What are they smoking in FL?

[MountainLaurel]

Requiring proof of rape?

:mad:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/sfl-flfabortion0409sbapr09,0,5973301.story

[bliss_eternal]

1. If I had to guess...

...I'd say that Florida's uber religious faction had a hand in this. That is without fully reading the article linked (just the headline and first sentence or two). I will later. I'm just not in the mood to be pissed off right now. This would definitely tip the anger scale for me.

[uppityperson]

2. What they already have in place is good enough for me.

I can understand getting an ultrasound for second/third trimester abortions BUT have them accessible, affordable, and only for health care provider's use. Making a woman pay for and view one though? I do not see how they can do this as it will go directly against Roe v Wade ruling for equal access.

Perhaps they are hoping the waiver bit would comply?

The legislation would require all women seeking to terminate their pregnancies to first pay for an ultrasound procedure and view the results — unless they signed a waiver. Victims of rape, incest, domestic violence or human trafficking would be automatically exempt if they can document the crimes against them.

One Republican, Sen. Dennis Jones, R-Seminole, voted against the bill and one Democrat, Sen. Gary Siplin of Orlando, for it. The committee's two other Democrats opposed the bill, while its three Republicans helped form the majority.

Florida law now requires an ultrasound for women seeking abortions during their second or third trimesters of pregnancy. Webster's bill would extend that provision to the first trimester, when Planned Parenthood lobbyist Stephanie Kunkel said 95 percent of abortions in Florida occur.

[ismnotwasm]

3. That's just vile

Not surprising, but completely vile.
"The legislation would require all women seeking to terminate their pregnancies to first pay for an ultrasound procedure and view the results"

PAY for? This can't be constitutional, not that these forced birth unteachable dumbasses care about a little thing like that but forcing an unnecessary test and forcing women to pay for it?

And like you point out, proving rape? When, at trial how many months later? Absolutely disgusting, deliberately cruel, and a complete violation of human rights.

[uppityperson]

4. I'm thinking that "must pay for" may make it not be legal

Roe v Wade/ equal access bit and all.

[bliss_eternal]

5. Sure, Roe v. Wade is on the books...

...but this administration has no respect for "law" and considers itself "above it." Any administration that would secretly (and illegally) wiretap citizens and treat the Bill of Rights like a rough draft, isn't going to think much of a law protecting women's rights. He and his ilk don't respect the law, and they don't care about women.

gw long ago stated his intent to reverse it. he also shared he considers it "a mistake." While they haven't reversed it per say, they are enabling a lot of "like minded" people to brandish their chisels and chip away at it.

I expect we'll see at least a few more like this, before the boy king leaves office. :eyes: