socalscout Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/08/texas.sonogram/index.html?hpt=T2 Abortion rights advocates plan to rally in Texas Tuesday after state lawmakers approved controversial legislaton that requires mothers seeking an abortion to undergo an ultrasound examination and listen to a description of what it shows. The state house approved the anti-abortion measure in a 107-42 vote Monday. And state senators backed a similar proposal last month. After a conference committee hashes out the details, Texas Gov. Rick Perry will have the final say. "This is a defining moment in reproductive rights, not just in Texas, but across the nation," Planned Parenthood of the Texas Capital Region said in a statement discussing its rally and lobbying day scheduled for Tuesday. Perry praised lawmakers for their vote. "I commend the Texas House for passing this legislation, which bolsters our efforts to protect life by ensuring Texans are fully informed when considering such an important decision," the governor said in a statement Monday. "The decision to choose life becomes clear when someone has access to all the information, and I look forward to this important legislation reaching my desk very soon." But opponents of the measure say it is intrusive and interferes with the relationship between doctors and patients. "It is not the jelly on the belly that most of you think. This is government intrusion at its best," Texas state Rep. Carol Alvarado said during a debate on the House floor last week. Anti-abortion advocates say they prefer the more stringent version of the bill passed by the Texas House, CNN affiliate KVUE reported. The House measure requires 24 hours to pass after the ultrasound before a woman can have an abortion, while the Senate version allows just two hours. "A woman should have a day, at least, to think about the information she's receiving about the abortion procedure," anti-abortion advocate Joe Pojman told KVUE. The Senate version also allows a woman to choose not to see the images or sounds if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, or if the fetus has an irreversible medical condition. The House version contains no such provisions, KVUE said. "At the end of the day they're both very problematic bills, and they do the same thing of using an ultrasound for political ends," Dr. Scott Spear of Planned Parenthood of the Texas Capital Region told the station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 woot. This is a great step. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnavarro61 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 [quote name='socalscout' timestamp='1299599431' post='2219159'] http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/08/texas.sonogram/index.html?hpt=T2 Abortion rights advocates plan to rally in Texas Tuesday after state lawmakers approved controversial legislaton that requires mothers seeking an abortion to undergo an ultrasound examination and listen to a description of what it shows. [/quote] Eh, they don't want the ultrasounds? Seems like they don't want to see the truth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I hear that many more women choose not to abort after actually seeing their baby. Is that not a choice? Better still, it's the right choice, which they're making freely. Cases like this show that pro aborts are not interested in choice, they're interested in aborting. This indicates that they have a vested interest in having women get more abortions (which we all know already). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice_nine Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Finally Texas gets something right. I no longer wish them to secede from the union. [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1299620607' post='2219333'] I hear that many more women choose not to abort after actually seeing their baby. Is that not a choice? Better still, it's the right choice, which they're making freely. Cases like this show that pro aborts are not interested in choice, they're interested in aborting. This indicates that they have a vested interest in having women get more abortions (which we all know already). [/quote] True. There's always all this talk about "getting to the facts" without religious bias weighing anything down but, they sure does a lot of scrambling around to put things out of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeresaBenedicta Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 All my exes live in Texas... which is why I now reside in Tennessee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AudreyGrace Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 [quote]"This is a defining moment in reproductive rights, not just in Texas, but across the nation," Planned Parenthood of the Texas Capital Region said in a statement discussing its rally and lobbying day scheduled for Tuesday. [/quote] Just goes to show that Planned Parenthood doesn't really care about giving women full rights, options, and access to information, but rather about their own business objectives surrounding "reproductive rights". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted March 9, 2011 Share Posted March 9, 2011 Sounds like informed consent to me. Profilers know that if abductors view their captives as real human beings, they can't kill them. Same process here. When they see it is a baby rather than a clump of cells like they've been told, they can't kill it. I can't remember the exact number, but it is around 80% who can no longer go through with the abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalscout Posted March 9, 2011 Author Share Posted March 9, 2011 I think this is a great step in the right direction and will stem many abortions. I am glad I moved here from Southern California for many reasons and I will add this one to it. I can see, however, how the abortion provider can circumvent this. It is difficult to distinguish the baby at 17 weeks when you are trying to see it from an OBGYN trying to get a good look for you on high quality equipment. Now an abortion provider who does not want you to see it will probably use low grade equipment and show the mother a static filled picture of a blob reinforcing their arguement that it is not a baby. We can only pray that the image of the life that God created will come through to be seen clearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now