Forced ultrasound = state-sanctioned rape

_
_ Posts: 6,657
edited February 2012 in A Moving Train
Rape: “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”


Most abortions happen before 9 weeks' gestation, when the fetus is too small to be seen via ultrasound except when using a vaginal probe.

Ultrasonography is not necessarily medically indicated for abortion care.

"Without the consent of the victim" includes so-called consent given under duress (like withholding medical care).
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1345678

Comments

  • Claireack
    Claireack Posts: 13,561
    Has there been a case?
    <a href="http://s952.photobucket.com/albums/ae8/catkinson_2009/?action=view&current=domo.jpg&quot; target="_blank"><img src="http://i952.photobucket.com/albums/ae8/catkinson_2009/domo.jpg&quot; border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,161
    states are trying to make this law.....

    this is state sanctioned rape and i do not know on what legal grounds this can be allowed to occur.

    equal protection anyone??

    man, i wish all women in this country would stand up and fight this, and i wish the men that are in power would listen to them and do the right thing on this...

    did anyone see the committe chaired by darrell issa had all men discussion contraception, and the one woman in attendance was "unqualified" to talk about contraception??? :shock: :shock: :?

    hey gop, what does a uterus, and the forced search of one, have to do with fixing the economy or creating jobs????
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • mikepegg44
    mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    states are trying to make this law.....

    this is state sanctioned rape and i do not know on what legal grounds this can be allowed to occur.

    equal protection anyone??

    man, i wish all women in this country would stand up and fight this, and i wish the men that are in power would listen to them and do the right thing on this...

    did anyone see the committe chaired by darrell issa had all men discussion contraception, and the one woman in attendance was "unqualified" to talk about contraception??? :shock: :shock: :?

    hey gop, what does a uterus, and the forced search of one, have to do with fixing the economy or creating jobs????

    :clap::clap::clap::clap: :thumbup:
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    Claireack wrote:
    Has there been a case?

    Here's some info on ultrasound laws that have already passed: http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/s ... ib_RFU.pdf

    There are more states that are in the process of trying to pass laws that require ultrasounds. I think Virgina is the main one that's been in the news recently.
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    a uterus, and the forced search of one

    :lol::lol:

    I hadn't thought of it as a search before, but you're right.
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    Breaking news: http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2 ... sound-bill

    Apparently the Governor of Virginia has come to understand the problems with forcing objects into women's vaginas against their will. (The rest of the bill is still fucked up though. It is in no way the place of politicians to stick their noses into the standards of medical care. Yet they're still mandating costly forced searches of women's uteruses.)
  • Vitalogy Man
    Vitalogy Man Posts: 174
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    states are trying to make this law.....

    this is state sanctioned rape and i do not know on what legal grounds this can be allowed to occur.

    equal protection anyone??

    man, i wish all women in this country would stand up and fight this, and i wish the men that are in power would listen to them and do the right thing on this...

    did anyone see the committe chaired by darrell issa had all men discussion contraception, and the one woman in attendance was "unqualified" to talk about contraception??? :shock: :shock: :?

    hey gop, what does a uterus, and the forced search of one, have to do with fixing the economy or creating jobs????

    HEY DEMS: What the hell does the Gov't have to do with Contraception?

    Gov't : Get the F@ck out of my life!
  • SweetChildofMine
    SweetChildofMine Posts: 842
    Thats exactly what the Dems are saying... Doh! :lol:

    Its funny. You like contradicted yourself but put democrat in there....



    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


    tell me what part of the brain does that brainwashed mental switch? You wanna them out of your life better get them out of your head first.
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    Vitalogy Man wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    states are trying to make this law.....

    this is state sanctioned rape and i do not know on what legal grounds this can be allowed to occur.

    equal protection anyone??

    man, i wish all women in this country would stand up and fight this, and i wish the men that are in power would listen to them and do the right thing on this...

    did anyone see the committe chaired by darrell issa had all men discussion contraception, and the one woman in attendance was "unqualified" to talk about contraception??? :shock: :shock: :?

    hey gop, what does a uterus, and the forced search of one, have to do with fixing the economy or creating jobs????

    HEY DEMS: What the hell does the Gov't have to do with Contraception?

    Gov't : Get the F@ck out of my life!

    I would answer your question, but we already have another thread for that topic. This is a different topic.
  • blackredyellow
    blackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    _ wrote:
    Breaking news: http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2 ... sound-bill

    Apparently the Governor of Virginia has come to understand the problems with forcing objects into women's vaginas against their will. (The rest of the bill is still fucked up though. It is in no way the place of politicians to stick their noses into the standards of medical care. Yet they're still mandating costly forced searches of women's uteruses.)


    From that link (and the Governor):
    I am asking the General Assembly to state in this legislation that only a transabdominal, or external, ultrasound will be required to satisfy the requirements to determine gestational age. Should a doctor determine that another form of ultrasound may be necessary to provide the necessary images and information that will be an issue for the doctor and the patient. The government will have no role in that medical decision.

    This makes absolutely no sense... We don't want to pass a law that requires internal ultrasounds, but we will require the doc to determine gestational age. But if that can't be done externally, wouldn't the woman have to have an internal one to satisfy this bullshit gestational age requirement?
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • SweetChildofMine
    SweetChildofMine Posts: 842
    wait ... now I hear there will be private congressional hearing BY MEN about the future of women's reproductive health


    fucking dont say it isnt so...
  • Vitalogy Man
    Vitalogy Man Posts: 174
    _ wrote:
    Vitalogy Man wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    states are trying to make this law.....

    this is state sanctioned rape and i do not know on what legal grounds this can be allowed to occur.

    equal protection anyone??

    man, i wish all women in this country would stand up and fight this, and i wish the men that are in power would listen to them and do the right thing on this...

    did anyone see the committe chaired by darrell issa had all men discussion contraception, and the one woman in attendance was "unqualified" to talk about contraception??? :shock: :shock: :?

    hey gop, what does a uterus, and the forced search of one, have to do with fixing the economy or creating jobs????

    HEY DEMS: What the hell does the Gov't have to do with Contraception?

    Gov't : Get the F@ck out of my life!

    I would answer your question, but we already have another thread for that topic. This is a different topic.


    Not really sure what the hell this thread is about anyways... Using an ultra sound prior to abortion is rape?

    Sorry if Im off about that...
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,161
    Vitalogy Man wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    states are trying to make this law.....

    this is state sanctioned rape and i do not know on what legal grounds this can be allowed to occur.

    equal protection anyone??

    man, i wish all women in this country would stand up and fight this, and i wish the men that are in power would listen to them and do the right thing on this...

    did anyone see the committe chaired by darrell issa had all men discussion contraception, and the one woman in attendance was "unqualified" to talk about contraception??? :shock: :shock: :?

    hey gop, what does a uterus, and the forced search of one, have to do with fixing the economy or creating jobs????

    HEY DEMS: What the hell does the Gov't have to do with Contraception?

    Gov't : Get the F@ck out of my life!
    I'm sorry. Are you a man? What right do you have to force a woman to undergo the forced penetration by a metal probe? If someone is against contraception and against abortion then they are anti woman and anti women's reproductive rights. I never understood how a man can deny contraception to a woman yet make them wholly responsible for carrying the fetus, wanted or otherwise, to full term and make them deliver the baby. You can not have it both ways.

    The most ironic thing about all of this is that the people who support these laws are pro life Christian republicans who are anti taxes, anti social programs, anti contraception, yet pro death penalty. None of those positions are very christlike are they?
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,314
    Let me start be saying that this is a dumb law and a waste of taxpayer's time and money.

    But I have a question as I'm a dude and most likely will go through life without having an abortion unless my life turns into a bad Schwarzenegger movie ... at any point during the abortion process, is there a point where anything penetrates the woman?
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    edited February 2012
    blackredyellow wrote:
    _ wrote:
    Breaking news: http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2 ... sound-bill

    Apparently the Governor of Virginia has come to understand the problems with forcing objects into women's vaginas against their will. (The rest of the bill is still fucked up though. It is in no way the place of politicians to stick their noses into the standards of medical care. Yet they're still mandating costly forced searches of women's uteruses.)


    From that link (and the Governor):
    I am asking the General Assembly to state in this legislation that only a transabdominal, or external, ultrasound will be required to satisfy the requirements to determine gestational age. Should a doctor determine that another form of ultrasound may be necessary to provide the necessary images and information that will be an issue for the doctor and the patient. The government will have no role in that medical decision.

    This makes absolutely no sense... We don't want to pass a law that requires internal ultrasounds, but we will require the doc to determine gestational age. But if that can't be done externally, wouldn't the woman have to have an internal one to satisfy this bullshit gestational age requirement?

    I totally agree that it makes no sense to think the government has a role in the medical decision to have an ultrasound based on the kind of ultrasound that's performed (or the pregnancy decision that's made). But my assumption is that they're only talking about knowing gestational age so as not to violate some law they probably have about later abortions. If the gestational age can only be determined by transvaginal ultrasound, then the pregnancy is necessarily early enough for later-term requirements to not apply. Put another way, abdominal ultrasounds can tell you what trimester the pregnancy is in, and that's all the state "needs" to know.
    Post edited by _ on
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    Vitalogy Man wrote:
    _ wrote:
    Vitalogy Man wrote:
    HEY DEMS: What the hell does the Gov't have to do with Contraception?

    Gov't : Get the F@ck out of my life!

    I would answer your question, but we already have another thread for that topic. This is a different topic.


    Not really sure what the hell this thread is about anyways... Using an ultra sound prior to abortion is rape?

    Sorry if Im off about that...

    Some states are trying to require that women who choose abortion have ultrasound probes inserted into their vaginas against their will, without medical reason.
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    Jason P wrote:
    Let me start be saying that this is a dumb law and a waste of taxpayer's time and money.

    But I have a question as I'm a dude and most likely will go through life without having an abortion unless my life turns into a bad Schwarzenegger movie ... at any point during the abortion process, is there a point where anything penetrates the woman?

    Depends on the kind of abortion.

    But, if I see where you're trying to go with this train of thought, let me just stop you right there and point out that women have a right to decide what is and is not inserted into their vaginas and just because they allow one thing to be inserted doesn't mean they should be required to have something else - that they don't want - inserted.
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,501
    _ wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    a uterus, and the forced search of one

    :lol::lol:

    I hadn't thought of it as a search before, but you're right.
    MAybe it can be overturned on 4th amendment grounds? Unreasonable search and seizure?
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • _
    _ Posts: 6,657
    mickeyrat wrote:
    _ wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    a uterus, and the forced search of one

    :lol::lol:

    I hadn't thought of it as a search before, but you're right.
    MAybe it can be overturned on 4th amendment grounds? Unreasonable search and seizure?
    :lol:
  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,314
    _ wrote:
    Jason P wrote:
    Let me start be saying that this is a dumb law and a waste of taxpayer's time and money.

    But I have a question as I'm a dude and most likely will go through life without having an abortion unless my life turns into a bad Schwarzenegger movie ... at any point during the abortion process, is there a point where anything penetrates the woman?

    Depends on the kind of abortion.

    But, if I see where you're trying to go with this train of thought, let me just stop you right there and point out that women have a right to decide what is and is not inserted into their vaginas and just because they allow one thing to be inserted doesn't mean they should be required to have something else - that they don't want - inserted.
    I'm glad you see where I'm going with this. My intention is not to support either side, but whether to see if inflammatory language is being used as a tool to combat the proposed legislation.

    Again, under normal and commonly practiced circumstances, is there a part of the clinical procedure that requires a woman to have something "penetrate" her in order to get an abortion during a medical evaluation?

    And if a woman refuses to go let something "penetrate" her under normal circumstances, will she be denied an abortion?
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!

Categories