English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Read from yahoo:
Women seeking abortions in South Carolina would be required to view an ultrasound image of their fetus before the procedure under a proposal gaining support from lawmakers. If enacted, it would be the first law of its kind in the nation.
.....
"Women are intelligent and thoughtful human beings who would not go forward if they did not think this was in their best interest," Siler said. "This bill is nothing more than politically driven. It's unnecessary and an attempt to restrict abortion by scaring and intimidating women."

Why does siler think the ultrasound will scare or intimidate people. It can only do that if something about it might be scary or intimidating. Since the ultrasound is definitly true (its not debatable as to whether the ultrasound is an ultrasound or a cartoonists drawing) Why could it possibly be scary or wrong or intimidating to show an Xray?

Shouldnt every woman want as much info as possible about a major procedure?

Help?

2007-03-16 07:51:22 · 10 answers · asked by kent j 3 in Social Science Gender Studies

10 answers

If the mother is making the right decision regardless, why would seeing the baby make any difference?

Life is not to be trivialized. She should know exactly what she is doing. The facts are the facts.

2007-03-16 09:57:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Women who practice abortion are not thinking of anyone but themselves. They have no qualms about killing what they convince themselves is 'just a mass of cells' for this is what feminism has taught them.
In reference to the quote above about this bill being used as an attempt to restrict abortion, I agree that it almost surely is but after seeing that two million babies a year are killed over the past 30 years, something should be done to restrict it, especially since virtually all abortions are done because the parties involved (both) failed to practice conception.
In the US, we have the means to prevent unwanted pregnancy in virtually all cases, thereby eliminating the "need" for abortion. Even so, each year there are about 2 million abortions, one-third of all born children are to an unmarried woman and about one-half of all children born into an intact family will grow up without one parent in their life, usually the father.
I'm pretty sure this bill will fail but not because it is not a good idea or a bad idea. It will fail under pressure from feminists who do not want to be saddled with the responsibility that abortion on demand removes.
Most women do not want to be forced to realize that they are killing a person, whether in fact or potentially. I can't blame them for that, however, I keep wondering what have we become besides selfish.

2007-03-19 09:16:19 · answer #2 · answered by Phil #3 5 · 0 1

An ultrasound is intimidating because a woman may not like the idea of actually seeing her child before having an abortion. She knows that she can't keep the baby, so she doesn't want to get attached to it. Seeing a picture forces her to aquaint herself with the baby.

2007-03-16 14:56:54 · answer #3 · answered by Kaiialyne S 4 · 0 0

But how is giving a woman an ultrasound giving her "as much info as possible"? Do you think women are idiots who don't know that there is a fetus inside her uterus? The only intent and purpose in forcing women into getting ultrasounds is to shame them, scare them, and try to make them have an attachment to the fetus. The fact is, women make the choice to get abortions for their own personal, valid reasons. And I would imagine it takes a lot of thought and consideration. Why not just respect their choice? Why force them into doing something that is completely medically unnecessary? (Already answered that rhetorical question above).

The poster who spoke of burqas is right. Sometimes the U.S. is mind-bogglingly ridiculous. You certainly are an anamoly in the Western World.

2007-03-16 16:24:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

HOW CRUEL ! ! ! I'm Pro-Life, but that's sadistic.

Information the woman uses to make decision:
1. Do I love myself? (Self esteem issue)
2. Does her sexual partner love her?
3. Does her family support her?
4. Will her friends help her?
5. Does society value life enough for her to have hope for the child's future?

This sounds cruel instead of helping her realize that the source of life come from the love of those around her. This would force her to feel more like a looser enforcing her desire to terminate the pregancy. Everything else at that point is just noise.

In short, if you want to save the babbies life ... show love.

2007-03-16 16:02:55 · answer #5 · answered by Giggly Giraffe 7 · 1 1

Nothing wrong with showing an image of your baby to make sure you make the right decision.

Also I don't think people really know just how bad an abortion is on your body.

You might not care about the baby, but you need to know about the damage it causes to yourself.

Then make your choice.

2007-03-16 14:55:55 · answer #6 · answered by You may be right 7 · 1 0

If you're going to make a choice, you had better be sure it's an INFORMED choice. Pro-aborts know fully well that nine out of ten women who see the ultrasound get up and walk out of the clinic--and that costs the abortion clinics money.

Follow the money.

2007-03-16 15:01:53 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 3 2

Would you want to have a viewing window as they put your pet to sleep? It terrorizes someone who already has to deal with the fact that they are going to kill their child. There is no excuse for it beyond other peoples meddling in your business.

You Americans are really screwed in the head sometimes; I'm amazed you started making women wear burkas yet.

2007-03-16 15:31:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

I think if a woman see the beating heart she would realize that they will be killing something that is alive. Maybe the woman would actually be thinking about the interest of someone one else other than herself.

2007-03-16 15:06:52 · answer #9 · answered by dh 2 · 4 2

It's not an attempt to "scare and intimidate" - it's underhanded scheming in order to shame.

2007-03-16 17:20:43 · answer #10 · answered by Rain 3 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers