elevated_u2_fan
Blue Crack Supplier
she's not Canadian Beav, relax...
pro-lifers kill women
- Thread starter Irvine511
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
UberBeaver
Breakdancing Soul Pilgrim
But her name is Khanada and she hates Freedom. She has to be Canadian.
i'm afraid it's worse than that. i'm a nazi communist socialist democrat.
UberBeaver
Breakdancing Soul Pilgrim
Aren't they all kinda the same thing?
yeah, but we haven't wanted to let the word out. 
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
Just like the right pontificate about their right to bare arms, which is the reason 1000's of innocent people a year are shot dead in america by morons toting pistols, yet these same people think that aborting a child before it has developed sufficiently to cognate, feel or react to any stimulus is immoral?
Yeah that seems as relevant as the weed/cigarettes arguement!
For the record, I think weed and cigarettes are disgusting, but people are free to do what they will in their own private residence.
That is the dumbest arguement ive ever heard. How about the numerous cases of barstaff (who I was at one point in time) that get lung cancer and other life threatening ailments because they work in an environment where you are forced to breathe second hand smoke? There should be smoking and non-smoking bars, let all the smokers kill each other, have only smokers who work there then they wont worry about it. The damage caused by the odd drink affects only the drinker with miniscule braincell death (ie unnoticeable). The damage caused by a smoker affects their own health aversely, and the health of everyone anywhere near them.
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Too bad that it affects someone else's body as well.
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
Too bad that it affects someone else's body as well.
NO IT DOESNT!!!!
it isnt a human until it is born. Or at least until it can respond to stimulus in the womb. It is a potential human.
Are you going to make it illegal for people to masturbate because every sperm that is expelled was a 'potential human'? How about locking up every woman who doesn't get pregnant every time they ovulate. All those wasted eggs and tadpoles
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
abcnews.com
Abortion Law Akin to 'Undressing Women'
Two Women Challenge Oklahoma Law That Posts 37 Personal Details on Public Web Site
By SUSAN DONALDSON JAMES
Oct. 15, 2009—
Two women are challenging an Oklahoma law that will require the state to create a Web site where any woman who has an abortion will have to provide intimate details about her choice -- including her relationships, financial situation and even her motivation for seeking the abortion.
"A friend said it best: It's like undressing women in public, exposing their most personal issues on the Internet," said Lora Joyce Davis, one of the plaintiffs working with the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights to fight the law, which goes into effect Nov. 1.
Called the Statistical Reporting of Abortions Act, the law requires all doctors to file information on a woman's age, marital status, education level, number of previous pregnancies, cost and type of abortion, as well as the mother's relationship to the father, with the Oklahoma Department of Health.
Though it does not ask for names, the form poses 37 questions detailing a woman's personal situation. Critics say the first eight questions alone could easily lead to the identification of a woman who lives in one of the state's many small communities.
"This law asks for so much information, and they are going to put it on the Internet for public scorn," said Davis. "Women who have abortions are considered murderers by many people, and you are going to put the name of a town of 200 and the fact that the girl is 17 and it's her first pregnancy and she in the 10th grade. People are going to know who it is."
Many questions fish for more, critics say. "Was there an infant born alive as a result of the abortion?" and "Was the abortion performed within the use of any public institution?"
Doctors who fail to provide information would face criminal sanctions and loss of their medical license.
While the litigants object to the invasion of privacy, their lawsuit challenges the law on more technical grounds. It charges that House Bill 1595 covers more than one subject and therefore violates the state constitution.
The plaintiffs hope to delay implementation of the law and the planned March 1, 2010, launch of the Web site.
Last month, the organization used the same argument to successfully strike down a 2008 law that would have required women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound within an hour of the proceedings and require doctors to describe the picture to their patients in great detail -- down to the numbers of finger and toes.
In addition to mandating the new Web site for abortion-related demographics, the legislation also redefines various abortion terms, bans sex-selective abortion and creates other new reporting requirements.
