post that flag considering you
> > drool over a fool that wants to introduce the
> > government in all aspects of healthcare. All
> > seeing eye indeed.
>
> Where in ObamaCare does it mandate shoving a probe
> up a women's vagina against her will?


It mandates that organizations whose fundamental beliefs oppose abortion pay for a vacuum be shoved up a woman's vagina. All against those organizations will.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's great to see thar these small-government,
> freedom-loving conservatives are finally focusing
> on jobs & the economy.


American Taliban.

__________________________________
That's not a ladybug, that's a cannapiller.

stats Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 57% of Virginia women support this legislation.
>


Now. Let's see how all those soccer moms respond to this debacle.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

look at me Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> It mandates that organizations whose fundamental
> beliefs oppose abortion pay for a vacuum be shoved
> up a woman's vagina. All against those
> organizations will.


See, that's because you are listening to idiots like Hannity. ObamaCare doesn't require that and never has. As for the contraception piece for religious-affiliated hospitals and universities, NOT Churches, he has rectified that situation. Frankly, I don't see where a Catholic-owned hospital has the right to tell a Protestant cafeteria worker making $8 an hour that she can't have access to birth control through the health plan SHE is subsidizing through premiums SHE pays. THAT is the infringement of an individual's religious beliefs.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

stats Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 57% of Virginia women support this legislation.
>
> They make decisions at home, you know, and they
> vote.
>
> 20 states have ultrasound provisions.


If you only ask a certain portion of the population you can make statistics say anything you want. Or if you ask a question in a certain way.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> look at me Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > It mandates that organizations whose
> fundamental
> > beliefs oppose abortion pay for a vacuum be
> shoved
> > up a woman's vagina. All against those
> > organizations will.
>
>
> See, that's because you are listening to idiots
> like Hannity. ObamaCare doesn't require that and
> never has. As for the contraception piece for
> religious-affiliated hospitals and universities,
> NOT Churches, he has rectified that situation.
> Frankly, I don't see where a Catholic-owned
> hospital has the right to tell a Protestant
> cafeteria worker making $8 an hour that she can't
> have access to birth control through the health
> plan SHE is subsidizing through premiums SHE pays.
> THAT is the infringement of an individual's
> religious beliefs.


See, that's because you are listening to idiots like Maddow. ObamaCare does require that and always has. As for the abortion piece for religious-affiliated hospitals and universities, NOT Churches, he has NOT rectified that situation. Frankly, I don't see where the government has the right to tell a religious organization paying health care premiums that they must pay for abortion inducing drugs which is in direct violation of their constitutionally protected religious beliefs.

There is no infingement of the individual's beliefs. The organization is not preventing the person from obtaining those drugs, they just aren't going to aid and abet her.

Really? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stats Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > 57% of Virginia women support this legislation.
> >
> > They make decisions at home, you know, and they
> > vote.
> >
> > 20 states have ultrasound provisions.
>
>
> If you only ask a certain portion of the
> population you can make statistics say anything
> you want. Or if you ask a question in a certain
> way.


Yeah, Mason-Dixon knows nothing about polling.....

stats Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> 20 states have ultrasound provisions.

So, according to WashingtonLocian, the governments of almost half the states in this country are forcibly raping women.

What a jackass he is. He loses all credibility when he presents his opinion wrapped in sensationalism and lies.

I'm confused...so it's "rape" when an ultrasound is performed during an abortion, but the actual abortion itself, which I would suspect is at least as invasive, is not rape?

Maybe it's not rape, because it's murder?

Hmmmm

look at me Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ....The New Virginia State Flag....
> >
> >
>
>
> Pretty ironic to post that flag considering you
> drool over a fool that wants to introduce the
> government in all aspects of healthcare. All
> seeing eye indeed.

Just tell us how? Has your doctor quoted new laws to you? Do you now send your health insurance check to the government? There is no take over of heath care and the day the affordable care act passed stocks in most health care companies went up.


There in no government take over. You are an idiot if you think so.

Fairfaxunderground rules: Lilliputions, not ok. Midgettville ok. I got it now.

which is it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm confused...so it's "rape" when an ultrasound
> is performed during an abortion, but the actual
> abortion itself, which I would suspect is at least
> as invasive, is not rape?

Are you deliberately obtuse or just a moron? The issue is CONSENT to the procedure.

And the ultrasound is not performed during the abortion; it's performed before, in a futile attempt to make the woman change her mind. And if that doesn't work, the intent is to at least make her feel guilty and miserable for the rest of her life. Do you really think women need to see a picture of the fetus to make this life-altering decision?

which is it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm confused...so it's "rape" when an ultrasound
> is performed during an abortion, but the actual
> abortion itself, which I would suspect is at least
> as invasive, is not rape?
>
> Maybe it's not rape, because it's murder?
>
> Hmmmm

Yes you are confused and quite stupid. Rape is the UNWANTED vaginal penetration. If the women says no do not put that in my vagina and the laws says the doctor must, then that is rape.

Rape would also be considered if the abortion was not wanted by the women and an abortion was performed.

So genius - if the women gives permission to stick something in her vagina it is not rape. If she says no and you do it anyway, it is rape.

Glad I could clear this up for you. I feel sorry for any females in your immediate vicinity.

Fairfaxunderground rules: Lilliputions, not ok. Midgettville ok. I got it now.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Where in ObamaCare does it mandate shoving a probe
> up a women's vagina against her will?


That bill doesnt mandate that. You dont want it in you dont get pregnant or have an abortion, problem solved

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> See, that's because you are listening to idiots
> like Hannity. ObamaCare doesn't require that and
> never has. As for the contraception piece for
> religious-affiliated hospitals and universities,
> NOT Churches, he has rectified that situation.
> Frankly, I don't see where a Catholic-owned
> hospital has the right to tell a Protestant
> cafeteria worker making $8 an hour that she can't
> have access to birth control through the health
> plan SHE is subsidizing through premiums SHE pays.
> THAT is the infringement of an individual's
> religious beliefs.


You can seriously be this dumb can you. He didnt do anything to solve the situation. She doesnt pay for her whole health care she pays for part of it and the church pays for the other part. Shes more than able to get a job at another cafeteria if she wants those benefits.

If a woman says "no," it's rape. SCOTUS determined abortion is a protected right for women. It said nothing about the state forcibly shoving an object in a woman's vagina against her will as part of that right.




§ 18.2-67.5. Attempted rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, aggravated sexual battery, and sexual battery.

A. An attempt to commit rape, forcible sodomy, or inanimate or animate object sexual penetration shall be punishable as a Class 4 felony.

B. An attempt to commit aggravated sexual battery shall be a felony punishable as a Class 6 felony.

C. An attempt to commit sexual battery is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

(1981, c. 397; 1993, c. 549.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If a woman says "no," it's rape. SCOTUS determined
> abortion is a protected right for women. It said
> nothing about the state forcibly shoving an object
> in a woman's vagina against her will as part of
> that right.
>
>
>
>
> § 18.2-67.5. Attempted rape, forcible sodomy,
> object sexual penetration, aggravated sexual
> battery, and sexual battery.
>
> A. An attempt to commit rape, forcible sodomy, or
> inanimate or animate object sexual penetration
> shall be punishable as a Class 4 felony.
>
> B. An attempt to commit aggravated sexual battery
> shall be a felony punishable as a Class 6 felony.
>
> C. An attempt to commit sexual battery is a Class
> 1 misdemeanor.
>
> (1981, c. 397; 1993, c. 549.)

No rape is something that happens to you against your will that you have no control over. You have a choice to get an abortion. If you want one you have to do that. If you dont want it done dont have one or dont get pregnant in the first place. Its very plain and simple and there many similar laws around the country. As usual you dont care about fact and just want women to be able to kill as many babies as they want so you dont have to buy condoms because it feels better natural

worng again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> No rape is something that happens to you against
> your will that you have no control over. You have
> a choice to get an abortion. If you want one you
> have to do that. If you dont want it done dont
> have one or dont get pregnant in the first place.
> Its very plain and simple and there many similar
> laws around the country. As usual you dont care
> about fact and just want women to be able to kill
> as many babies as they want so you dont have to
> buy condoms because it feels better natural

Women have the right to get an abortion. Even if the state forces a woman to get this procedure, she still has the right to abort the fetus. It's state-sanctioned sexual harassment.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Women have the right to get an abortion. Even if
> the state forces a woman to get this procedure,
> she still has the right to abort the fetus. It's
> state-sanctioned sexual harassment.


No its a condition of being able to kill you kid. You should have to look at it and think about what you are doing. Only people that are pro killing babies want to make it as easy as possible. What a terrible thing they have to actually think about it and see what it looks like before killing it oh no

wrong again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Women have the right to get an abortion. Even
> if
> > the state forces a woman to get this procedure,
> > she still has the right to abort the fetus.
> It's
> > state-sanctioned sexual harassment.
>
>
> No its a condition of being able to kill you kid.
> You should have to look at it and think about what
> you are doing. Only people that are pro killing
> babies want to make it as easy as possible. What
> a terrible thing they have to actually think about
> it and see what it looks like before killing it oh
> no


The Court asserted that that the government had two competing interests – protecting the mother's health and protecting the "potentiality of human life". Following its earlier logic, the Court stated that during the first trimester, when the procedure is more safe than childbirth, the decision to abort must be left to the mother and her physician. The State has the right to intervene prior to fetal viability only to protect the health of the mother, and may regulate the procedure after viability so long as there is always an exception for preserving maternal health. The Court additionally added that the primary right being preserved in the Roe decision was that of the physician's right to practice medicine freely absent a compelling state interest – not women's rights in general.[25] The Court explicitly rejected a fetal "right to life" argument.[26]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Your not making any argument at all. Theres no legal basis for an abortion other than they wanted them legal. You just spouting a bunch of bs about this and that and ignoring the main issue. NO ONE IS FORCING THEM TO HAVE AN ABORTION. Dont want an ultrasound dont get one, dont get pregnant end of story. Abortion is state sponsored murder so your state sponsored anything argument also holds no weight.

Bottom line you want abortions to be seen as just like getting something dry cleaned, just stop by no big deal pay and be on your way which really isnt surprising considering the morals you demonstrate. They can still get the abortion if they want they just have to actually think about it and know what they are doing. Considering the majority of women regret having them anyone with a brain would see this as a positive

wrong again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your not making any argument at all. Theres no
> legal basis for an abortion other than they wanted
> them legal. You just spouting a bunch of bs about
> this and that and ignoring the main issue. NO ONE
> IS FORCING THEM TO HAVE AN ABORTION. Dont want an
> ultrasound dont get one, dont get pregnant end of
> story. Abortion is state sponsored murder so your
> state sponsored anything argument also holds no
> weight.
>
> Bottom line you want abortions to be seen as just
> like getting something dry cleaned, just stop by
> no big deal pay and be on your way which really
> isnt surprising considering the morals you
> demonstrate. They can still get the abortion if
> they want they just have to actually think about
> it and know what they are doing. Considering the
> majority of women regret having them anyone with a
> brain would see this as a positive


Actually, you have no argument. And neither does the State of Virginia. If this is signed into law, it will be the unraveling of the Republican Party in Virginia.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Actually, you have no argument. And neither does
> the State of Virginia. If this is signed into law,
> it will be the unraveling of the Republican Party
> in Virginia.


Only someone with no brain would think that.


They have the right to make a woman think about the abortion. They arent limiting them or restricting their access and they have similar laws in other states on their side. As always you either dont know what you are talking about or just dont care and will say anything to try and prove what you want

WashingtonLocian is just jealous.

He would pay to have Obama shove a probe up his ass.

worng again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If a woman says "no," it's rape. SCOTUS
> determined
> > abortion is a protected right for women. It
> said
> > nothing about the state forcibly shoving an
> object
> > in a woman's vagina against her will as part of
> > that right.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > § 18.2-67.5. Attempted rape, forcible sodomy,
> > object sexual penetration, aggravated sexual
> > battery, and sexual battery.
> >
> > A. An attempt to commit rape, forcible sodomy,
> or
> > inanimate or animate object sexual penetration
> > shall be punishable as a Class 4 felony.
> >
> > B. An attempt to commit aggravated sexual
> battery
> > shall be a felony punishable as a Class 6
> felony.
> >
> > C. An attempt to commit sexual battery is a
> Class
> > 1 misdemeanor.
> >
> > (1981, c. 397; 1993, c. 549.)
>
> No rape is something that happens to you against
> your will that you have no control over. You have
> a choice to get an abortion. If you want one you
> have to do that. If you dont want it done dont
> have one or dont get pregnant in the first place.
> Its very plain and simple and there many similar
> laws around the country. As usual you dont care
> about fact and just want women to be able to kill
> as many babies as they want so you dont have to
> buy condoms because it feels better natural

What if there were a law that said the women had to give the doctor a blow job first. If you wanted to have an abortion (which is federally protected) then you would have to suck the dick in Virginia?

While you may feel your logic is linear, it is not. The abortion is a medical procedure. The tube up the vagina is also a medical procedure that has nothing to do with the first medical procedure except the GOP says it necessary, and they will not listen to your doctor.

You are the same idiots that complained the affordable care will but a bureaucrat between you and your doctor, which it will not. Now you are in favor of the VA government forcibly making a doctor shove a stick in a womens vagina.

And thanks for the law. I would hope that some woman will have a doctor whip that thing out and since the law says "attempt" she sues the doctor for rape and gets the American Medical Association to weight in on this kooky law.

Fairfaxunderground rules: Lilliputions, not ok. Midgettville ok. I got it now.

worng again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If a woman says "no," it's rape. SCOTUS
> determined
> > abortion is a protected right for women. It
> said
> > nothing about the state forcibly shoving an
> object
> > in a woman's vagina against her will as part of
> > that right.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > § 18.2-67.5. Attempted rape, forcible sodomy,
> > object sexual penetration, aggravated sexual
> > battery, and sexual battery.
> >
> > A. An attempt to commit rape, forcible sodomy,
> or
> > inanimate or animate object sexual penetration
> > shall be punishable as a Class 4 felony.
> >
> > B. An attempt to commit aggravated sexual
> battery
> > shall be a felony punishable as a Class 6
> felony.
> >
> > C. An attempt to commit sexual battery is a
> Class
> > 1 misdemeanor.
> >
> > (1981, c. 397; 1993, c. 549.)
>
> No rape is something that happens to you against
> your will that you have no control over. You have
> a choice to get an abortion. If you want one you
> have to do that. If you dont want it done dont
> have one or dont get pregnant in the first place.
> Its very plain and simple and there many similar
> laws around the country. As usual you dont care
> about fact and just want women to be able to kill
> as many babies as they want so you dont have to
> buy condoms because it feels better natural

What if there were a law that said the women had to give the doctor a blow job first. If you wanted to have an abortion (which is federally protected) then you would have to suck the dick in Virginia?

While you may feel your logic is linear, it is not. The abortion is a medical procedure. The tube up the vagina is also a medical procedure that has nothing to do with the first medical procedure except the GOP says it necessary, and they will not listen to your doctor.

You are the same idiots that complained the affordable care will but a bureaucrat between you and your doctor, which it will not. Now you are in favor of the VA government forcibly making a doctor shove a stick in a womens vagina.

And thanks for the law. I would hope that some woman will have a doctor whip that thing out and since the law says "attempt" she sues the doctor for rape and gets the American Medical Association to weight in on this kooky law.

Fairfaxunderground rules: Lilliputions, not ok. Midgettville ok. I got it now.

wrong again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Actually, you have no argument. And neither
> does
> > the State of Virginia. If this is signed into
> law,
> > it will be the unraveling of the Republican
> Party
> > in Virginia.
>
>
> Only someone with no brain would think that.
>
>
> They have the right to make a woman think about
> the abortion.

No they dont. An abortion is a federally protected procedure. Do they require that you "think" about who you vote for? No they dont. Idiot.

> They arent limiting them or
> restricting their access and they have similar
> laws in other states on their side.

And many more laws have been or will be eventually overturned.

> As always you
> either dont know what you are talking about or
> just dont care and will say anything to try and
> prove what you want

You are an idiot.

Fairfaxunderground rules: Lilliputions, not ok. Midgettville ok. I got it now.

wrong again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your not making any argument at all. Theres no
> legal basis for an abortion other than they wanted
> them legal.

The Supreme Court said so.

> You just spouting a bunch of bs about
> this and that and ignoring the main issue. NO ONE
> IS FORCING THEM TO HAVE AN ABORTION.

No one is forcing you to vote either. Another federally protected thing. But if you want to vote, and you meet the requirements, you can vote. No one requires that you think about it.

> Dont want an
> ultrasound dont get one, dont get pregnant end of
> story. Abortion is state sponsored murder so your
> state sponsored anything argument also holds no
> weight.


You are an idiot. Does the state actually sponsor it? What I think you mean to say but you are an idiot is it is "State Sanctioned Murder". But that is a real stretch and just big words meant to scare people.
>
> Bottom line you want abortions to be seen as just
> like getting something dry cleaned, just stop by
> no big deal pay and be on your way which really
> isnt surprising considering the morals you
> demonstrate.

Abortion has been legal in US since the Supreme Court ruled on it in the early 70s - some 40 years ago idiot. All this talk about abortions becoming as common as dry cleaning was fear mongering then and fear mongering now with no basis in reality. Idiot.

> They can still get the abortion if
> they want they just have to actually think about
> it and know what they are doing.

You think that women do not know what they are doing?You are an idiot. The vast majority do and it is an extremely personal/private thing between a women and her doctor.


> Considering the
> majority of women regret having them anyone with a
> brain would see this as a positive

Where did this nifty little fact come from?

Fairfaxunderground rules: Lilliputions, not ok. Midgettville ok. I got it now.

wrong again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Women have the right to get an abortion. Even
> if
> > the state forces a woman to get this procedure,
> > she still has the right to abort the fetus.
> It's
> > state-sanctioned sexual harassment.
>
>
> No its a condition of being able to kill you kid.
> You should have to look at it and think about what
> you are doing. Only people that are pro killing
> babies want to make it as easy as possible. What
> a terrible thing they have to actually think about
> it and see what it looks like before killing it oh
> no


Men like you give the rest of us men a bad rep.

I think that people should be required to watch a 15 minute video of people getting shot in the head, showing dead kids who were shot, and explaining all the bad statistics of what happens when idiots own guns. Are you for that? I bet not.

Fairfaxunderground rules: Lilliputions, not ok. Midgettville ok. I got it now.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Apparently rape is okay as long as the State is
> doing it....

Well what used to be considered an intrusive assault becomes okay once Democrats are in charge.



Neither Democrats nor Republicans have any ideals that actually matter; loyalty to the party and the boss is what counts most.

Radiophile Wrote:


> No they dont. An abortion is a federally protected
> procedure. Do they require that you "think" about
> who you vote for? No they dont. Idiot.

Only in your mind do they not. Does your vote kill the candidate no it doesnt idiot. Lets keep comparing actual rights to the right of a mother to murder her child great comparison.

> And many more laws have been or will be eventually
> overturned.

Right because you are legal expert and not just saying so because you want it to be that way. The same way you look back on slave owners as being idiots and monsters, 200-300 years from now will look back at people like you and ask what kind of sick society thought it was a protected right to murder babies.

> You are an idiot.

I take that as a compliment. I would be terrified about the person I had become is someone like you agreed with me. You arent pro choice, people that want 0 restrictions on abortion and access for everyone to have them like they are no big deal are pro murder. You want to take the choice entirely out of the equation and make sure its a done deal.

wrong again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> > You are an idiot.
>
> I take that as a compliment. I would be terrified
> about the person I had become is someone like you
> agreed with me. You arent pro choice, people that
> want 0 restrictions on abortion and access for
> everyone to have them like they are no big deal
> are pro murder. You want to take the choice
> entirely out of the equation and make sure its a
> done deal.

I am not sure what you are trying to say. I am pro choice. I believe that abortions should be safe, legal, and rare. Personally I am against abortions. But I will NOT under any circumstances allow my views to stand in the way of a personal decision that is made between a women and her doctor.

Fairfaxunderground rules: Lilliputions, not ok. Midgettville ok. I got it now.

Radiophile Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I am not sure what you are trying to say. I am pro
> choice. I believe that abortions should be safe,
> legal, and rare. Personally I am against
> abortions. But I will NOT under any circumstances
> allow my views to stand in the way of a personal
> decision that is made between a women and her
> doctor.

This has nothing to do with medical decisions and everything to do with people just deciding abortions should be legal because its more convenient. Pregnancy is 100 percent preventable. Trying to make a woman who is killing a baby into a victim in the circumstance is disgusting. Unless she was raped, which is a different story, she was a willing participant in the action should take responsibility for her poor choices.

Then the argument is well theyll happen anyway so we should legalize them. Well murder and rape is illegal but happens anyway. Should we legalize that too?

Spoken like a guy who has no problem forcing his morality onto people in a wholly different situation then he is.

Way to go libs. Your close minded policies are leading to the unnecessary deaths of women. A transvaginal ultrasound would have likely prevented this woman's death....

Woman dies after abortion at Planned Parenthood clinic
Last Modified: Jul 24, 2012 05:16AM
A woman died of injuries she received during an abortion at a local Planned Parenthood clinic Friday.

Tonya Reaves, 24, of the 1500 block of N. Kildare, was pronounced dead at 11:20 p.m. Friday at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, according to the Cook County Medical Examiner’s office. She was taken to the hospital from the Planned Parenthood clinic at 18 S. Michigan Ave.

An autopsy done Saturday listed the woman’s cause of death to be hemorrhage, with a cervical dilation and evacuation, as well as an intrauterine pregnancy as contributing causes, according to the medical examiner’s office. Her death was ruled an accident.

Calls to local and national Planned Parenthood offices were not returned.


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

Copyright © 2012 — Sun-Times Media, LLC

It's a shame that Virginia's laws weren't able to help this woman in Illinois.

Also, glad to see you are a Medical Examiner who can determine these things via the internet. You have no idea if a transvaginal ultrasound would have done anything for this woman.


liberal policies kill again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Way to go libs. Your close minded policies are
> leading to the unnecessary deaths of women. A
> transvaginal ultrasound would have likely
> prevented this woman's death....
>
> Woman dies after abortion at Planned Parenthood
> clinic
> Last Modified: Jul 24, 2012 05:16AM
> A woman died of injuries she received during an
> abortion at a local Planned Parenthood clinic
> Friday.
>
> Tonya Reaves, 24, of the 1500 block of N. Kildare,
> was pronounced dead at 11:20 p.m. Friday at
> Northwestern Memorial Hospital, according to the
> Cook County Medical Examiner’s office. She was
> taken to the hospital from the Planned Parenthood
> clinic at 18 S. Michigan Ave.
>
> An autopsy done Saturday listed the woman’s
> cause of death to be hemorrhage, with a cervical
> dilation and evacuation, as well as an
> intrauterine pregnancy as contributing causes,
> according to the medical examiner’s office. Her
> death was ruled an accident.
>
> Calls to local and national Planned Parenthood
> offices were not returned.
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------
>
> Copyright © 2012 — Sun-Times Media, LLC

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's a shame that Virginia's laws weren't able to
> help this woman in Illinois.
>
> Also, glad to see you are a Medical Examiner who
> can determine these things via the internet. You
> have no idea if a transvaginal ultrasound would
> have done anything for this woman.

I assume you then see the point in the Mississippi law, which requires that anyone performing an abortion be an OB/GYN and have hospital admission agreements with area hospitals.

But no, I am sure if Virginia does not already require that and decide to add it that you'll be skreetching about how bad THAT is.

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

twitter @EyeAmU

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's a shame that Virginia's laws weren't able to
> help this woman in Illinois.

Yes, because liberals wouldn't have complained if the law was being proposed in IL. Your ignorance around this issue would persist no matter the jurisdiction. Also, should this happen in VA, we know who prevented the proper diagnosis of such events. For a group of people that claim to be superior in scientific knowledge, your stupidity in this area is astounding. It is almost as if your zeal for abortion has clouded any rational thought.

> Also, glad to see you are a Medical Examiner who
> can determine these things via the internet. You
> have no idea if a transvaginal ultrasound would
> have done anything for this woman.

I know for a fact that a transvaginal ultrasound is the best and most appropriate way to diagnose an intrauterine pregnancy. Had that been diagnosed, a traditional abortion procedure would have never been performed and alternative means to end the pregnancy would have been pursued.

liberal policies kill again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's a shame that Virginia's laws weren't able
> to
> > help this woman in Illinois.
>
> Yes, because liberals wouldn't have complained if
> the law was being proposed in IL. Your ignorance
> around this issue would persist no matter the
> jurisdiction. Also, should this happen in VA, we
> know who prevented the proper diagnosis of such
> events. For a group of people that claim to be
> superior in scientific knowledge, your stupidity
> in this area is astounding. It is almost as if
> your zeal for abortion has clouded any rational
> thought.
>
> > Also, glad to see you are a Medical Examiner
> who
> > can determine these things via the internet.
> You
> > have no idea if a transvaginal ultrasound would
> > have done anything for this woman.
>
> I know for a fact that a transvaginal ultrasound
> is the best and most appropriate way to diagnose
> an intrauterine pregnancy. Had that been
> diagnosed, a traditional abortion procedure would
> have never been performed and alternative means to
> end the pregnancy would have been pursued.

Not to mention she might actually still be alive.

Vexxxed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not to mention she might actually still be alive.


Exactly.

liberal policies kill again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know for a fact that a transvaginal ultrasound
> is the best and most appropriate way to diagnose
> an intrauterine pregnancy. Had that been
> diagnosed, a traditional abortion procedure would
> have never been performed and alternative means to
> end the pregnancy would have been pursued.

God, you're an idiot. An intrauterine pregnancy is a pregnancy within the uterus - which is exactly where it belongs. As opposed to an ectopic pregnancy within the fallopian tube, which is a life threatening issue.

And let's give up the pretense that you give a flying fuck about this woman's health. You just want to stop abortion.

U R a Moron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> liberal policies kill again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I know for a fact that a transvaginal
> ultrasound
> > is the best and most appropriate way to
> diagnose
> > an intrauterine pregnancy. Had that been
> > diagnosed, a traditional abortion procedure
> would
> > have never been performed and alternative means
> to
> > end the pregnancy would have been pursued.
>
> God, you're an idiot. An intrauterine pregnancy is
> a pregnancy within the uterus - which is exactly
> where it belongs. As opposed to an ectopic
> pregnancy within the fallopian tube, which is a
> life threatening issue.
>
> And let's give up the pretense that you give a
> flying fuck about this woman's health. You just
> want to stop abortion.


If anyone cared about women's health, an ultrasound would be mandated. Would you not want to know where the object is that you are trying to extract. If you need your appendix removed, just let the doctor scrape around for a while until he finds it. Don't bother with finding out where it is.

liberal policies kill again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> U R a Moron Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > liberal policies kill again Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I know for a fact that a transvaginal
> > ultrasound
> > > is the best and most appropriate way to
> > diagnose
> > > an intrauterine pregnancy. Had that been
> > > diagnosed, a traditional abortion procedure
> > would
> > > have never been performed and alternative
> means
> > to
> > > end the pregnancy would have been pursued.
> >
> > God, you're an idiot. An intrauterine pregnancy
> is
> > a pregnancy within the uterus - which is
> exactly
> > where it belongs. As opposed to an ectopic
> > pregnancy within the fallopian tube, which is a
> > life threatening issue.
> >
> > And let's give up the pretense that you give a
> > flying fuck about this woman's health. You just
> > want to stop abortion.
>
>
> If anyone cared about women's health, an
> ultrasound would be mandated. Would you not want
> to know where the object is that you are trying to
> extract. If you need your appendix removed, just
> let the doctor scrape around for a while until he
> finds it. Don't bother with finding out where it
> is.

Wow, you are retarded. No, thats cruel to the mentally handicapped. you are fust a flat out moron.

JBass Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> liberal policies kill again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > U R a Moron Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > liberal policies kill again Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > I know for a fact that a transvaginal
> > > ultrasound
> > > > is the best and most appropriate way to
> > > diagnose
> > > > an intrauterine pregnancy. Had that been
> > > > diagnosed, a traditional abortion procedure
> > > would
> > > > have never been performed and alternative
> > means
> > > to
> > > > end the pregnancy would have been pursued.
> > >
> > > God, you're an idiot. An intrauterine
> pregnancy
> > is
> > > a pregnancy within the uterus - which is
> > exactly
> > > where it belongs. As opposed to an ectopic
> > > pregnancy within the fallopian tube, which is
> a
> > > life threatening issue.
> > >
> > > And let's give up the pretense that you give
> a
> > > flying fuck about this woman's health. You
> just
> > > want to stop abortion.
> >
> >
> > If anyone cared about women's health, an
> > ultrasound would be mandated. Would you not
> want
> > to know where the object is that you are trying
> to
> > extract. If you need your appendix removed,
> just
> > let the doctor scrape around for a while until
> he
> > finds it. Don't bother with finding out where
> it
> > is.
>
> Wow, you are retarded. No, thats cruel to the
> mentally handicapped. you are fust a flat out
> moron.


So, there is one vote for blindfolded surgery. It's amazing you people know so little about what you support.

liberal policies kill again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If anyone cared about women's health, an
> ultrasound would be mandated.

You would think. There is a certain amount of regulation that should be involved in any business that practices medicine, and there are certain steps which should be taken before any medical procedure that could have life or health threatening complications should be undertaken.

The problem is that in the are of abortion Regulation has become the acceptable surrogate for fighting over whether the procedure should be permitted. Pro-choice people see any effort to regulate abortion as a way to prevent it, and Anti-abortion people see it pretty much the same way.

It is fairly clear that on the question of ultrasound this is exactly what is happening. The legislature seldom says what pre-procedure tests you must have before undergoing certain other medical procedures. That is usualy done by the board of health or by the standards of the industry. If you have an ultrasound for other medical procedures the doctor or whoever is administering the test may offer to let you look at the results, but they seldom require that you do so.

liberal policies kill again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If anyone cared about women's health, an
> ultrasound would be mandated. Would you not want
> to know where the object is that you are trying to
> extract. If you need your appendix removed, just
> let the doctor scrape around for a while until he
> finds it. Don't bother with finding out where it
> is.

You are so stupid I'm starting to think you're a troll.

I think we all have a pretty good idea of there "the object" is. And if a doctor can't figure out where the appendix is, then he should have his medical license revoked.

To think that people like you are allowed to vote on issues that affect me is downright scary.

U R a Moron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> liberal policies kill again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If anyone cared about women's health, an
> > ultrasound would be mandated. Would you not
> want
> > to know where the object is that you are trying
> to
> > extract. If you need your appendix removed,
> just
> > let the doctor scrape around for a while until
> he
> > finds it. Don't bother with finding out where
> it
> > is.
>
> You are so stupid I'm starting to think you're a
> troll.
>
> I think we all have a pretty good idea of there
> "the object" is. And if a doctor can't figure out
> where the appendix is, then he should have his
> medical license revoked.
>
> To think that people like you are allowed to vote
> on issues that affect me is downright scary.


To think that you would approve a medical procedure without knowing all the conditions and factors affecting it is downright scary. Oh, and I want the doctor just to have "a pretty good idea" instead of definitive proof when it comes to these things. Yeah right. I idea of the medical profession is from the stone age.

Danielle Deaver, who lives in Nebraska with her husband, was told by the doctor at 22 weeks that she would not be able to carry her baby to term and that the baby would die as soon as it was born. Deaver, who wanted more than anything to have the baby told her doctor that it was only humane to terminate the pregnancy. Deaver was informed of the most horrible news any expectant mother should have to face. She could not terminate the pregnancy and she would have to watch her baby die.

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/277175/nebraska-woman-denied-abortion-forced-to-watch-baby-die/#eqdtLCim3Sv5Luz9.99

This whole argument was/is specious.

I'm pretty sure no one is going to be forced to have an ultrasound. Even though the law now calls for an abdominal ultrasound, if it hadn't have been changed, no doctor/tech would have forcibly rammed a transducer into a woman's vagina.

Here's what actually would have happened: Woman goes to gynecologist and asks for an abortion. They say, "Well, here in Virginia, you need to get an ultrasound first". She refuses. So the doctor refuses to do the abortion.

Did you see how no one had a transducer forcibly rammed into their vagina there?

Also, the more likely scenario would be that she'd drive to Maryland, or that a doctor of similar viewpoint would perform the abortion and wait to get arrested in order to bring the case to the USSC.

Still no ultrasound rape.

