nevermind, you really are missing the point[/quote] I'll take a stab at this. A transvaginal ultrasound is intrusive. They have to insert "a wand that looks like a penis" into the vagina and twist it all around. I can't even begin to imagine the horror woman who was impregnated as a result of a rape must feel if she has to get one of these before getting an abortion. Not to mention who gives a flip about the growth of a fetus or if the pregnancy is ectopic if you are going to have an abortion. The baby's heartbeat is the key for the anti-abortion crowd--let's not pretend fetal growth, ectopic pregnancy, or ovarian cysts have anything to do with it.
Your point? Abortion is legal and until the entire debate of when is a baby considered a human is finaly over, its still a bunch of jib jab. If it gets reversed, it will only be because of an acceptance of then the fetus is considered a human and needs rights to protect them. Then the woman's right issues gets thrown out b/c we are talking about another person in the mix.
That is a nice tight review of the whole debate. Abortion is the one part of the liberalization of human rights that has two trule legitimate sides. I think it is because both sides have no room for compromise. Either a fertilized egg is human or any fetus until it passes through the birth canal is just extra meat. Likewise women's rights are hampered if the fetus is human. It is an emotional debate and one that won't end soon. Funny thing I read a George Will editorial a few years ago that advocated a limited window for abortion say somewhere in the first trimester. There is room for discussion and a middle path.
It's amazing that the debate gets hung up on the very rare instances of rape, incest and mothers health. And I don't know who's to blame but it's stupid. Make it illegal except in those instances. My biggest prob with dems.
At the risk of stating the obvious, you said earlier that But it does appear that the majority of republicans have a major issue with with preventing women from accessing abortion services, so much so they are making it a part of their platform and carving out no exceptions for rape or incest.
Again, the debate is not about preventing women anything. It is about the protection of a life.. Where life begins is the debate. Not rape. Not attacking women. Please try, whether you agree or not, to understand both sides.. While it might be hard for you to comprehend, republicans aren't stirring this up to spite women. It is truly a matter of a belief that a life needs to be protected in most instances. There are extreme sides to this. Don't get caught up in the far left or far right of things.
Short people do not get equal pay for equal work either, should we legislate to protect them as well?
"While it might be hard for you to understand..." Why is it that some people are quick to insult those who challenge them a little bit? Lighten up. I am pro choice but I am not a radical by any stretch. The republican stance may not de jure be restricting women from doing anything, but it is de facto denying access to abortion services, a right they currently have.
that seems to be his method, insult and question peoples intelligence when they dont agree. apparently im an idiot and have reading comprehension problems