Abortion Law 'Protects Sanctity of Life'
The new law was sponsored by two anti-abortion rights Republicans, Sen. Todd Lamb, of Edmond, and Rep. Dan Sullivan, of Tulsa.
"This legislation is essential in protecting the sanctity of life," said Lamb when the bill was enacted last April. "Too often the life of the unborn is taken for granted, and I applaud my colleagues for their bipartisan support of a pro-life measure, despite attempts on the floor to sabotage this issue important to families across our state."
Lamb, who is running for lieutenant governor, said he is confident the law will be upheld, calling it "commonsense legislation" that passed with bipartisan support.
"To say these [questions] are onerous, we are talking about human life, and to ask some questions and add two pages of forms to the already multiple pages you are filling out for the medical profession, for an innocent child, that's not much to ask," Lamb told ABCNews.com.
But Davis, and co-plaintiff Wanda Jo Stapleton, a former Democratic state representative from Oklahoma City, argue that the law is not only ineffective but is also "an unlawful expenditure of public funds."
The Web site, they say, will cost taxpayers $281,285 the first year and $256,285 every subsequent year.
Davis said money spent on women in "personal crisis" could be better spent addressing Oklahoma's high teen pregnancy rate -- which is the sixth highest in the nation, according to a 2009 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"I always cared about civil rights, and it seems in Oklahoma, politicians keep trying to do something on the abortion issue to make them look like they are pro-life," said Davis. a 66-year-old great-grandmother from Shawnee.
"It's disingenuous to keep passing laws that make it harder and harder for people seeking abortion for personal reasons and to keep lowering funding for support of teens who are pregnant."
"People are more likely to choose abortion if there is not hope for taking care of the child," she told ABCNews.com.
Oklahoma allows abortions to be performed up to 22 weeks. There are only three doctors in the state who are known to perform abortions, and many have become "vilified in the public eye," according to Jennifer Mondino, staff attorney for the U.S. legal program for the Center for Reproductive Rights.
"I think the intent is to further stigmatize doctors who provide abortions and make it more difficult for women to access reproductive health services," said Mondino.
"In talking to abortion providers, they have been telling us that they are seeing a serious upswing in harassment and protest activity since the beginning of the year," she told ABCNews.com.
In 2007, more than 6,300 abortions were performed in Oklahoma, down slightly from the previous year and reflecting a trend nationwide, according to Planned Parenthood, an organization that supports abortion rights.
"Oklahoma women should be terrified of this onerous law," said Keri Parks, director of external affairs for Planned Parenthood of Central Oklahoma. "It basically turns an already difficult and personal decision into a situation which may put a woman's private and protected health information at risk of inadvertent disclosure.
"Our reproductive rights are challenged yearly in the Oklahoma legislature, and our state seems to have become a testing ground for oppressive restrictions on abortion access," she told ABCNews.com.
The number of abortion restrictions is increasing nationwide, according to Planned Parenthood. During the 2009 state legislative session alone, 23 bills were introduced in Texas and 18 were introduced in Mississippi.
But supporters say the law is not about restricting access to abortion but helping the state gather important information.
"I don't think [the bill] has anything to do with restrictions or roadblocks," said David Dunn, director of research for the Oklahoma Family Policy Council, which opposes abortion.
"The government knows what the situation is and isn't operating in the dark," said Dunn, who dismissed complaints that the new Web site might reveal confidential information.
"We might have a situation in some small town, but I don't know why it's a big deal if abortion is legal and there is nothing wrong, why would people be ashamed to have an abortion?" he asked.
Recording statistical data on abortions is nothing new. Currently 46 out of 50 states and the District of Columbia have mandatory or voluntary reporting, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which promotes sexual and reproductive health worldwide.
Since 1969, when abortion was legal in only a handful of states, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has gathered and released aggregate data provided by state health departments to track maternal morbidity and mortality.
"Generally, the requirements have been benign," said Elizabeth Nash, a Guttmacher public policy associate. "The forms go to the health department and they put them under lock and key and send the data to the CDC."
But over time, as the abortion debate has heated up, states have added "twists and turns" to those requirements, asking for details on minors and fathers of the fetus, according to Nash.
"They are becoming more and more intrusive," she told ABCNews.com. "And now comes the Oklahoma law -- it's pretty darn intrusive.
"You basically get into a whole bunch of stuff that goes way far beyond the CDC in its interest in your personal life," she said. "This is very personal, the kind of information you keep very close and might not even share with a close family member."
The law also places a burden on abortion providers, who Nash said are "really being put between a rock and a hard place."
"They want to protect themselves, and their patients from troubling and upsetting questions and at the same time there are strong penalties," she said.
As for women seeking abortion, this week's Guttmacher report says that the abortion rate is roughly equal in countries where it is legal and those where it is highly restricted.
"Honestly," said Nash. "It seems to be that women surmount all sorts of barriers to abortion waiting periods. They travel long distances to get child care because they know what they need to do. Women still get abortions and I think this is just adding to their burden."
Abortion Law Akin to 'Undressing Women'
Two Women Challenge Oklahoma Law That Posts 37 Personal Details on Public Web Site
By SUSAN DONALDSON JAMES
Oct. 15, 2009—
Two women are challenging an Oklahoma law that will require the state to create a Web site where any woman who has an abortion will have to provide intimate details about her choice -- including her relationships, financial situation and even her motivation for seeking the abortion.
"A friend said it best: It's like undressing women in public, exposing their most personal issues on the Internet," said Lora Joyce Davis, one of the plaintiffs working with the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights to fight the law, which goes into effect Nov. 1.
Called the Statistical Reporting of Abortions Act, the law requires all doctors to file information on a woman's age, marital status, education level, number of previous pregnancies, cost and type of abortion, as well as the mother's relationship to the father, with the Oklahoma Department of Health.
Though it does not ask for names, the form poses 37 questions detailing a woman's personal situation. Critics say the first eight questions alone could easily lead to the identification of a woman who lives in one of the state's many small communities.
"This law asks for so much information, and they are going to put it on the Internet for public scorn," said Davis. "Women who have abortions are considered murderers by many people, and you are going to put the name of a town of 200 and the fact that the girl is 17 and it's her first pregnancy and she in the 10th grade. People are going to know who it is."
Many questions fish for more, critics say. "Was there an infant born alive as a result of the abortion?" and "Was the abortion performed within the use of any public institution?"
Doctors who fail to provide information would face criminal sanctions and loss of their medical license.
While the litigants object to the invasion of privacy, their lawsuit challenges the law on more technical grounds. It charges that House Bill 1595 covers more than one subject and therefore violates the state constitution.
The plaintiffs hope to delay implementation of the law and the planned March 1, 2010, launch of the Web site.
Last month, the organization used the same argument to successfully strike down a 2008 law that would have required women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound within an hour of the proceedings and require doctors to describe the picture to their patients in great detail -- down to the numbers of finger and toes.
In addition to mandating the new Web site for abortion-related demographics, the legislation also redefines various abortion terms, bans sex-selective abortion and creates other new reporting requirements.
Abortion Law 'Protects Sanctity of Life'
The new law was sponsored by two anti-abortion rights Republicans, Sen. Todd Lamb, of Edmond, and Rep. Dan Sullivan, of Tulsa.
"This legislation is essential in protecting the sanctity of life," said Lamb when the bill was enacted last April. "Too often the life of the unborn is taken for granted, and I applaud my colleagues for their bipartisan support of a pro-life measure, despite attempts on the floor to sabotage this issue important to families across our state."
Lamb, who is running for lieutenant governor, said he is confident the law will be upheld, calling it "commonsense legislation" that passed with bipartisan support.
