Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 108
  1. #1 "Rape by the State": TX Can Force Doctors to Deliver Intrusive Vaginal Ultrasound to 
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    2,161
    link

    The cognitive dissidence is quite stunning.

    Star Member kpete (31,714 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

    View profile

    "Rape by the State": TX Can Force Doctors to Deliver Intrusive Vaginal Ultrasound to Abortion Seeker

    Last edited Tue Jan 10, 2012, 05:24 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2)
    Judges: Texas Can Enforce Sonogram Law Now
    http://www.texastribune.org/texas-le...ogram-law-now/


    "Rape by the State"? Court: Texas Can Force Doctors to Deliver Intrusive Vaginal Ultrasound to Abortion Seekers

    According to the Guttmacher Institute, 88 percent of abortions occur during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Because the fetus is so small at this stage, traditional ultrasounds performed through the abdominal wall, "jelly on the belly," often cannot produce a clear image. Therefore, a transvaginal probe is most often necessary, especially up to 10 weeks to 12 weeks of pregnancy. The probe is inserted into the vagina, sending sound waves to reflect off body structures to produce an image of the fetus. Under this new law, a woman's vagina will be penetrated without an opportunity for her to refuse due to coercion from the so-called "public servants" who passed and signed this bill into law.

    MORE:
    http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews...rtion_seekers/
    http://www.texastribune.org/texas-le...ogram-law-now/
    http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfa...t_rules_te.php
    Star Member LiberalEsto (12,955 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
    1. Could this procedure cause a miscarriage?

    This is not just insane, but I have to wonder how safe it is.

    And what if an improperly sanitized probe caused an infection?
    Star Member uppityperson (60,295 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
    5. No more so than a speculum, a penis, a finger.

    It is rather like getting a pelvic with a speculum.
    Star Member TwilightGardener (34,449 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
    2. Well, she's just a vessel for the fetus--who cares how she feels about it?

    Seriously, though, these people are sick.
    No, that's how liberals think-the fetus is just a parasite on the woman

    Star Member JitterbugPerfume (17,482 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
    3. that is obscene
    Star Member uppityperson (60,295 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
    4. Assholes. Is this website (link) a joke? The writeup on this is really weird

    View profile
    http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...137029568.html
    Patients Win in Texas Sonogram Case
    The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) applauds the magnificent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit this morning, which affirmed the strengthening of informed consent contained in the amended Texas Woman's Right to Know Act. Specifically, the Fifth Circuit upheld the "sonogram law" that was enacted in May 2011.

    This law helps ensure that women will be fully informed before agreeing to an abortion. AAPS, which supports the Nuremberg Code for all treatments, not merely experimental ones, has long supported fully informed consent for patients.

    It is the standard of care for abortion providers to perform sonograms on patients, but many do not show those sonograms to the women. Such information should not be withheld from patients in the delivery of medical care. Many women change their mind about abortion if they see their sonogram before they consent to the operation, and no one should be hiding information from a patient in order to obtain consent for a procedure that she may later regret.

    AAPS filed an amicus brief in this case along with one of its Texas members. We urged the Fifth Circuit to vacate a preliminary injunction that had blocked enforcement of the sonogram law to the detriment of hundreds of women who have abortions each day there. "There is no legitimate right to deny patients informed consent, and no injunction should remain in place to perpetuate such a denial," AAPS wrote. "The preliminary injunction violates the right of the people to protect themselves against procedures performed without informed consent."...


    I mean, wtf? "Patients win" by making something mandatory? What?
    Well, that's what we were told time after time about Obamacare.
    Star Member my2sense (2,460 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
    6. Unbelievable

    I weep for this country. We are quickly regressing. So the state can rape women with a probe now (for her benefit) of course.
    They'll screech about putting a probe into the vagina, calling it "rape", but they're perfectly fine with putting something in the uterus in order to abort a baby. In actuality they hate that women see exactly what they are aborting.

    That group is not "Pro choice" they are pro abortion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    441
    Star Member LiberalEsto (12,955 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
    1. Could this procedure cause a miscarriage?

    This is not just insane, but I have to wonder how safe it is.

    And what if an improperly sanitized probe caused an infection?
    Yeah you'd sure hate to have a miscarriage before the abortion. Kind of like the condemned having a heart attack the night before the execution. Takes all the fun out of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Carol View Post
    They'll screech about putting a probe into the vagina, calling it "rape", but they're perfectly fine with putting something in the uterus in order to abort a baby.
    The issue is consent. Penetration without consent is rape.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    The Guttmacher Institute is a highly partisan, pro-abortion think tank that makes its living promoting abortion. Their statements about the mandatory vaginal probe are BS. If the sonogram cannot see the fetus, then that is what the doctor reports, that the fetus isn't developed enough to see, or to hear the heartbeat.

    The real issue is that women who are informed about the development of the fetus are less likely to abort, which means less federal money for Planned Parenthood and other abortion-providers. The Dallas Observer column even included this bit of idiocy:

    "This court ruling says you have to start putting those requirements in place," Wheat says. "Even more appalling is the court said a woman can decline -- she can say, 'I've got all the information I need, thank you' -- but the doctor still has to provide all those things.

    Her 'choice' is plug her ears and cover her eyes. That's what is so significant. Regardless of what she says or what her wishes are, the physician still has provide those steps."
    This is called "informed consent." In every other surgical procedure, the physician is required by law to inform the patient of every possible complication from the surgery, no matter how unlikely, and no matter what the patient says. This applies to elective procedures and necessary operations. The only exception to this has been abortion, because informed consent actually reduces the likelyhood of the patient opting for it.

    When liberals claim that they want abortion to be "safe, legal and rare," what they really mean is that they want it to be lucrative, protected and pervasive.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    The issue is consent. Penetration without consent is rape.
    Penetration is necessary for an abortion.
    Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
    Penetration is necessary for an abortion.
    OK. What does that have to do with consent?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
    Penetration is necessary for an abortion.
    The consent for the abortion procedure is not general permission to put anything you like up the vagina.

    Odd that some of the folks who raise the boogey man of government interference in individual healthcare in a universal healthcare system, are the same folks who have no problem requiring females to jump through hoops to get an abortion.

    I understand requiring counseling prior to abortion. I do not understand requiring unnecessary medical procedures prior to abortion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    OK. What does that have to do with consent?
    If you're consenting to an abortion, then you're consenting to let a doctor use medical instruments to penetrate. It's not really all that complicated to figure out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    The consent for the abortion procedure is not general permission to put anything you like up the vagina.
    No one said it did. You really beat the shit out of that straw man, didn't you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Odd that some of the folks who raise the boogey man of government interference in individual healthcare in a universal healthcare system, are the same folks who have no problem requiring females to jump through hoops to get an abortion.
    Is the federal government making this requirement? No? Well then, your argument is again for shit and you're beating up another straw man. Congratulations!
    Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
    If you're consenting to an abortion, then you're consenting to let a doctor use medical instruments to penetrate. It's not really all that complicated to figure out.
    Ah. We are talking about two different things. I was referring to the (dubious, at best) claim of a probe being used to get an ultrasound image of the person in the womb. I wasn't referring to an abortion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Ah. We are talking about two different things. I was referring to the (dubious, at best) claim of a probe being used to get an ultrasound image of the person in the womb. I wasn't referring to an abortion.
    So was I.

    If you (well, not you, since you're not likely to have an abortion any time soon, but the Royal You) are going to agree to an abortion, then you're going to agree to be penetrated by medical instruments. As such, it's not unreasonable that one of those instruments be an ultrasound dildo.
    Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •