Cal Thomas has a good post on a judge's injunction in support of the ACLU's lawsuit to block North Carolina's quite reasonable effort to require pre-natal ultrasound prior to an abortion, to show the mother just
Thomas:
So what's the objection to orally and visually disclosing to a woman seeking an abortion what's inside her womb? Judge Eagles' decision, and the rationale behind it, is unabashedly political. How can more speech containing factual information violate the First Amendment, which is all about protecting, not restricting, speech?
The only way abortion can remain common is if women remain ignorant of what abortion really is. The ultrasound requirement is good medicine and indispensible for informed consent to a procedure that isn't successful unless it kills a child.
Looks like we might actually get a commons debate on the issue up this way, Mike.
ReplyDeleteIt has been YEARS in the making, but it looks like the Parliament may actually get a chance to revisit the legalization and limits to abortion in Canada.
The (Tory) PM we have now said he would not revisit the issue, but he has been losing ground and the MP's themselves are responding to an increasing number of constituents who want the DISCUSSION about the law...we never had one.
Not a sure thing, but it sure feels like it COULD happen in the next cycle.
Anyway, wish us luck.
REX! Good to see you over here, man! You'll love it. SA is a great blogger.
ReplyDeleteAs for the ultrasound, don't you love how in CA they want to allow almost anyone to stick a vacuum hose in your crotch, but it's somehow a violation of your rights to have a professional do an ultrasound on you?
Oops. I forgot where I was. I thought I was here.
DeleteDuhhhhhhhhhh.
:-)
“The only way abortion can remain common is if women remain ignorant of what abortion really is.”
ReplyDeleteAbortion: because women are ignorant.
No misogyny here!
-KW
So, KW, since women by your snarky estimation are not ignorant of what they're doing, then looking at the ultrasound will make no difference. Therefore you have no reason to be against it. Or perhaps by your own misogyny you find them too weak to handle a small additional dose of data? The poor dears just need to do as they're told by the menfolk who knocked them up, and not make any trouble, is that it? Such chivalry, KW, you are to be commended!
ReplyDeleteSo, KW, since women by your snarky estimation are not ignorant of what they're doing, then looking at the ultrasound will make no difference. Therefore you have no reason to be against it. Or perhaps by your own misogyny you find them too weak to handle a small additional dose of data? The poor dears just need to do as they're told by the menfolk who knocked them up, and not make any trouble, is that it? Such chivalry, KW, you are to be commended!
ReplyDeleteI suspect KW is a (liberal) male and that he does not care what his (God given) sperm does as long as he ENJOY giving it in the Darwinian sense...
ReplyDeleteWe should also pass a law that no one can have a colonoscopy without a detailed film showing what is really in your colon.
ReplyDeleteBetter yet, let's have it for every single medical procedure. Egnor can't operate unless we see exactly what it looks like.