"To say these [questions] are onerous, we are talking about human life, and to ask some questions and add two pages of forms to the already multiple pages you are filling out for the medical profession, for an innocent child, that's not much to ask," Lamb told ABCNews.com.
But Davis, and co-plaintiff Wanda Jo Stapleton, a former Democratic state representative from Oklahoma City, argue that the law is not only ineffective but is also "an unlawful expenditure of public funds."
The Web site, they say, will cost taxpayers $281,285 the first year and $256,285 every subsequent year.
Davis said money spent on women in "personal crisis" could be better spent addressing Oklahoma's high teen pregnancy rate -- which is the sixth highest in the nation, according to a 2009 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
"I always cared about civil rights, and it seems in Oklahoma, politicians keep trying to do something on the abortion issue to make them look like they are pro-life," said Davis. a 66-year-old great-grandmother from Shawnee.
"It's disingenuous to keep passing laws that make it harder and harder for people seeking abortion for personal reasons and to keep lowering funding for support of teens who are pregnant."
"People are more likely to choose abortion if there is not hope for taking care of the child," she told ABCNews.com.
Oklahoma allows abortions to be performed up to 22 weeks. There are only three doctors in the state who are known to perform abortions, and many have become "vilified in the public eye," according to Jennifer Mondino, staff attorney for the U.S. legal program for the Center for Reproductive Rights.
"I think the intent is to further stigmatize doctors who provide abortions and make it more difficult for women to access reproductive health services," said Mondino.
"In talking to abortion providers, they have been telling us that they are seeing a serious upswing in harassment and protest activity since the beginning of the year," she told ABCNews.com.
In 2007, more than 6,300 abortions were performed in Oklahoma, down slightly from the previous year and reflecting a trend nationwide, according to Planned Parenthood, an organization that supports abortion rights.
"Oklahoma women should be terrified of this onerous law," said Keri Parks, director of external affairs for Planned Parenthood of Central Oklahoma. "It basically turns an already difficult and personal decision into a situation which may put a woman's private and protected health information at risk of inadvertent disclosure.
"Our reproductive rights are challenged yearly in the Oklahoma legislature, and our state seems to have become a testing ground for oppressive restrictions on abortion access," she told ABCNews.com.
The number of abortion restrictions is increasing nationwide, according to Planned Parenthood. During the 2009 state legislative session alone, 23 bills were introduced in Texas and 18 were introduced in Mississippi.
But supporters say the law is not about restricting access to abortion but helping the state gather important information.
"I don't think [the bill] has anything to do with restrictions or roadblocks," said David Dunn, director of research for the Oklahoma Family Policy Council, which opposes abortion.
"The government knows what the situation is and isn't operating in the dark," said Dunn, who dismissed complaints that the new Web site might reveal confidential information.
"We might have a situation in some small town, but I don't know why it's a big deal if abortion is legal and there is nothing wrong, why would people be ashamed to have an abortion?" he asked.
Recording statistical data on abortions is nothing new. Currently 46 out of 50 states and the District of Columbia have mandatory or voluntary reporting, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which promotes sexual and reproductive health worldwide.
Since 1969, when abortion was legal in only a handful of states, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has gathered and released aggregate data provided by state health departments to track maternal morbidity and mortality.
"Generally, the requirements have been benign," said Elizabeth Nash, a Guttmacher public policy associate. "The forms go to the health department and they put them under lock and key and send the data to the CDC."
But over time, as the abortion debate has heated up, states have added "twists and turns" to those requirements, asking for details on minors and fathers of the fetus, according to Nash.
"They are becoming more and more intrusive," she told ABCNews.com. "And now comes the Oklahoma law -- it's pretty darn intrusive.
"You basically get into a whole bunch of stuff that goes way far beyond the CDC in its interest in your personal life," she said. "This is very personal, the kind of information you keep very close and might not even share with a close family member."
The law also places a burden on abortion providers, who Nash said are "really being put between a rock and a hard place."
"They want to protect themselves, and their patients from troubling and upsetting questions and at the same time there are strong penalties," she said.
