# I pit Gov. Scott Walker for mandating the unnecessary inserting of objects into women **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 5, 2013, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746 "2013-07-05T20:19:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/501 "2013-07-16T03:36:15Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Actually, that’s true for me, too. Being Canadian, the abortion laws in the United States are purely of academic and philosophical interest to me. I could possibly take them as a warning sign - more laws indicate more Republican governmental control, which correlates with less teaching of science and less chance at reasonable economic/financial/environmental regulation, which can end up hurting my country along with yours. > > But I like to think I have good solid reasons to be arguing for personal freedom, while I get the impression Bricker has few (or none) to be arguing otherwise. “Humans are special…” - that’s all I’ve seen lately. What are Canada’s laws on abortion if you don’t mind my asking? I presume, like much else in Canada, they are probably a bit saner. Is the issue as contentious there? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/502 "2013-07-16T04:27:00Z")
> [@LavenderBlue](#): > > What are Canada’s laws on abortion if you don’t mind my asking? I presume, like much else in Canada, they are probably a bit saner. Is the issue as contentious there? [They apparently don’t have any at all.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canada) > [@Wikipedia](#): > > Early in Canadian history, all abortions were illegal. The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968-69 introduced by Pierre Trudeau’s Liberal government, legalized abortion as long as a committee of doctors signed off that it was necessary for the physical or mental well-being of the mother. In 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in R. v. Morgentaler that the existing laws were unconstitutional and struck down the 1969 law. The then governing Progressive Conservatives attempted, but failed, to pass a new abortion law, and since then Canada has had no criminal laws governing the subject and abortion is a decision made by a woman with her doctor. Without legal delays, most abortions are done at a very early stage. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/503 "2013-07-16T04:42:15Z")
And just look what happened! Forty years without abortion laws and Canada is a smoldering ruin! Doesn’t pay to piss off God, 'ey! ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/504 "2013-07-16T04:45:04Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > [They apparently don’t have any at all.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canada) That may be the sanest paragraph I’ve ever read on this subject. Bravo Canadians! One of many reasons that, were the place a bit warmer, I would give serious consideration to moving there. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/505 "2013-07-16T10:08:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So now I’m guessing you haven’t even read this law you’ve been arguing against. > > It does provide that the ultrasound is free. > [@Cyros](#): > > Does it? I thought that the wording indicated that a list of clinics offering free ultrasounds would be provided and not that the ultrasound would be free at every provider. Ya know, I asked about this on the first page and was ignored. Mentioned it again on the last page with the same result. You’ve once again stated categorically that the ultrasound is free without posting any evidence of such. My reading of the bill is that it is required to provide a list of places that offer free ultrasounds but not that the ultrasound itself must be free. Can you point out anywhere in the bill that mandates that people who offer free ultrasounds must offer it to people seeking a pre-abortion ultrasound? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 11:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/506 "2013-07-16T11:08:04Z")
> [@LavenderBlue](#): > > That may be the sanest paragraph I’ve ever read on this subject. Bravo Canadians! One of many reasons that, were the place a bit warmer, I would give serious consideration to moving there. To be fair, the situation didn’t come about because of some particular groundswell in a Canadian liberal struggle for human rights (a key figure, Henry Morgentaler, is a crusader, but he ain’t exactly beloved). A very unpopular government was in power when the existing law got struck down and couldn’t get a replacement passed out of what may have been largely due to obstruction by their opponents in the Canadian Senate, possibly comparable to what Republicans in the U.S. Senate are doing now. And once the law was gone, nobody had enough political will and/or political backing to write a new one. At this point, it would be like trying to legislate corsets or horseless carriages. Sometimes dickishness gets it right. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/507 "2013-07-16T11:10:44Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > And just look what happened! Forty years without abortion laws and Canada is a smoldering ruin! Doesn’t pay to piss off God, 'ey! Our banks are well-regulated and failure-free, too! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/508 "2013-07-16T13:15:14Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > Ya know, I asked about this on the first page and was ignored. Mentioned it again on the last page with the same result. You’ve once again stated categorically that the ultrasound is free without posting any evidence of such. My reading of the bill is that it is required to provide a list of places that offer free ultrasounds but not that the ultrasound itself must be free. > > Can you point out anywhere in the bill that mandates that people who offer free ultrasounds must offer it to people seeking a pre-abortion ultrasound? I read this as a distinction without a difference. Why, if a facility offers free ultrasounds, wouldn’t the ultrasound be free? ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/509 "2013-07-16T13:29:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I read this as a distinction without a difference. Why, if a facility offers free ultrasounds, wouldn’t the ultrasound be free? Because there is nothing in the legislation preventing the facility to refuse to do free pre-abortion ultrasounds on morality grounds. There is nothing preventing them from stating that due to limited funding they are only offering free ultrasounds to high risk pregnancies where the ultrasound is medically necessary. You make it sound as if the legislation itself is providing that the ultrasound will be free but the bill makes no provision for funding such a thing while at the same time increases the number of ultrasounds which will be required. I can easily see the present system finding itself overwhelmed and either limiting the free ultrasounds to medical necessity or stopping the offering altogether. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/510 "2013-07-16T16:49:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I read this as a distinction without a difference. Why, if a facility offers free ultrasounds, wouldn’t the ultrasound be free? I think this is the solution to the UHC issue. Just have congress publish a list of facilities that have free medical care. Problem solved. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/511 "2013-07-16T19:13:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I read this as a distinction without a difference. Why, if a facility offers free ultrasounds, wouldn’t the ultrasound be free? If this is truly how you see it, I have to question your ability to read and understand the law, and that’s long before even getting to the real world consequences. As written, it is perfectly correct for an abortion provider to supply a list of “facilities offering free ultrasounds” that reads, in total; “NONE”, as could be perfectly true after the clinics now offering it cannot meet demand and with no government subsidies, no new free ultrasound clinics arise. Net effect: wealthier women or women with good insurance pay for the useless ultrasound, while the poorer women who have the least resources for a pregnancy and child cannot get an ultrasound at all. Charming. My idea of setting up hassle-free storefront ultrasound clinics (with very generous working definitions of “ultrasound”) sounds better and better. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/512 "2013-07-16T19:40:38Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > My idea of setting up hassle-free storefront ultrasound clinics (with very generous working definitions of “ultrasound”) sounds better and better. Say, a wand massager plugged into an old B/W television tuned to static? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/513 "2013-07-16T19:54:45Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > Say, a wand massager plugged into an old B/W television tuned to static? Unless someone can cite Wisconsin’s legal definition of “obstetric ultrasound” and it specifically rules OUT the use of B/W televisions, I’d be in perfect compliance. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/514 "2013-07-16T20:20:31Z")
Again, that’s not how law works. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/515 "2013-07-16T20:36:35Z")
So I’m using the letter of the law to obtain a desired result. Take me to SCOTUS. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/516 "2013-07-16T20:55:33Z")
I’m not going to have to. You’ll be cooling your heels in the hoosegow afore you can Snap your fingers and say hoodleberry wanamikkin. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/517 "2013-07-16T21:03:50Z")
For what, exactly? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/518 "2013-07-16T22:39:49Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Unless someone can cite Wisconsin’s legal definition of “obstetric ultrasound” and it specifically rules OUT the use of B/W televisions, I’d be in perfect compliance. No. Because in construing the law, words have their ordinary meaning: > [@](#): > > In construing a statute, the common and approved meaning of a word can be established by reference to a recognized dictionary. Kollasch v. Adamany, 313 N.W.2d 47 at 53 (1981) ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/519 "2013-07-16T22:58:02Z")
Nothing makes the women of the world happy like reading a discussion between men about exactly how the state gets to invade our private parts in the name of religious beliefs and morals many of us do not share. > [@](#): > > [Texas Weighs Ban on Women | The New Yorker](http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/07/texas-weighs-ban-on-women.html) > > “That was our moment to say, ‘Enough is enough,’ ” he said. “This comes down to a choice between life and women, and we choose life.” It’s satire but I could hear Walker saying it. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2013, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/520 "2013-07-17T00:17:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. Because in construing the law, words have their ordinary meaning: So is there a dictionary that describes in precised detail the exact preparation, sequence and detail of an obstetric ultrasound? I assume the ultrasound machine has an operating manual, and the guidelines of the procedure appear in various medical textbooks, but this is a thought experiment: Since you admit you’re okay (indeed embracing of) mandating an unnecessary medical procedure that, in all honesty, has nothing to do with informing the woman but everything to do with delaying (why is a 24-hour waiting period medically necessary?) and possibly emotionally manipulating her, I’ve decided my goal (in the hypothetical) is to make the ultrasound requirement moot, to the best of my ability. To that end, what is the absolute rock-bottom bare-minimum “obstetric ultrasound”? Could I (assuming I was a “qualified person” to operate an ultrasound machine - another issue I’d like to explore, since if there’s no licensing issue, I could just buy an obsolete machine and hang out a shingle) perform the procedure… incompetently? Slide a scanner over the woman’s abdomen for a few seconds, look at a blurry monitor image and say “Yeah, there’s the fetus. Here’s your certificate showing you completed the ultrasound procedure. Next!” Are you going to question my ultrasound technique? On what basis? Unless the woman or her doctor complains that I’ve provided inadequate service, how would you or Wisconsin lawmakers even find out? As an incidental note, I wonder if you’d care to revisit your post #459, in which you say: > [@](#): > > So now I’m guessing you haven’t even read this law you’ve been arguing against. > > It does provide that the ultrasound is free. …because that is _not_ what the law provides, and you score no points by saying I’m ignorant of the law while immediately displaying ignorance of it, yourself. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746.md?page=27)