Anti-abortion groups begin a brazen campaign to make women listen to their fetus before they end a pregnancy
Abortion opponents have a new weapon of choice: the “heartbeat bill.” A coalition of anti-abortion groups told the Associate Press last week last week that it was pushing to enact laws in all 50 states that would make women listen to a fetus’s heart beat before they could abort. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) has introduced a similar federal bill, The Heartbeat Informed Consent Act, in Congress.
More
15 comments:
par·a·site /ˈpærəˌsaɪt/ Show Spelled[par-uh-sahyt] Show IPA
noun
1. an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
2. a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.
are we gonig to listen to the "heartbeat" of bacteria and viruses before we take antibiotics now?
ive said before, the scum of the earth are usually the ones getting abortions. once you get an abortion, your tubes should be tied. no questions asked.
Someone should check Bachmann's brainbeat.
FINALLY!! Once they hear that precious bundles heartbeat maybe their hardened heart will soften.
What if their mother had aborted them?
An abortion is the murder of an innocent baby and no amount of liberal spin can change that fact.
"brazen campaign"??
what... to make a mother listen to her baby's heartbeat?
man, we are whacked as a country when that act becomes "brazen."
I wish Michele Bachman had been aborted
Anon. 2:50 is a classic example of what the left thinks is a coherent argument for their position.
Rick, I left that comment. I am FAR from the left. But Michele Bachman is loonier than tunes.
Liberals are always wanting to kill the innocent.
Why is so horrible to remind women that it's not "just a bunch of cells" that they are scraping from their bodies?
This is such a simple non issue. Don't believe in abortion, don't have one. If you believe in limited government power, and that government cannot intrude upon personal liberty, then how can you possibly say the government can legislate on this?
I know many of you are religiously motivated on this... ask yourself.. what happens to this life, as you define it, when it is aborted? One way ticket to heaven.... right?
@11:57 -- Did you even read your own definition -- "another species" -- a parasite By DEFINITION is another species. An unborn child is human -- same species as the mother.
@6:07 Your "argument" applies equally to infanticide, spousal abuse, slavery, etc. No one forced the abolitionists to keep slaves, so what was wrong with slavery?
The real question is, why shouldn't all innocent life be protected by law?
@6:45 Sorry, but we are not talking about anything other than abortion. Not infanticide, not spousal abuse, or slavery. Issues most people would agree that they don't support, and are clearly defineable. Really, your arguments are just strawmen. There is quite a disagreement in the discussion of what abortion is, and clear divides in the right or wrong of it, and it is abortion we are discussing... you should keep to that.
The problem with your "real" question, is legally defining life, and the point in which it begins. You use the "innocent" life termonology because it pulls the heartstrings.. but you don't really say what that means. Please to be clear on what you mean.
Regardless of whether the fetus is a parasite or human, or whether the politician pushing for the bill to pass is competent or "loonier than tunes", this issue questions if the government can place a requirement on how well a woman can "know" her potential child before deciding on an abortion. Does this bill guarantee a certain emotional process to occur while going through the process of an abortion, or does it have other motives? How harmful are these effects of the bill and to what extent do they help/hinder those involved?
Post a Comment