U R a Moron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> liberal policies kill again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I know for a fact that a transvaginal
> ultrasound
> > is the best and most appropriate way to
> diagnose
> > an intrauterine pregnancy. Had that been
> > diagnosed, a traditional abortion procedure
> would
> > have never been performed and alternative means
> to
> > end the pregnancy would have been pursued.
>
> God, you're an idiot. An intrauterine pregnancy is
> a pregnancy within the uterus - which is exactly
> where it belongs. As opposed to an ectopic
> pregnancy within the fallopian tube, which is a
> life threatening issue.
>
> And let's give up the pretense that you give a
> flying fuck about this woman's health. You just
> want to stop abortion.


+1

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

liberal policies kill again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> If anyone cared about women's health, an
> ultrasound would be mandated. Would you not want
> to know where the object is that you are trying to
> extract. If you need your appendix removed, just
> let the doctor scrape around for a while until he
> finds it. Don't bother with finding out where it
> is.


Funny how Conservatives supposedly want the government out of the business of telling doctors what to do until it's something they want. Don't you think you should let the health care experts on site determine what is and isn't necessary? Or do you want more of this kind of bullshit?



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

cTuTU Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This whole argument was/is specious.
>
> I'm pretty sure no one is going to be forced to
> have an ultrasound. Even though the law now calls
> for an abdominal ultrasound, if it hadn't have
> been changed, no doctor/tech would have forcibly
> rammed a transducer into a woman's vagina.
>
> Here's what actually would have happened: Woman
> goes to gynecologist and asks for an abortion.
> They say, "Well, here in Virginia, you need to get
> an ultrasound first". She refuses. So the doctor
> refuses to do the abortion.
>
> Did you see how no one had a transducer forcibly
> rammed into their vagina there?

Jesus, you're just as stupid as that other guy. Your dumb scenario doesn't solve the actual problem - the woman wants an abortion. She's not just trying to avoid an ultrasound.

> Also, the more likely scenario would be that she'd
> drive to Maryland, or that a doctor of similar
> viewpoint would perform the abortion and wait to
> get arrested in order to bring the case to the
> USSC.
>
> Still no ultrasound rape.

There are ultrasound laws in 21 states, not just Virginia. We're lucky that we have geographical flexibility. But if a woman in Nebraska wants an abortion without an ultrasound, she's got a lot of travelling to do.

Your logic is so twisted and pathetic, I can't believe I'm even responding to this lunacy.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> liberal policies kill again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> >
> > If anyone cared about women's health, an
> > ultrasound would be mandated. Would you not
> want
> > to know where the object is that you are trying
> to
> > extract. If you need your appendix removed,
> just
> > let the doctor scrape around for a while until
> he
> > finds it. Don't bother with finding out where
> it
> > is.
>
>
> Funny how Conservatives supposedly want the
> government out of the business of telling doctors
> what to do until it's something they want. Don't
> you think you should let the health care experts
> on site determine what is and isn't necessary? Or
> do you want more of this kind of bullshit?
>
>


The two aren't even remotely connected. State regulations mandate all kinds of medical procedures. Nice of you to bring something completely irrelevant to teh conversation. Go back under the bridge.

uh huh right Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> The two aren't even remotely connected. State
> regulations mandate all kinds of medical
> procedures. Nice of you to bring something
> completely irrelevant to teh conversation. Go
> back under the bridge.


So you are advocating the state have a greater role in medicine then? Are you advocating socialized medicine? It sounds like it to me.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/2012 02:36PM by WashingTone-Locian.

liberal policies kill again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know for a fact that a transvaginal ultrasound
> is the best and most appropriate way to diagnose
> an intrauterine pregnancy. Had that been
> diagnosed, a traditional abortion procedure would
> have never been performed and alternative means to
> end the pregnancy would have been pursued.

An alternative means to end the pregnancy? What did you have in mind? Something involving a hot poker, some haggis, and a bat wing? Eye of newt. (Eye of Newt?) Ox testicle and jalapeno peppers? As has been pointed out, an intrauterine pregnancy is where it normally is found. Well, at least until McDonnell or Romney issue a proclamation saying something different. Hey, I know. We could call it an extratesticular pregnancy. Take the woman completely out of the linguistic equation.

I like that: extratesticular pregnancy.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> uh huh right Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> >
> > The two aren't even remotely connected. State
> > regulations mandate all kinds of medical
> > procedures. Nice of you to bring something
> > completely irrelevant to teh conversation. Go
> > back under the bridge.
>
>
> So you are advocating the state have a greater
> role in medicine then?

I am advocating that the state maintain certain minimum standards that be followed in order to ensure patient safety. Think of it as a building code for doctors. Are you against that? You don't want doctors to be licensed or follow safety standards?

> Are you advocating
> socialized medicine?

How does advocating for safe operating procedures correspond to socialized medicine. The state puts regulations on the practice of law, in your mind does that constitute socialized law practice? I bet it does.

> It sounds like it to me.

Of course it does. You are an idiot.

The point is moot. It failed to be signed and what happened in Illinois won't change things because odds are it wouldn't have prevented it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm