Texas Abortions: Ultrasound vs Constitutional Rights

A while back, Texas legislation enacted HB 15, which requires any doctor who will be performing an abortion, to perform an ultrasound on the woman. The doctor is required to offer to show the woman the ultrasound and allow her to hear the heartbeat if she so chooses. The woman can decline the offer of course and the procedure will continue on as if it had not happened.

Doctor’s know what happens to the fetus during the abortion, but the plan is to “help” women understand what is inside of them and I am guessing to hopefully allow them to make a connection to the baby and decline the abortion. That or they woman the woman to feel guilt later on after the abortion has occurred when ever she thinks back to listening to the heartbeat.

Pro-life groups are excited of course, but Pro-Choice supporters say it deprives the woman of her constitutional rights. I am not sure what rights they think are being denied, but they still have the right to not know what is going on inside of them. I can see this bill as a maneuver to decrease abortions in the state. There have been allegations by former Planned Parenthood staff on how they are told specific ways in which to minimize thinking about the fetus as a baby, so I don’t think it is fair to say that the ultrasound will influence a person in a way in which will deny them of any constitutional rights.

If I were to have an abortion, I would not want to know. I would say no, I do not wish to see any evidence that a baby is growing inside of me and no I do not wish to hear its heartbeat. I have seen the videos of the fetus moving away from the scissors when doctors are trying to cut it up so they can vacuum it out of the woman’s body, so I can only imagine how hard it would be for the woman to deal with that. I guess that is the point of it though.

I wonder what efforts the government will try and implement to deal with all of the children that are not wanted or raised by mothers who are not ready to deal with the responsibility. That is where pro-life groups seem to fail. The baby is alive and now it needs caring. Maybe that is phase two of their plan.


Filed under Misc, Politics, Religion

10 responses to “Texas Abortions: Ultrasound vs Constitutional Rights

  1. In the 50 states combined, legislators introduced more than 1,100 reproductive health and rights-related provisions, a sharp increase from the 950 introduced in 2010. By year’s end, 135 of these provisions had been enacted in 36 states, an increase from the 89 enacted in 2010 and the 77 enacted in 2009.

    Five states adopted provisions mandating that a woman obtain an ultrasound prior to having an abortion. The two most stringent provisions were adopted in North Carolina and Texas and were immediately enjoined by federal district courts. Both of these restrictions would have required the provider to show and describe the image to the woman. The other three new provisions (in AZ, FL and KS), all of which are in effect, require the abortion provider to offer the woman the opportunity to view the image or listen to a verbal description of it. These new restrictions bring to six the number of states that mandate the performance of an ultrasound prior to an abortion.

    But, of course the assault on abortion does not end here. There are multiple legislative bills to change the language of the law to make a fertilized egg a legal person, increase bans on medical procedures, imposing fines and penalties for health care providers involved with delivering abortion services, reduction of insurance coverage, increasing regulations for abortion clinics, reducing the funding for Planned Parenting, increasing the public subsidy for Abstinence Only sex education, and so on.

    It is religiously inspired ignorance in action (we know AO programs are ineffective and a waste of money, and we know there is causal benefit in fewer pregnancies and less transmission of STDs associated to teaching PP sex education) and directly attacks the constitutional rights of women under the excuse of being pregnant and so the woman’s rights should be submerged in favour of imposing the supposed rights on the blastocyst over a fully developed citizen beyond the age of consent to suit the opinions and curry political benefit from anti-choice, pro-death advocates.

    (Imagine if we tried to teach the young how to drive by keeping them as far away from cars as possible. It seem to be safer, but it doesn’t teach what it pretends to teach… it avoids the issue, thus creating ignorance in place of knowledge and calls it pious.)

  2. Point taken, but at the same time Planned Parenthood isn’t pushing protected sex as it does not make them any money. They push abortions as that is where the profit is and that is not a religiously motivated campaign.

    • It’s a non profit organization. They ‘push’ sex education… and empowering women through knowledge to control their own reproductive organs.

      • True, it is a non-profit, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t have a lot of money and power. It just means that the organization keeps the money, it doesn’t go to owners or investors, but the people at the top of the organization still get access to all the funds. And lets face it, people with power like having money they can spend.

      • I believe the President of the organization made over $400,000 last year in salary. They make money, but the money is spent in salaries and lobbying. They are hardly the non-profit that is pushing sexual education. If you look at those who have left the organization, they speak to the fact that they were to promote abortions primarily as they were income generators. Free condoms and health tests are performed, but they are not the focus of the organization.

      • Whereas the mega churches and Catholics arrayed against empowering women are don’t have a lot money at stake! Ha! You guys crack me up with – oooo, $400K to run a large organization. Come on. I can’t believe you actually attribute financial gain to Planned Parenthood.

        But of course you do…. as always, a different standard for anyone or anything that dares to criticize religion’s pernicious influence in society, specifically when it involves the equality of women in it.

        As for the claim Planned Parenthood isn’t pushing protected sex as it does not make them any money. They push abortions as that is where the profit is, what I see is that Contraception accounts for 35% of PPFA’s total services and abortions account for 3%; roughly 10% of PPFA’s clients obtain abortions. (Must be a bad source compared to your own, right?)

  3. From the Planned Parenthood site, for 2009 – 2010, since the current reports are not out, this organization spent 42 million on sexual education. Compared to 113 million in management and support expenses or 56 million in public policy. Almost 700 million in medical services, which includes free / reduced rate medical exams as well as abortion procedures. They did spend 14 million in family planning.

    Planned Parenthood did take in 320 million in non-government services revenue. That is the abortion money, as the federal funding is not allowed for abortions.

    In percentages, 68% of all money goes to medical expenses. Back to the combination of abortion and medical exams. 15% of the expenses went to the sexual education that you claim they are known for. That is 3% more than what is spent on management salaries and general support.

    In the general numbers, yes, more contraception visits occurred than abortion. There were 329,445 medical abortions and 1,461,816 prescription abortions or plan B handed out that year. They like to include Plan B in contraception, but it really isn’t since it is designed to eject the egg and seed. As far as contraception for women, birth control pills and the like, were in the neighborhood of 2.220,000 visits. If you want to look at contraception as preventing pregnancy, then your percentage decreases drastically when you eliminate almost 40% of the contributing numbers from what is reported.

    There were more STD tests and treatments than contraception and almost an equal amount spent on cancer screening as contraception visits.

    Get off your high horse. This is not a religion vs. non-religion matter. This is about an organization who is crying about constitutional freedoms being denied because it has a direct impact on their business.

    • Your point is that PP is ‘pushing’ abortion to make money. An abortion procedure costs significantly more than a condom. That’s a ‘cost’ that needs to met by ‘income’ for any non profit organization. Would you have them charge $350 for a condom but 10 cents for an abortion? Would that make you think they were ‘pushing’ contraception? You are sometimes ridiculous in your assertions and this is just such a case.

      It’s not a ‘high horse’ I’m on, Xander. I want people to be responsible for their sexual activities and reduce unwanted pregnancies and STDs. I want people to engage in sex at an age when they can be responsible for the consequences. All of these favourable outcomes are improved by education. But the schools aren’t going to educate kids about this because of religious blowback. They’d rather increase the rate of these negative outcomes by insisting that abstinence is a favourable alternative by NOT teaching sex education. They’d prefer to do nothing but pretend that ignorance is preferable.

      Is it any wonder that there is a need for organizations like Planned Parenthood to step into the void they have created? Not if you’re rational. But that’s asking too much of the religiously motivated, I know. Maintaining the woeful and willful ignorance of the anti-choice lobby as policy continues to be more highly valued for its political profit than educating kids to achieve favourable outcomes. The religious continue to try to insert government that acts as a bludgeon on behalf their religious interests to be rammed into the lives of female citizens, insisting on limiting their reproductive choices. So much anti-woman legislation is an infringement on their rights to access what they consider legitimate and legal medical services. The anti-woman, anti-choice, lobby is religiously motivated to make women’s uterus’ subservient to their religious beliefs, meaning they continue to make necessary such organizations as PP.

  4. I think your missing that the costs of condoms, birth control pills, diaphragms and the like are basically underwritten by the federal government. PP will ask the person what they do and if you can afford to pay, I have gone there before so I know from experience, but of you say no then it is free of charge. They give out bags of condoms for free when you go in for the STD test. The issue is not about which one costs more, as this service which you pushed off as the base of what they do is paid for largely by tax payer dollars.

    On the flip side, abortions are paid for by the individual seeking to rid themselves of the unwanted pregnancy. Abortions are not given out of cost, as the “profit” from this service goes to help with other programs as well as additional pay. Family planning, keeping the child or adoption, is rarely performed by PP. It makes them no money and not part of the business plan. This is how that business works. Not passing a moral judgment on them, but pointing out how biased their protest for unconstitutional practices are. If they were really concerned about sexual education, they would choose to take lower salaries and spend more on education and prevention.

    I support sex education. It needs to be conducted by parents, but they for the most part seem inept at the job. They refuse to because they can not deal with the topic but they don’t want anyone else to either. The child is at a severe disadvantage when faced with natural desires and no education. Disease is passed around at amazing rates and teen pregnancy is way too high. I understand why the pro-life group wants the ultrasound to be mandatory, but there is no call for it to be shoved down the throat of a woman seeking an abortion. You cant force people to make the right choice, at least the choice preferred by the pro-life people.

    I don’t think my assertion was ridiculous, but you wanted to make the argument more about sex education and religion and that is not the case of this post.

  5. Pingback: URL

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s