But it was a brilliant strategy that Planned Parenthood and friends used to defeat a bill in Virginia that would have required pre-abortion ultrasounds: Get as many people as possible to repeat the word “transvaginal” in news and commentary, in order to accomplish two things: defeat the legislation at hand and make your opposition look like a freak show.
At one protest against the legislation, “Molly Vick of Richmond said it was her first time to take part in a protest, but the issue was too infuriating and compelling,” the Washington Post reported. Ms. Vick wore a sticker on her shirt that insisted: “Say No to State-Mandated Rape.” Instead of a belt on her jeans, she wore yellow tape that warned: “Private Property: Keep Out.”
Advertisement
Infuriating? What’s infuriating is that we can’t have an honest debate about anything that might happen to involve women, because it might make Planned Parenthood or any of the political or business wings of the abortion industry uncomfortable. This is the new bra-burning America, and it’s just as delusional and duplicitous as the old one. These protesters aren’t anti-establishment; they are the establishment. Don’t let the gal with the yellow tape fool you.
In recent days (weeks and years, too), media coverage of just about all things regarding women have taken on new frenzied proportions. George Orwell would be impressed — even Saturday Night Live got into the messaging.
Go ahead and read the bill that caused the “rape” cries. The word “transvaginal” never appears in it.
The bill was an update on Virginia’s informed-consent law, and didn’t require a particular kind of ultrasound, but mandated that the “standard medical practice in the community” for an ultrasound be followed. So doctors on site, not the governor or the house of delegates or the legendary exorcist Rick Santorum, would be making the calls about exactly what kind of ultrasound would be best for a particular woman. Planned Parenthood clinics already do ultrasounds (it helps with the pricing of abortions, among other things). The law wasn’t meant to do anything but make sure no women fell through the cracks.
And, frankly, even if the bill did mandate an invasive form of ultrasound — sometimes gestational age or other factors will make these the most accurate methods — let’s be honest about it and “women’s health”: It wouldn’t have been state-sponsored rape, as it was being characterized. It’s standard medical care. All things in the OB-GYN world tend to be invasive. Are routine exams rape, too? Can we just drop the nonsense already?
Apparently not. Not when those who resort to the most shameless rhetoric tend to win. The chattering class is fully engaged in a self-righteous spin cycle about those right-wing hypocrites who claim to be about small government and freedom but who instead are “literally trying to insert themselves into women’s bodies,” as one talking head explained.
I've never been for "informed consent" laws. I don't understand how conservatives can either. Informed consent is saying we need government help to make our decisions. I understand they only want this because abortion is legal but even so government has no place here. Conservative legislatures should support banning abortion but until that time turning to government mandates and regulations to force introspection in women is bound to fail in its goals.
Er, no. Informed consent means that doctors cannot withhold information that would keep you from making a fully informed decision. If the government is involved, it's as an enforcer, not as a decision-maker.
Informed consent equals knowing acquiescence in a decision. But in the world of the rightwingnuts, a pregnant woman never knows any better so, let's badger her with irrelevant information (e.g., sights and sounds of a heartbeat) and hope that she is "shamed" into doing the "right" thing. As for the authors claim that doctors are free to choose the best method for delivering picture and sound, a good percentage of doctors are going to choose that method BECAUSE "it is especially useful for identifying ectopic pregnancy, FETAL HEARTBEAT, and abnormalities of the uterus, placenta, and associated pelvic structures[,]" making her claim laughable, at best (External Link).
Informed consent laws are designed to make it more difficult to defraud the patient. In the case of abortion it is fraud to allow a woman to have an abortion without knowing what is really happening. The pro abortion folks are so anxious to perform abortions that all sorts of lies are promulgated through our schools and our society.
The government has almost nothing to do with informed consent, since it is an ethical basis of the medical profession, the only thing that distinguishes surgery from assault with a deadly weapon. There cannot be enough of it ever under any circumstances and anyone who tries to limit it is an anti-human, anti-scientific brute.
Your fine with these tax payer funded organizations withholding vital medical information from a patient? Information necessary in order to make medical choices. Pro-aborts are spreading misinformation about abortion, pregnancy, birth and rape like wildfire*. What's worse, they hide behind HIPPA laws in order to avoid reporting rape and incest. So while everything in this country is regulated to death, including one's own underpants, the billion dollar abortion industry and all its supporters get a pass?
The narrative is that an abortion entails expelling a 'cluster of cells', or blastocyst. In reality, an abortion cannot be effectively executed until the 7th week of development. A 7-week gestated baby is not a cluster of cells - but many women, particularly young girls, have no idea, thanks to rabid feminist politics. If a woman knew her about to be terminated baby was not only NOT a cluster of cells, but had hands, eyes, a heartbeat and the beginnings of a spine, she might want the right to change her mind - would she not? Wouldn't you sue any doctor who withheld vital information like that? Go to any Planned Parenthood - there are not even posters of the stages of development posted anywhere, as in any OBGYN office. And their services aren't 'free' per se - they charge on a sliding scale. Women blend in there - No one asks if you've been raped, or if you're a victim of incest. If a 25 year old says her 35 year old 'boyfriend' got her pregnant, it is kept secret. This is breaking the law. Even worse, crooked, dirty clinics have operated in this country for years, ignored by authorities. All because of the shrill hysterics of the self-anointed 'protectors of women's rights'.
Little by little, the alternative media are having an effect. I see it in the email I receive, I see it in the comments on Facebook. The people are NOT acting, thinking, and voting the way the MSM tell them to.
Keep writing - you are NOT sending your words into a vacuum (although, at times, it seems to be a futile fight). The people are listening, and the temper of the people is changing.
Yes, it is true that the MSM is no longer in total control of the narrative. Dishonesty does eventually destroy trust, sooner or later.
You know you're getting somewhere when the most crazy-liberal liberal you know starts prefacing statements with qualifiers like, "I still believe in [liberal ideal], but ... "
For Ms. Lopez's information, she is reading the AMENDED version of the bill.
The ORIGINAL version of the bill did require the invasive type of ultrasound. (I can't use the specific term for it, because the NRO filter won't allow it in a post.) After a public outcry, the bill was watered down to allow any type of ultrasound.
A limited government--the type we conservatives favor--should NEVER mandate any invasive medical procedure on any American citizen against her will. Ever.
Any invasive medical procedure has risks; and invasive ultrasound has some absolute contraindications, which are not to be left up to a bunch of lawmakers in the VA legislature. A woman should be free to decline any such procedure. It's unwise, because ultrasound can detect health issues that could threaten the mother's life. But as a free citizen, that's her choice.
If, OTOH, all the bill stipulates is that "standard medical procedure should be followed," then the bill is pointless because we already have regulations requiring physicians to follow standard medical procedures. (They can be sued for malpractice if they don't.)
Any type of ultrasound deemed necessary by a physician should be employed - should it not? Shall we ban the use of these ultrasounds altogether? And while we're at it, ban speculums too? After all, a woman cannot receive proper care unless she subjects herself to these exploratory procedures. I cannot get a prescription for the pill unless I get a pelvic exam, a pap smear - is that 'rape' too? There is no mandate to use v-ultrasound - no federal agent standing over a doctor, no requirement to 'probe' anyone. V-ultrasounds would be used at a doctor's professional digression, as the womb cannot always be viewed using ordinary ultrasound in certain cases. Equating a vital diagnostic tool with 'rape' is another heinous obfuscation of the pro-abortion 'it's just a cluster of cells' lobby - more propaganda from the Margaret Sanger eugenics death cult. How dare you people suggest keeping women ignorant is better for their health, and use scare tactics to cloud their ability to make a clear choice. You're not pro-choice - you're pro-death.
Forcing women to have an unnecessary and invasive medical procedure which they haven't asked for and don't want hardly represents "standard medical procedure".
Women were right to be outraged about government interfering in their health.
This was a victory for small government. I don't know how K-Lo or socons can get upset about Obama imposing health insurance on people but not mind government imposing actual, UNNECESSARY, medical procedures on the same people. Bizarre.
I know..When will big government fascists reform themselves and decriminalize murder?!
You don't have the right to tell me who I can and can't murder! Hands off my freedom to do evil!!!
COME ON EVERYBODY!
LEGAL MURDER! LEGAL MURDER! EVEN IF YOUR GRANDMA BUGS YOU! LEGAL MURDER! LEGAL MURDER!!!!
You have absolute no right to tell people what they can or can't do concerning abortion or gay marriage. Do I agree with abortion or gay marriage? My view is irrelevant. We are free to do as we please with ourselves as long as we aren't infringing on others. If a woman chooses an abortion, you can disagree with it, abhor it, or feel any way you'd like; but you have no right to tell someone they can't do. Same with gay marriage. Hate it, speak against it, but it really has no effect on your life, or does it? The government has no authority under the constitution to regulate abortion or marriages. Either we are completely free or we're not.
Exactly what Calhoun was demanding of Lincoln in the run up to the Civil War--if slavery was so immoral, why didn't he just outlaw it everywhere and free all the slaves in a single day? Because Lincoln didn't have the votes for that and he understood that the best (no slavery at all) was the enemy of the good (eliminating slavery over time). So too in this case--the best (no abortions at all, today) is the enemy of the good (eliminating abortion over time).
Get over yourself. Someone removing a zygote in the first trimester isnt committing murder.
Taking the morning after pill isn't either. And the Supreme Court ruled it's a legal, protected right, not murder, no matter how many of you zealots try and pretend it is.
But I'll bet, for all your ranting about "Murder" you're pro death penalty, pro warfare, and anti welfare. Wheres all your compassion when the kid is born?
What an asinine argument! We are for the protection of a life that is unable to make any decisions for itself. Murderers and despots made their choices. Hardly anyone on here, save for the most ardent libertarians, are completely against welfare. We just want it scaled down to where only the most deserving receive it. Way to pick your strawman arguments!
By the way, why should I depend on your word on when a human life begins?
Follow
