Annie’s point is entirely sensible. When the locks on your house are broken, for instance, burglary is the first suspicion. Your response has no relevence to that point, so we are left to wonder why she is quoted, since we naturally expect a “quote” type response to relate directly to what was said.
It is as if she said “This is a bad law” and you responded, “Yes, a kangaroo is a marsupial. Futhermore, Des Moines is in Iowa.”
What are you on about, here, Bricker?
Somebody posted the text of the bill in the Stupid Republican Ideas thread and I didn’t see any language to that effect. Can’t find it now, though.
Now that is just being naughty. I’d almost think you did that deliberately. Your cite shows that condoms along with spermicide have the same failure rate as the Pill when used perfectly. When used typically, the failure rate of condoms along with spermicide is 30 times higher than the failure rate of the Pill. Comparable my foot.
I guess you could make the argument that it is the girls fault if her partner does not use the condom perfectly, but that would be demonstrating such a complete lack of compassion and concern for the welfare of young women I would refuse to believe it possible of you.
Your link does not support that statement. You really do your side no good by posting erroneous, alarmist information like that.
Utah is pretty f-in big. Six abortion doctors in the entire state is not a lot at all. And what if the girl had no car/driver’s license? Maybe she did, maybe she didn’t, but the point being, just because a whopping six doctors in the state perform abortions, doesn’t automatically mean she had access to one.
And as to the money issue, she paid $150 for the man to beat her. Abortions typically cost two to three times that, depending on when in the pregnancy it is performed. And maybe she spent all those six months saving up the money, only to find out “too little, too late.”
Liberal: Oh, the poor, helpless victim!
Conservative: The stupid, lazy slut!
Jeez, guys, we don’t know anything about this girl, other than her age and that she was 7 months pregnant. Why make these crazy assumptions about her?
Well, we also know that she paid somebody $150 to punch her in the gut, in an attempt to terminate the fetus. Presumably this wouldn’t be a person’s first choice of ways to go about it.
When the people enforcing a law are just looking for an excuse to harass the people it is targeted at. An anti-woman law, written and enforced by anti-woman people, is going to be enforced in an anti-woman way. It’s not like America doesn’t have experience with laws written to indulge hatred; that’s what happens.
Not that I know of. But then, they didn’t need to; they had the law forbidding abortions, and many other methods of beating women down. Now, with abortion legal and women having more rights in general, they need to look for more weapons.
In other words, your example fails because it presumes that preventing abortions is the point; it’s not. The point is, and was back then, to harass, hurt and oppress women. It’s not much different than the old anti-black Jim Crow laws; the point of such laws is the punishment of a despised group, in this case women.
Given such a law as this, the woman-hating authorities in that state ( and the abortion laws there alone tell us that they DO hate women ) will interpret it in as broad and anti-woman a way as they possibly can, because that’s the point.
(The special features and commentary presented here are the opinions of the individuals presenting them and in no way are representative of the official position of pro-choice-ness as a whole.)
Well, I wouldn’t order eggplant, but I know there are those who do…
A late second trimester abortion can run $5,000, not including gas money or bus ticket, hotel room or anything else that might be involved in traveling to get it (and, often, staying around for 24 hours after going for a mandatory ‘consultation’). As you mention, they get costlier as the pregnancy progresses, which can be a real problem for women without access to a lot of money, including working women, single mothers and students (even if they’re from well off families, they may not have savings, and they may not be able to get money quickly, especially if their families are anti-abortion). So in the time it takes to get enough money for the procedure, find a doctor who will do it and figure out how to take the time off from work/school/childcare to do it, the price has gone up. Rinse. Repeat. Add to that any psych issues, lack of sex ed, abuse or assault and extreme denial, and you’ve got seven months.
No, her point is not sensible. She may have valid complaints against the proposed law – in fact, no “may;” she DOES have valid complaints.
But she supports those complaints by adding in this parade of absurd horribles, and despite the fact that her points have been rebutted by more than one poster, she continues to do it.
The comparson to death panel rhetoric is spot on. There are valid reasons to oppose universal health care. But one of them is NOT fear that death panels will decree that it’s time to say your goodbys to Grandma.
Conservatives that use that tactic are routinely pilloried here. It’s suggested that we can’t even trust polls about health care, because the populace has been poisoned by the lies.
But no one’s pilloried Annie. She’s been asked to support her statements once or twice, but there’s no swell of outrage for poisoning the well of debate with outrageous accusations like bad thoughts serving as probable cause for a homicide investigation. No, no… because, you see, she’s on the correct side. Lying about issues is fine when you’re on the correct side. Death panels? Those filthy Republican lliars! Evil, evil people. Investigate a menstrual period? Um… yeah, that might technically happen, and anyway, the point is a good one.
True. 
But whether she’s a victim or an idiot, it’s hard to tell, even knowing that.
Seven months is late second trimester? Maybe for an elephant.
OK, maybe you were just talking in general, and not about this specific case. But I shudder at the thought that there are doctors out there who would perform elective abortions at 7 months.
Bah! Bad analogy. More like if you misplace something, burglary isn’t the first suspicion.
Miscarriages are extremely common. Mal intent would not be the first suspicion. Again, unless there is a provision in the law requiring doctors to report all miscarriages, then all miscarriages would not be investigated. Is there such a provision? The onus is on **Annie **to show that there is, since she is making the claim.
WHAT “absurd horribles” ?
One important difference is, in this case one side IS driven by malice. This is like looking at a segregation-era law passed enforcing “separate but equal”, and assuming it will be enforced in a way prejudiced against blacks - of course it will. That’s the point.
If heath care reform was being pushed by old-style eugenicists, then fearing that they would set up “death panels” and kill grandma would be a perfectly reasonable fear; it’s not like such people didn’t have a history of such behavior, and it fits their ideology. Motivation matters, as does the history of behavior of a movement. A movement that has consistently worked to harm women, whose ideology is anti-woman can be safely assumed to intend to use a law like this in as anti-woman a way as possible. Assuming they will be even-handed and reasonable is foolish.
I see. So, what this is really all about is the hypocrisy of the left, as demonstrated here on the Boards?
Why is it that none of you are focusing on the real problem? You’re argument is that she can’t get a legal abortion by herself, so she should be able to pay someone to beat it out of her.
It shouldn’t take that much thought to arrive at the conclusion that if parental consent is the problem, then the parental consent law should be changed (or at least complained about). If monetary or geographic access to abortion is the problem, then you need to address that problem. But you can’t possibly argue that allowing a woman to get an 7-month-along person beaten out of her is an OK thing, simply because the other wrongs exist!
Well, someone has to remind you that you’re evil people.
But for the record, I’m not “rabidly” anti-abortion.
Either that, or the well-known stance that that “blob of cells” is a person just like you are. But hey, don’t let the other side’s stated stance get in the way of you dictating to them what they believe.
In what justice system would every incident be investigated, regardless of if there was any hint of wrongdoing? How is that sensible in the least?
The ones that Annie expresses. The ones about cops investigating every menstrual period. Surely that’s COMPLETELY ABSURD to you, right? Does the term “slippery slope” come to mind here?
Bricker’s absolutely right. This board laughs and jeers about wild death panel claims but thinks “This law will create period boards!” is totally sensible. Amazing.
Maybe what we need is a “lefty hypocrisy” smilie, save you guys all that typing, A little round caricature of Trotsky, maybe?
and everytime you or someone else does, I think of the seven month old babies I’ve taken care of that were healthy, playful, and viable as well as being born early, that someone will try to call
Fair or not the clock is ticking on every pregnant woman, and in my opinion by 7 months all of her termination options have run out.
Now personally, I’d want to go over this new law with a fine tooth comb to cull out anything that could be used by the anti abortion crowd to promote their agenda because I’m pro-choice and I think the way to prevent abortion is to prevent the need.
That warped definition of “person” has one purpose, and only one: to justify the oppression of women. A blob of flesh is a blob of flesh whatever name you give it.
A justice system run by people looking to persecute a group of people they despise. In this case, women. A group they are already persecuting; I see no reason to assume they will suddenly stop when handed a new weapon to do so.
No. I consider it quite possible. A law like this is designed so they can use it as an excuse to beat down any woman they think is too uppity.
OK then. You’re on record for saying it’s possible. I’m going to try to read your mind and say you’ll call it likely. Since this law is already passed, you let me know when the cops set up “random tampon searches”. Until then, I am right and you are wrong.