As for women seeking abortion, this week's Guttmacher report says that the abortion rate is roughly equal in countries where it is legal and those where it is highly restricted.
"Honestly," said Nash. "It seems to be that women surmount all sorts of barriers to abortion waiting periods. They travel long distances to get child care because they know what they need to do. Women still get abortions and I think this is just adding to their burden."
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
That is abslutely abhorrent. It is like posting the size of a guys penis online after he has a vasectomy. This debate is just sick.
Most peoples belief in pro-life comes from religion. It is generally based in christian ideologies that people believe abortion is immoral. Isn't it against the convention of human rights to legislate against a person's religious freedom?
Most peoples belief in pro-life comes from religion. It is generally based in christian ideologies that people believe abortion is immoral. Isn't it against the convention of human rights to legislate against a person's religious freedom?
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Too bad that it affects someone else's body as well.
Thanks for putting a fetus ahead of me in the line for importance.
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
I wasn't saying that to in any way undermine the terrible actions here, I was relating it to something equally as absurd and highly obtrusive so that the fellas here could relate
A stor
Refugee
Thanks for the article Mrs. Springsteen. I don't know about Oklahoma law, but Maryland has very strict privacy laws when it comes to medical information and patients.
Though, I chose not to have an abortion. At twenty seven, married and expecting my first child. I was ready. But, I have no right to speak out against, deny access, or judge other women. Of a medical procedure, which is their right to have performed in a safe environment such as a hospital or medical center. I am not in their situation. I don't throw stones. And yes, I am a christian.
Though, I chose not to have an abortion. At twenty seven, married and expecting my first child. I was ready. But, I have no right to speak out against, deny access, or judge other women. Of a medical procedure, which is their right to have performed in a safe environment such as a hospital or medical center. I am not in their situation. I don't throw stones. And yes, I am a christian.
dan_smee
ONE love, blood, life
^ the most mature post in the thread so far 
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Well that's your belief. Are you for abortion at any time during the pregnancy?
Because there is absolutly no difference between a a sperm/egg cell, and the two combined together.
Wheres financeguy?
I didn't, I believe that they are both human beings; so they have the same importance in my eyes.
But holding that belief means I judge women who have abortions, I am a sexist, I am a radical conservative, a religous fanatic, stone-thrower, or what have you. Oh and also being a pro-lifer kills women.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
You do realize it's very natural for fertilized eggs not to ever attach to the wall of the uterus and just be flushed out at the next menstrual cycle, right? So what do you call that?
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Nature.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
So then life doesn't begin at conception.
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
I don't know where you got that out of my post
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Well then look back at the part of your post that I quoted. You asked a question as if you assumed there was a difference.
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Some people die in their sleep. Thats nature as well. As opposed to him walking down the street and getting killed in a drive-by shooting. That's not nature.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Uh, yeah that's what I was talking about...
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
What are you getting at then? You asked me what I called it when a fertilized egg doesn't attach and is flushed out, and I said that that was nature, an unfortunate but natural way for the fetus to die. Thats a little bit different then an abortion I would think.
OP
OP
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
the point is this.
if we are to believe that life begins at conception, and that all life from the moment of conception is sacred and worthy of protection, why then does a woman's body naturally flush out little baby humans like that? a woman's uterus appears to be a very hostile, perhaps murderous place for these children.
it seems that there's a difference between a fertilized egg vs. a 2nd trimester pregnancy vs. an infant. a woman's body makes distinctions between these different stages, why, then, shouldn't medicine do the same?
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
Nature can sometimes be cruel, can't it? The human body will do what it has to do.
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
I'm glad you got my point though. 
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
I knew you weren't understanding my point...
But it's not a fetus, and that was my whole point. Fertitlized egg does not equal fetus. That's why I think this whole thing of life begins at conception is crap.
OP
OP
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
The_Pac_Mule
Refugee
I have only a vague concept of what it does..could you explain it to me?
