Florida State House OKs bill requiring waiting time, ultrasound before abortions

[Francisco Montana]

Florida State House OKs bill requiring waiting time, ultrasound before abortions

The Associated Press
April 28. 2007 6:01AM

TALLAHASSEE - A woman seeking an abortion in Florida would have to wait 24 hours before going through with it under a bill passed Friday by the state House. The measure could also make it more likely that she would see an ultrasound image of the fetus before undergoing the procedure.

Full Article

[Thanatos]

I believe in this law - nothing like having a women have to see what they're going to kill before they do it.

They should know the full consequences before they get an abortion.

[Lord Bohemond]

Ignorance kills. Let her understand what she's doing before she makes the decision. A hasty decision is a stupid decision.

[Sosobra]

This is ridiculous and more backdoor attempts to outlaw abortion. Is there a medical reason to wait not that I know of so this is trash.

ahhh but no need to worry.

The Senate hasn't considered either the waiting period or the ultrasound idea, and even backers of the proposal have acknowledged the bill is unlikely to pass the Senate, which is a generally more moderate body.

[LoZz]

tbh - i agree with the wait, let them think about it, so they dont make any rash desicions

but the ultra sound? tbh that just seems like a methord to guilt them to keep it

[Thanatos]

Well, there's no need to kill the child. Just give it up for adoption. Otherwise, you give it no choice, and that is murder.

And why shouldn't the woman see what they're going to kill? There are countless women who deeply and sorrowfully regret what they've done afterwards.

Not only that, but every person who is the failed product of an abortion says that they are so happy that the abortion didn't go through. Nobody wants to be killed before they've had a chance.

[LoZz]

Well, there's no need to kill the child. Just give it up for adoption. Otherwise, you give it no choice, and that is murder.

And why shouldn't the woman see what they're going to kill? There are countless women who deeply and sorrowfully regret what they've done afterwards.

Not only that, but every person who is the failed product of an abortion says that they are so happy that the abortion didn't go through. Nobody wants to be killed before they've had a chance.

what about rape? or a birth that will result in the death of the mother? should she have to wait then? and then see the child that will remind her for ever of her rape or the child whos birth will kill her?

[Sosobra]

Well, there's no need to kill the child. Just give it up for adoption. Otherwise, you give it no choice, and that is murder.

And why shouldn't the woman see what they're going to kill? There are countless women who deeply and sorrowfully regret what they've done afterwards.

Not only that, but every person who is the failed product of an abortion says that they are so happy that the abortion didn't go through. Nobody wants to be killed before they've had a chance.

First of all how many kids have you adopted ? Secondly have you talked to these women our are you projecting onto them. Its the mother choice she has rights over her reproductive organs just like males do . Should we collect every ounce of sperm because that has the potential for life , the female body self aborts 30% of time because the egg doesn't attach or has defects do rescue those fertilized eggs.

Or is that "natural" and therefore okay. Women should be forced to carry children to term if they make that decision with in the time allowed by the law.

If you think life at conception then do not abort your fetuses but impose your metaphysics on others.

[Thanatos]

But it's not her body, Sosobra. The baby has its own complete set of DNA. How can the mother possibly claim such stuff?

But let's look at this for a second. Everybody that is pro-choice says that a woman has the right to abort her baby if it become inconvenient for her. It might not be the exact words, but that's the underlying principle.

If that's the case, then why not kill off old people? They're mightily inconvenient, you know. You've got to feed them, visit them, and so on and so forth. Why can't we kill off people we simply think are inconvenient?

[Sosobra]

But it's not her body, Sosobra. The baby has its own complete set of DNA. How can the mother possibly claim such stuff?

But let's look at this for a second. Everybody that is pro-choice says that a woman has the right to abort her baby if it become inconvenient for her. It might not be the exact words, but that's the underlying principle.

If that's the case, then why not kill off old people? They're mightily inconvenient, you know. You've got to feed them, visit them, and so on and so forth. Why can't we kill off people we simply think are inconvenient?

Inconvenience very light way to put it but nice try at using wordplay to advance your argument. The underlying principle is that woman may not be able to care for the child, or she was raped , or her life is at risk, or she 3 kids but her and her husband cannot support a fourth. The underlying principle is that a woman has right over her womb. She shouldn't be forced to carry or not carry children.

Old people can exist independlty of their mother a 2 week old fetus is in no way shape or form viable outside of the womb. The earliest brain waves have been recored is at 40 days old people however have brain activity.

[Thanatos]

No, I honestly believe every word I say. I wasn't try to make light of the situation. So, if women aren't aborting their children out of inconvenience that the child's birth would bring, then what is it, then?

[LoZz]

No, I honestly believe every word I say. I wasn't try to make light of the situation. So, if women aren't aborting their children out of inconvenience that the child's birth would bring, then what is it, then?

look mate, no offence but your being a bit ignorant.

i am not 100% pro choice, i belive their is a rightful and wrongful abortion. and i belive that the abortion shouldnt be done just because the child is an inconvenience to the mother, people have to accept reasoncibilty for their mistakes, however!

if a women is raped, then that child is the off spring of the rapest, how do you think that will make the mother fee?, or the child feel? the mother would never be able to show it the love and attention it needs because of what it represents, so its better for everyones sake for it to be aborted, after all its not as if its her fault she was raped.


if the babies birth could harm the mother in a critical way, whats the point in giving birth to a life when it will mean ending another? better the mother to live as she can always try again, and yet again, this is not her fault ether! and this is usualy a very hard choice for women in this situation.


the baby could have serious medical problems, better to not live then live in pain.


and of course a child is not conceved as a babie, it has to grow, when it is a fetus it is just that, nothing more and i see nothing wrong with getting rid of the fetus, i will argee their is a point before birth when it is a baby and has the right to life but their is a point before that when it isnt and it would silly of us to consider it as such.



like i said - their are many perfectly ok cases for abortion, its not a simple black and white issue like you make it out to be

[Thanatos]

Curious. How often is a woman's life threatened by a babies birth?

[Gaidin]

Curious. How often is a woman's life threatened by a babies birth?

The only way this is a legitimate point is if the answer is *exactly* 0%. Not estimated to 0% mind you. EXACTLY 0%.

[Irishmafia2020]

Curious. How often is a woman's life threatened by a babies birth?

Spoken like a bunch of men, whose lives will NEVER be threatened by childbirth...

[Tom Paine]

Curious. How often is a woman's life threatened by a babies birth?

Not as rarely as we would hope, sir. And Gaidin makes an excellent point - if it threatens even one life, then it threatens life.

[Templar Knight]

I am pro-life so i think abortion is murder

[verity_blues]

This is ridiculous and more backdoor attempts to outlaw abortion. Is there a medical reason to wait not that I know of so this is trash.

ahhh but no need to worry.

Theres nothing "backdoor" about it. This type of law, which South Carolina just passed as well, is what is necessary for the Supreme Court to reexamine Roe vs Wade. Because this law is obviously going to get challenged, and when it does its going to go all the way to D.C., to the Supreme Judges. Then it will be up to them to either keep with the precident, or revoke Roe vs Wade entirely.
Without these little laws there can be no "challenge," and without a challenge the supreme court will never open it back up. Just last week the "backdoor" ban on Partial birth abortion (this is the abortion they do on fully mature babies, they pull out the feet and torso, leaving the head still inside and shove a tube into the base of the skull and suck out the brains of the "fetus")was upheld by the same court, 5-4. The conservatives are smelling blood now, and are in the works of passing bill just like this one all over the country! It won't be long now before the Supreme Court will have to make the choice, again. Are we killing babies, or aborting unwanted fetus's?

I say that we are killing babies, and anyone who says otherwise is going to Hell in a handbasket. Sorry if thats offensive, but 100,000 babies a year think so too...

By the way, my step-daughter is a child born from a rape. It hasn't affected her, she doesn't even know it. My wife was obviously affected by it, but its still HER CHILD. I love my DAUGHTER, and my God demanded that I also forgive this terrible person who did this, whoever and wherever he is. The things that we think are so horrible in this world, such as an unplanned/unwanted preganancy, are nothing compared to the love in an innocent child. And the need of a child for us, those who are to love and nuture them. Not choose to discard them, as our "rightful" choice. My wife did not have a choice over becoming pregnant, but she NEVER felt she had a right to discard a life that God had entrusted to her either, nor do I.

Please remember to use the edit button instead of double posting.

Scorch

[Francisco Montana]

OK, I'll wiegh in here.

Background: I am pro-life (big shock for those who know me.) But, as a person who will never have to deal with giving birth to a child (being a man) I don't think my personal views should be impossed on women. There are, however, situations where an abortion has gone beyond justified -- late-term abortions. If you didn't want to have a child then you shouldn't have waited until the fetus is unmistakenly a full-blown child. Do you know how they perform late-term abortions? They rip the child apart limb by limb. First they may tear off an arm and pull it out. Then they may pull of a leg and pull it out. The head is tricky. They have to crush it to get it through the birth canal. That, my friends, is beyond disturbing. At that point, if the mother's life is in jeapordy you can perform a cesarean section and the mother and child can both survive in this day-in-age of technology.

Now to the question of this decision by the Florida State House. I do think a 24-hour waiting period is justified. There is no harm whatsoever waiting 24-hours. Even if the pregnancy is the result of rape. The person can still think about it after having a consultation on all the available options. If, after that period of reflection the mother decides it would not be in hers and/or the child's best interest to proceed with the pregnancy. Fine. At least we all know she didn't make a hasty decision from the result of emotional trauma.

The ultrasound requirement, however, I find less justied. I think it's too much akin to rubbing the woman's face in it. If they have decided, after deliberation, that they do not want to continue with the pregnacy there is no need to further traumatize her with images of 'what could have been.'

I know my views are less than perfect but I just find it impossible to impose my views on something I will never have to experience first hand.

But I must reiterate. If you have not made a decision by the third trimester --all bets are off. You cannot tear a perfectly viable baby apart limb by limb and tell me it's humane.

[Lord Bohemond]

but the ultra sound? tbh that just seems like a methord to guilt them to keep it

Requiring cars to have windshields is jut guilting people into driving carefully.

So deliberately keeping yourself ignorant is now an acceptable means of decision making?