Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Don't want a sonogram? Stay out of Mississippi!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 09:27 AM
Original message
Don't want a sonogram? Stay out of Mississippi!
Edited on Wed Mar-01-06 09:40 AM by 11 Bravo
A House Committee in the Mississippi state legislature has passed a bill that will not only criminalize abortion without exception for rape, incest, or health of the brood mare (pardon me, I mean mother); but will also REQUIRE said breeders to undergo sonograms in the early part of their pregnancy so that the semen receptacles would hear a fetal heartbeat. I wonder how the allegedly pro-choice Republican voters are feeling these days.

:sarcasm:

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/13984932.htm

on edit: typo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. Brood mare, breeders? Your choice of words
stinks, regardless of what info you're trying to relay here. Last I checked, it takes two, a male being the other half of the equation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Sorry, I thought the sarcasm was obvious.
I was attempting to describe how the people supporting this bill view women. I'll go back and add the appropriate icon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
13. deleted n/t
Edited on Wed Mar-01-06 10:21 AM by kgfnally
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theHandpuppet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
3. And what of women who miscarry?
Edited on Wed Mar-01-06 09:38 AM by theHandpuppet
Not all pregnancies end in live birth. My own mother had two miscarriages before her third trimester. So what's next? Shall we put women who miscarry on trial where they will have to prove they naturally aborted? What if they smoked or had a drink during pregnancy? Didn't get proper prenatal care? Should we charge them with manslaughter? Just how far is this going?

The Handmaid's Tale -- the frightening reality coming to a neighborhood near you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #3
12. For every woman (and man too) that hs NOT read the Handmaid's Tale
Edited on Wed Mar-01-06 10:18 AM by mtnester
Here are your links:

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&isbn=038549081X&itm=1

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/038549081X/sr=8-1/qid=1141225871/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-1910429-9890201?%5Fencoding=UTF8

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=64209&item=8773249690

or try your local Half Price Books store, the library (author Margaret Atwood)

Like 1984 and a Brave New World, this is a MUST read, IMO, if you have not. For me, since I have had the tubal, I suppose my choices will be as an Aunt or death. Since I freely chose the tubal, probably death.

On edit - shoot, I forgot I could probably work as a prostitute in one of the gentleman's clubs...by I think I would rather just go ahead and be dead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
16. I miscarried at lesat twice too. I hope most docs won't try to get their
patients charged with murder when they are already heartbroken at not carrying to term. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #3
17. Yep, they re going to want to start tracking evey pregnancy
next thing you know, and if you spontaneously miscarry, WATCH OUT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalnurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
4. Ultrasounds are a standard of practice
Edited on Wed Mar-01-06 09:42 AM by liberalnurse
for pre-abortion screening, as is a pregnancy test, lab work and choice education.

Determining the gestational age is absolutely essential to the procedure. Additionally, no one can be forced to hear the "beeps". Volume is always off in my experiences as is the screen not visible to the client.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. I agree about the efficacy of ultrasound. But this bill is written ...
at least as I read it, to mandate that expectant mothers hear a heartbeat. That is the expressed intent of the bill. The bill's authors apparently believe that once they hear an actual fetal heartbeat, all those thousands of women who think, "Hey, I've got a few hours to kill before lunch, I think I'll go have an abortion." may change their minds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalnurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. They can not force someone to listen....
Patients have rights which trump this shannaigan. Research the Patients Bill of Rights.....there may be one just for Mississippi.

Secondly, the clinic will honor the right to privacy....no fundy police will be there to patrol the ultrasound process. I'd keep the volume off and if they ask, say, "I don't hear anything."

Secondly, the ultrasound measures the skull for gestational age....a pulsation is not the goal here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #10
20. I'd like to think that you're right on this point but
Edited on Wed Mar-01-06 10:46 AM by Gormy Cuss
we have pharmacists in this country refusing to dispense legal medications to patients with valid prescriptions. Most medical personnel honor a patient's right to privacy, but if they believe they have the moral authority to dissuade women by any means necessary, I predict that the patient's right to privacy will be drowned out by the ultrasound volume set to high.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. I hope you're correct.
I'm not conversant with patient's rights in the state of Mississippi. However, the sole thrust of the OP was to point out the lengths to which many in the anti-choice crowd will go in order to restrict a woman's right to choose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalnurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. There are doing the same thing
here in Ohio....well the goal is the same, just different twists....The gig now is to add last minute Amendments to good Bills which make the Bill 100% different that what was discussed in Committee. That happened yesterday in the Ohio Senate. The last line is the clincher which needs explained...

Freeper-Fundy thinking.....(this is tricky to explain)

It means, that a physician /clinic who may of preformed a diagnostic test for fetal abnormalities will NOT have to tell a woman that there is any thing wrong if that is indeed the case. ( such as anacephalic, Downs Syndrome)....

This protects them, the physician, from liability according to the right wing nuts. They claim that if a pregnant women saying later, "Oh, they didn't tell me about that disability, I would of had an abortion if I knew that".

In reality, this meanings:

They physicians, do not have to tell a woman that the test was positive for any disability...including Downs, anacephalic, spinal bifida...etc...Thus, a women has lost the right to choose by default and or lack of information.

As Passed by the Senate

126th General Assembly
Regular Session
2005-2006
Sub. H. B. No. 287



A BILL
To amend sections 3702.30 and 3702.31 and to enact sections 2305.116 and 3702.301 of the Revised Code to exempt certain freestanding birthing centers from the requirement that a center obtain a health care facility license from the Director of Health and to provide that there is no cause of action on a medical claim that because of an act or omission an abortion was not performed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingshakabobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
5. WTF?
"He said he woke up about 3 a.m. Tuesday and decided to introduce his proposal, and he only told two House staff members about his plans before he made the move."

:scared: General Jack D. Ripper? Is that you? Was it during the physical act of love that you felt this "emptiness"..??


"I have a strong dilemma within myself on this," Holland said. "I can only impregnate. I can't get pregnant myself." :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
6. I live in Mississippi
and there is an incredible number of unwed mothers driving by signs advertising DNA and drug testing everyday. And you can't drive a half mile down the highway without being greeted by some marquee outside a baptist church condeming us all to hell. By the looks and actions and lifestyles of a large segment of the state's populace, I'd have to say the "christians" have failed. I guess they will rely on the state legislature to force part of their beliefs on us all. Funny, no one gets stoned to death for working on the sabbath.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmejack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. You weren't aware that it was optional which of the Scriptures
one chose to honor? No wonder you were confused Boss! You are allowed four "gimmes", so just select four verses which you find particularly onerous & next time you communicate with the Lord, in whatever style of prayer in which you engage, merely call them to his attention! God will issue you a special dispensation and POOF no problemo, you will be freed from those pesky restrictions on your personal behavior!

I'm amazed you haven't heard of this before. How do you think so many devout Christian republiCONs have been able to maintain their faith yet act in the fashion in which they have?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. An old shipmate of mine
was a drunken old salt in the service, borderline reliable, cussed (well) like a Sailor, currently on wife number three. Somehow, after he retired he found the Lord and our friendship evaporated, but he told me he knew he was going to heaven because he was saved; and that I was full of sin. My sinfulness paled in comparison to his carryings on in our steaming days, but I guess that all gets forgotten.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A Simple Game Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. You can be bad for 50 years, ask forgiveness, die the next day
and go to heaven. You can be good for 50 years, screw up one day, die the next day and go to hell.

If I decide to have a God, mine will be much smarter than that. My God would not be so easily fooled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SCantiGOP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
11. this has been done before
In Romania, before they shot Ceausescu, women were required to go to the clinic monthly to be checked for pregnancy. The goal was to increase the population for the fatherland. Women who lost the baby could be fined or even imprisoned. I sent a letter to the editor at the time pointing out that it takes a totalitarian government to effectively stop abortions.
In another vein, this may turn out to be a blessing for our side by pushing rational people away from the republican party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
15. What if you don't think they are safe?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/04/07/MNGLL61MJM1.DTL
<snip>

In fact, the FDA advised expectant mothers in January not to patronize such "keepsake" ultrasound businesses, warning that "the long-term effects of repeated ultrasound exposures to the fetus are not fully known," even after three decades of routine use in prenatal care.

...would this be a legal way to overturn it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
18. Here's hoping the law of unintended consequences bites them
Rep. Omeria Scott, D-Laurel, persuaded the House committee to approve an amendment that says the state would provide free education and medical services to any child born in the state, until age 19.


Move to Mississippi and have guaranteed health insurance for your kids. The free education part you can already get in other states.

The law requiring sonograms with the intent purpose of letting women hear fetal heartbeats could mean that doctors and clinics would be required to turn up the volume, and even if it doesn't, watch it happen anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
area51 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
19. Payment.
Just who is going to pay for these forced sonograms? If the nazis are so damned desperate for them to be done, shouldn't they raise the taxes in MS to help pay for them?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalnurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #19
26. It is not the sonogram.....
it is the attempt to detect a pulsation and force a woman to listen.......Next, they will be forcing women to listen to old Pat Boone records!!!!!!:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
22. brood mare
LOL

So they are to be shamed into having even thought about having an abortion? Geesh don't they have anything else to worry about...no of course not this is Mississippi that we are talking about :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. I would suspect Gov.Barbour is all too pleased to take a pen in hoof
and sign this.

Honestly look at that guy. Have you seen him walking? Take one look at him walking and tell me there isn't some actual SWINE in his blood lines. Seriously he looks like a pig walking on its hindlegs.

Two legs bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
24. So if the breeders are deaf??
"breeders" -- using the real words of the idiots.

Women are to these monsters are merely a walking uterus.

I think we will see even more outrageous red state laws from deranged male anti privacy advocates.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC