Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit Grisham's column >>

GRISHAM

Home Page
There is no need for temples, no need for complicated philosophies. My brain and my heart are my temples; my philosophy is kindness. Dalai Lama
Articles Posted: 312  Links Seeded: 187
Member Since: 11/2010  Last Seen: 5/16/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Should Government be Allowed to Vaginally Probe Women Seeking an Abortion?

Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:32 PM EST
politics
By Grisham
Advertise | AdChoices

You would think the answer is obvious - of course they shouldn't. However, the Virginia House passed a bill 63-36 that mandates women get an unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound in an attempt to shame women going to get an abortion.

One article explained it like this:

The ultrasound legislation would constitute an unprecedented government mandate to insert vaginal ultrasonic probes into women as part of a state-ordered effort to dissuade them from terminating pregnancies, legislative opponents noted.

"We're talking about inside a woman's body," Del. Charnielle Herring, a Democrat, said in an emotional floor speech. "This is the first time, if we pass this bill, that we will be dictating a medical procedure to a physician."

The conservative Family Foundation hailed the ultrasound measure as an "update" to the state's existing informed consent laws "with the most advanced medical technology available."

 This is totally medically unnecessary invasive procedure. It serves no purpose other than to humiliate and shame women and intimidate them from choosing a legal medical procedure.

Speaking in support of the bill, one delegate said:

"We hear the same song over there. The very tragic human notes that are often touched upon involve extreme examples," said [Todd] Gilbert, R-Shenandoah. "But in the vast majority of these cases, these are matters of lifestyle convenience."

Even if you don't agree with abortion, I don't know how you can see this as anything more than a draconian, unnecessary procedure that invades a woman's privacy and rights. This isn't something a woman can say 'no' too either. They will be required by law to submit to this procedure if they wish to go ahead with their lawful abortion.

The House also passed an amendment that declares life begins at conception. And they aren't the first House to do that and I doubt they will be the last. Despite warnings from the medical community, the GOP controlled Oklahoma Senate has passed the same sort of bill.

The Oklahoma Senate has overwhelmingly approved an anti-abortion "personhood" bill that declares life begins at conception, despite objections from the medical community that the bill could have dire unintended consequences.

 

and further down...

 

The bill is opposed by the Oklahoma State Medical Association, which represents about 5,000 doctors and medical students in the state.

Oklahoma City reproductive endocrinologist Dr. Eli Reshef described the bill as an "embarrassment."

 

So let me get this straight - the medical community (those people trained in medicine and the body) are overwhelmingly against such a bill, but the dumb-ass politicians think they know better?

This is clearly a case of the GOP sending another volley against women's rights. Hopefully, women and men who support women's rights, return fire.

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Grisham's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (222)
Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3
Grisham

Even if you don't agree with abortion, I don't know how you can see this as anything more than a draconian, unnecessary procedure that invades a woman's privacy and rights.

As always, thanks for reading my thoughts. All comments are welcome but please stick to the CoH.

  • 42 votes
#1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:34 PM EST
ERich-356044

This law is disgusting.

My answer is no... the govt. shouldn't do anything of the sort. The most obvious answer right? Except to the politicians.

Ugh.

  • 56 votes
#1.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 12:41 PM EST
MDC-441879

I said on another thread that if my wife were the victim of rape and the gov. wanted to do it again, they would have one hell of a fight with me. I just can't put into words how &^%$ing stupid this law is.

Vote all teapublicans and self righteous christians out come November.

  • 48 votes
#1.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:41 PM EST
rescue dogs62

MDC,

Please don't assume that all Christians, even though on the right, approve of this.

  • 15 votes
#1.3 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:43 PM EST
Grisham

Please don't assume that all Christians, even though on the right, approve of this.

This is true. There was a referendum held in Mississippi on this same sort of bill and the citizens voted against it. That shows that Christian or not, most are against laws like this one.

However, there is a breed of Christian that would like nothing more than to continue their theocratic agenda and the more who support it and remain oblivious to it, the more likely they are to succeed in bringing bills like this one to fruition.

More Christians need to stand up against these sorts of agendas. People like you RD. You do a good job of bringing attention to laws like this one.

  • 35 votes
#1.4 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:47 PM EST
pjw-708550

Grisham, obvious answer, NO. I live in Virginia and luckily I, personally, am old enough not to be effected by this or the 'personhood' bills. But, that being said, my question to those who actually support such methods is this: Do you really want to go back to the bad old days of the back alley abortion where women were killed and maimed trying to abort unwanted children. It wasn't such a swell time in the history of women's rights. A woman has the right to decide what to do with her own body and to then be able to do it without the government looking on.

Sadly, Gov. McDonnell has said that if these bills reach his desk, he will sign them. Remember, he got a master's degree from Regent U--Pat Robertson's little school down in Tidewater.

  • 28 votes
#1.5 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:26 PM EST
robynlewisTX.

http://pregnancy.about.com/od/ultrasounds/f/transvaginal.htm

Question: What is a transvaginal ultrasound or sonogram?

Answer: Transvaginal ultrasound is an ultrasound that is used to help determine many things about a pregnancy. A transvaginal ultrasound is performed by using an ultrasound wand that is actually inserted into the vagina. This can be very helpful in early pregnancy as it is able to provide a better view.

Typically this type of ultrasound will be used to determine:

  • Help provide a more accurate due date for some women
  • Check for ectopic pregnancy (tubal pregnancy)
  • Determine the cause of bleeding
  • Check for cysts, particularly in the ovary
  • Look for early fetal heartbeat
  • Assess the uterine lining
  • Assess the uterus or ovary

This type of ultrasound is not painful, but for some women it can be embarrassing. It doesn't hurt as much as a vaginal exam.

The images are just as good as other ultrasounds. Though this exam is likely to provide better photos early on because it does not have to have the travel to sound through the abdomen, because the wand is closer to the uterus, giving you the best early pictures. It is used most frequently prior to the eighth week of pregnancy.

Ok, what exactly is the problem here? It's form of sonogram performed on a woman to discover, either how far along a pregnancy has progressed, or to see inside the uterus for various problems a woman may be having. I have 4 children and this was done on me several times. It's tool that is used to help diagnose what is happening inside a woman.

How else are you supposed to see an early pregnancy if a pelvic sonogram doesn't pick up the image of the embryo, people? Jeeze! A bunch of fussing over nothing.

  • 4 votes
#1.6 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:33 PM EST
MJL-3

because it is FORCED on them, LIKE RAPE!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 47 votes
#1.7 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:38 PM EST
Grisham

Ok, what exactly is the problem here? It's form of sonogram performed on a woman to discover, either how far along a pregnancy has progressed, or to see inside the uterus for various problems a woman may be having.

Did you consent to it? Did the doctor feel it was a necessary procedure at the time? Could you say 'no' you don't want it if you felt that way?

This is the government telling the doctor what has to be done. They are FORCING doctors to make this procedure a requirement. I would want the doctor making those calls, not a freaking politician.

It's not a lot of fussing over nothing. It's government going against the medical advice of the medical community to shove through religiously fueled, unnecessary procedures to try and humiliate women from having a LEGAL abortion.

  • 40 votes
#1.8 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:41 PM EST
pjw-708550

"Ok, what exactly is the problem here? "

It is not being done for diagnostic purposes. It is being done to shame a woman into not having an abortion. That is what is wrong.

  • 36 votes
#1.9 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:43 PM EST
SW Missouri Mule

For an abortion, the only things the doctor and patient need to know is if she is pregnant and approximately how many weeks. The rest is for a wanted pregnancy. The problem with this particular ultrasound is that it is inserted into the vagina against the wishes of the patient and the recommendation of the attending doctor. It is an unnecessary and invasive procedure required by law in order to deter a woman from an abortion. Any time an object is forced into a woman's vagina against her will, it is rape. It is legalized and coerced rape.

  • 32 votes
#1.10 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:48 PM EST
robynlewisTX.

because it is FORCED on them, LIKE RAPE!!!!!!!!!!!

And you have proof these women are being forced?

Did you consent to it?

Yep. Even signed a CONSENT FORM that was given to me that actually EXPLAINED the procedure in DETAIL.

Did the doctor feel it was a necessary procedure at the time?

Yep

Could you say 'no' you don't want it if you felt that way?

Sine I walked into the obstetrician's under my own power, yes I could. But it would've have been a stupid decision on my part since I was only 3 1/2 to 4 weeks pregnant and a pelvic sonogram couldn't pick up the images the doctor need to see.

This is the government telling the doctor what has to be done. They are FORCING doctors to make this procedure a requirement. I would want the doctor making those calls, not a freaking politician.

I hate to burst your bubble, but these types of sonograms have been used for many years now in abortion clinics. They have to determine how far along a woman is before the abortion it performed. You act like it has NEVER been used, and now only is it going to be utilized.

It's government going against the medical advice of the medical community

What a load of crap! If a woman needs a certain type of sonogram she's gonna get which ever is most needed.

unnecessary procedures

Trans-vaginal sonograms are NOT unnecessary procedures.

You never answered my question, Grisham:

How else are you supposed to see an early pregnancy if a pelvic sonogram doesn't pick up the image of the embryo, people?

  • 4 votes
#1.11 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:02 PM EST
Marshall James

sonagrams are already done before each abortion....so this is really a non issue.

that said...more laws are not going to solve this problem.

I say follow Ron Pauls lead.....follow our constitution and put this in the hands of the states......as that is what our laws allow.

some will condone it...some will not.

its the only halfway fair system as if you didnt like your states choice...you can move to one that did.

maximize choice and freedom.

  • 2 votes
#1.12 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:12 PM EST
Polka14

I say follow Ron Pauls lead.....follow our constitution and put this in the hands of the states......as that is what our laws allow.

It should be in the hands of the People. No government should be allowed to dictate what a woman can and can't do with her own body.

its the only halfway fair system as if you didnt like your states choice...you can move to one that did.

A better choice would be to overthrow the state government and not to essentially go into exile due to oppression.

  • 22 votes
#1.13 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:14 PM EST
Mongowildman

Methinks this is a law that really has no bearing on the issue.

The ultrasound procedure may be required by a doctor and that is after conferring with the patient. Doctors are legally and morally bound to NOT perform any procedure without the explicate consent of the patient. This is more of the government over-stepping the boundary and the government is not in the business of prescribing any medical treatment or procedure.

Although it is a common procedure, it is done in the doctor's office as a regular part of the routine examination. If the patient objects, it can be refused. It is not a necessity and has only become perceived to be only because the process now exists. It is merely another tool of the trade and there are other ways, though maybe not quite so detailed, that can be turned to. External ultrasound techniques can be just as informative when in the hands of a skilled professional.

  • 13 votes
#1.14 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:28 PM EST
Marshall James

polka

agree...that it is easier to change a state...than a central government.

and that is why we should follow our constitution.

each side wants to force the other nation to see their view.....so one side is going to have their rights violated.

if it was a state issue....move to the state that does or doesnt allow it.

    #1.15 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:05 PM EST
    klm-547227

    For one thing the law requires it to be a vaginal sonogram with a probe...like a rape. But the sonogram could very well be done ( though I still disagree with the premise) abdominally. The vaginal sonogram is being done to humiliate and further invade the woman's body.

    • 19 votes
    #1.16 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:06 PM EST
    rescue dogs62

    They are FORCING doctors to make this procedure a requirement. I would want the doctor making those calls, not a freaking politician.

    Doctors are legally and morally bound to NOT perform any procedure without the explicate consent of the patient.

    Grisham,

    I don't even think this is the woman's own doctor. Unless I'm incorrect they go to a different doctor, who then is to describe what he sees. For the person who said it has to be done to determine the stage of pregnancy, if it can't be picked up on a sonogram you can be assured it's in the earliest stages.

    • 18 votes
    #1.17 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:11 PM EST
    Polka14

    each side wants to force the other nation to see their view.....so one side is going to have their rights violated.

    What do you mean by "other nation"? There is only side that faces oppression in this issue. That would be women that have their rights attacked by state governments. The rights of the People must be universally recognized across the nation without exception.

    if it was a state issue....move to the state that does or doesnt allow it.

    Or overthrow the state government as I suggested.

    • 16 votes
    #1.18 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:57 PM EST
    IRESPOND-2315268

    The ultrasound legislation would constitute an unprecedented government mandate to insert vaginal ultrasonic probes into women as part of a state-ordered effort to dissuade them from terminating pregnancies, legislative opponents noted

    And they have the nerve to say that President Obama is anticonstitutional because he wants the church workers to provide insurance to buy birth control pills.

    What a country!

    • 23 votes
    #1.19 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:05 PM EST
    Daniel A. Hallo

    MDC,

    Please don't assume that all Christians, even though on the right, approve of this.

    If I was in a club that was known for being led by a bunch of crazy misogynist I would quit the club or worked my ass off to change it before I started to accuse others of assuming things about them.

    If you are complacent then you’re just as guilty.

    • 16 votes
    #1.20 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:22 PM EST
    Silvaria

    And you have proof these women are being forced?

    I'm surprised this has to be explained to you, but, when a woman HAS to have one in order to undergo a legal medical procedure, yes, it is by force.

    I hate to burst your bubble, but these types of sonograms have been used for many years now in abortion clinics. They have to determine how far along a woman is before the abortion it performed. You act like it has NEVER been used, and now only is it going to be utilized.

    You are obtusely refusing to recognize the fact that those women did it by choice.

    There is a difference between getting one by choice and being forced to get one in order to undergo a legal medical procedure.

    Besides, I've had an abortion when I was quite young, and I have multiple friends who have had them, and NONE of us were forced to do ANYTHING other than have a pregnancy test.

    As for your question to Grisham, see above paragraph.

    • 28 votes
    #1.21 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:41 PM EST
    rochart

    No one should vaginally probe a woman, who else would they vaginally probe, without their agreement!!!

    It is their fraking vagina and body!!! Don't you republicOns get that?

    • 15 votes
    #1.22 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:48 PM EST
    Daniel A. Hallo

    Women need to be thought of as chattel by weak men.

    • 9 votes
    #1.23 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:31 PM EST
    RI Mom

    The bills passed over bitter yet futile objections from Democrats. And one GOP delegate caused the House to ripple when he said most abortions come as "matters of lifestyle convenience."

    When Virginians voted for their legislators...was this even a point of discussion...?

    or were the citizens of Virginia hijacked & duped by the Republicans on this campaign?

    • 14 votes
    #1.24 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:53 PM EST
    petridishofideas

    I would gladly be for it when I can take a jackhammer to the men's asses!

    • 10 votes
    #1.25 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:03 PM EST
    lib50

    .so one side is going to have their rights violated.

    And one side is going to have the hell sued out of them. How dare they! If somebody is wondering why "war on women" keeps coming up, here you go. And it WILL be a loser for republicans.

    • 12 votes
    #1.26 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:04 PM EST
    Ms. B

    the ones who agree with this law are the same ones screaming about being FORCED to have birth control available so no none has to have abortion. these same ones would love to be the taliban in US controlling women and their rights. these are same ones who would love to take away your right to vote as well as control over your body. Rep darrel issa held a hearing with all men who claimed they the old white men knew what was best for WOMEN..next day with a two women who said I submit to men & let them do the thinking & women don't need birth control

    • 18 votes
    #1.27 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:33 PM EST
    cowboygrandpa

    Hmmmm ??? So by that kind of thinking can we say that a male rapist should have a probe inserted into his anus as violently as possible time and time again so he will understand what it is he is doing to a rape victim ?? This should be done before the trial right, so the accused will know what the victim went through.

    But then wait ?? What if the accused is innocent and we probed a person unnecessarily ?? Oh well they deserved it right, it served it's purpose and that person now knows how it feels to be a victim.

    I mean seriuosly people. Get a freaking clue here. Probing a woman unneccessarily is humiliation and degradation.

    I don't know maybe I'm way off base here. I don't believe in abortions anyway, but I believe in the right of the woman to decide what she will do. The freedom of choice is important because once you take that away, you force people to live according to your views.

    We will be judged for that.

    • 20 votes
    #1.28 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:39 PM EST
    mountainmike-1199289

    How about a penis taser/ultra sound for the opinionated elderly white men of the Republican Party that made this proposal? Appoint a female sargeant of arms for congress to conduct the medical procedure spontaneously during legislative sessions. Especially during debates on women's health issues.

    • 14 votes
    #1.29 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:54 PM EST
    James Andre

    Should the government require catheterization of men seeking prostate treatment?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISBAya_5cIM

    • 10 votes
    #1.30 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:56 PM EST
    PonGoad

    I mean seriuosly people. Get a freaking clue here. Probing a woman unneccessarily is humiliation and degradation.

    I totally agree with you cowboygrandpa.

    It seems to me to be major abuse to woman and major abuse of the government to abuse women. One of the things I would like to know is why this was not put up for vote by the people instead of the House? Actually, it should never have been put up for vote at all.

    This is clearly a case of the GOP sending another volley against women's rights

    I totally agree with this too, Grisham.

    Pon

    • 8 votes
    #1.31 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:01 PM EST
    Grisham

    I don't know maybe I'm way off base here. I don't believe in abortions anyway, but I believe in the right of the woman to decide what she will do. The freedom of choice is important because once you take that away, you force people to live according to your views.

    CG,

    You continue to amaze me with how often we agree on matters even when you see it from a religious perspective and I do not. Nicely said, my friend.

    I totally agree with this too, Grisham.

    I think it's because they've continually been stymied. Instead of trying to overturn abortion, they've decided to try and make it as invasive, humiliating and degrading as possible. It's an underhanded and sneaky way to try and accomplish the same goal using deplorable tactics.

    • 14 votes
    #1.32 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:07 PM EST
    another headache

    @Robynlewis:
    Bull@!$%#. I just had one of those things last week. It was very very painful. I bled the whole way home, seven hours of cramps, bleeding and nausea. Maybe it didn't hurt you. So what ? Lots of people have filling done without novacine too and swear it doesn't hurt, but it hurts others plenty. Maybe you are used to having a really long hard piece of metal and plastic pushed up your vagina to the very end and then twisted around so they can view your ovaries as well, but I am not used to it. I have had children too, and I never had a transvaginal ultrasound when I was pregnant. My cervix was very delicate when I was pregnant and bled easily. Miscarriage was a real threat. Not everyone can even have sex when they are pregnant and a penis, even erect is not as hard as that thing. People with retroverted uterus or adhesions of any sort have great pain with this. An ultrasound on the belly is bad enough, but doesn't usually hurt. This is despicable.

    You don't know the circumstances of anyone's pregnancies but your own. For all you know the woman or girl could be a victim of incest, or rape, or of just making a terrible mistake. In any case, you have a lot of nerve saying that the government can force a doctor to do an invasive procedure on anyone, especially a person who may already be traumatized. Shame on you.

    • 22 votes
    #1.33 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:18 PM EST
    PonGoad

    Grisham,

    Since you've researched this legislation, did the people in the State of Virginia get in an uproar about it at all? If they did, there would have to be some kind of compromise made, wouldn't there?

    Pon

    • 2 votes
    #1.34 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:28 PM EST
    Grisham

    Pon,

    Marshal (one of the main proponents of these bills) has tried three other times and failed. However, he's on the verge of winning this time around. From what I can tell, many people are angry about this bill and similar bills around the country, but it will remain to be seen if their anger will stop these bills. Even if they do pass, it's a pretty safe bet that it will be challenged in a court of law. Unfortunately, that might take some time and in the meantime, women will likely continue to be victimized by these two bills.

    • 10 votes
    #1.35 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:34 PM EST
    Brite

    Sorry, Robyn... I'm with the above. I was having then every other month for 2 years. They are uncomfortable to the point of painful. I cramped for 3 days afterward, while I waited for the radiologist to read them... only to tell me that I had to have a PAP the next month, which would lead to a transvag ultrasound then following month... for 2 years... Oh... and the biannual coloposcopies... all culminating in surgery for the removal of what turned out to be a bunch of polyps. I have had more people look at parts of me that I haven't seen in 20 years... (I could look at them... but it takes a mirror and some odd Yoga poses...)

    The POINT to all of this is -

    A transvag ultrasound is NOT needed pre-abortion. An ultrasound is not needed pre-abortion.

    A woman who goes in for an abortion has calculated the time frame of her pregnancy to the minute, almost. She has weighed all the options. She has thought this all through. And, with her doctor, has decided that this is the best course of action for her. She did not do this on a whim, did not pencil this in between her mani/pedi and bikini wax.

    If you don't like the procedure, then fine. Don't like it. Don't have one. But don't put yourself above anyone else, who may or may not choose to have one.

    • 20 votes
    #1.36 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:40 PM EST
    PonGoad

    Grisham,

    So, this country is going back to women being totally a second class citizen again. That stinks.

    Pon

    • 9 votes
    #1.37 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:41 PM EST
    Moby's ManCave

    "This is the first time, if we pass this bill, that we will be dictating a medical procedure to a physician."

    As a physician who did my own billing for over 10 years I can tell you this is not the first time the government has pushed it's agenda into healthcare. Medicaid and Medicare frequently refuse to pay bills for procedures and exams they deemed unnecessary or not approved. Private insurance usually falls in line with Medicaid and Medicare not because of science , but because it saves them money.

    This is the first time though that I've heard of the government trying to change the way medicine is practiced based on a moral agenda. I have a message for them, "you guys are no example of morality… please keep things black and white and stay out of the grey!"

    • 14 votes
    #1.38 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:58 PM EST
    cowboygrandpa

    Grisham:

    #1.32

    CG,

    You continue to amaze me with how often we agree on matters even when you see it from a religious perspective and I do not. Nicely said, my friend.

    Grisham, I try to see it as I'm led by Christ to see it, not the religious leaders who take man's point of view and try to make it out as God's point of view. Jesus Christ say's we all have to choose who we will follow.

    I take that to mean exactly what He says. Which to me means we have choices we must make in life. We are responsible for the choices we make. I never want to be responsible for denying a person their freedom to choose who they will follow.

    Since I am a servant of my Lord, I follow what He says. I may not always agree with someone elses choices, but they are free to choose just as I am.

    That is the difference between "being religious" and living in Christ to me. I know what He grants is freedom, we are changed in Him. Religious people expect you to change for them as if their beliefs aren't validated unless you become like them. Their changes are not from Him and do not last or bring His fruit. They are like the Pharisees white washed sepulchres full of dead mens bones. Clean on the outside, but dead and rotting on the inside.

    Peace my friend.

    I hope all is going well for you and your family during this time of mourning. If there is anything I may do to help please let me know.

    cowboygrandpa-Randy-

    • 9 votes
    #1.39 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:59 PM EST
    Grisham

    I hope all is going well for you and your family during this time of mourning. If there is anything I may do to help please let me know.

    Thank you, CG. That's very kind of you. I just try to keep busy. Idle hands or heads and all that. :)

    • 8 votes
    #1.40 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:11 AM EST
    Daniel A. Hallo

    I'm for chemical castration for pedophiles, especially if they're preist.

    • 7 votes
    #1.41 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:42 AM EST
    grumpy_jon

    Is it just me, or are the Republicans getting way too kinky? I mean, first there is Santorum, who wants to far too involved into our sexual lives than I would care for, and now this. Whatever happened to "family values"?

    • 7 votes
    #1.42 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:56 AM EST
    Daniel A. Hallo

    Whatever happened to "family values"?

    Whose Family? The Addams Family or the Manson Family.
    I always thought American principles trump any arbitrary set of values that can mean anything.

    • 5 votes
    #1.43 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:50 AM EST
    WmRAllen

    I don't know, Dan, I always felt that the Addams family had a very positive outlook. Morticia and Gomez have a very committed & romantic partnership, the family at large is accepting of all kinds of differences, they care for their elders and relatives, the children are confident and supported in their individuality... and they stand united against the forces of society that would tell them they're wrong or not good enough.

    After all, Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc: "we gladly feast on those who would subdue us"...

    • 9 votes
    #1.44 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 7:59 AM EST
    Baron Brian

    Oh, hell no!

    Perhaps the politicians who came up with this stupid, unnecessary and invasive law should have been forced to submit to colonoscopies "just because."

    I thought the Republicans wanted to get government out of peoples' private lives. WTF!?

    I'm kinda glad my wife and I are past the child-bearing years. I could see myself winding up in jail over this...

    • 10 votes
    #1.45 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 7:59 AM EST
    Bye

    Unbelievable.

    • 7 votes
    #1.46 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:51 AM EST
    Daniel A. Hallo

    My point is "Family Values" change from one family to the next and in America we frown on imposing one families values over the rest, it smacks of monarchy.

    Principles are not whims, they are not made, they can only be discovered. America is founded on solid Principles not arbitrary values.

    • 6 votes
    #1.47 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:10 AM EST
    Daniel A. Hallo

    This link below graphically shows what Vaginal Probing entails.

    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/17/427778/virginia-poised-to-enact-state-sponsored-rape-law-forcing-women-to-be-vaginally-probed-before-abortions/

    • 6 votes
    #1.48 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:20 AM EST
    HappyToSeeYa

    pimp-daddy government: yeah, I'll tap that ass

    • 1 vote
    #1.49 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:50 AM EST
    blazera

    wow, that's definitely stunningly invasive.

    • 2 votes
    #1.50 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:53 AM EST
    Mary Price99224

    NEW ONE:

    should non-medical professionals be given the power to order medical tests?

    • 4 votes
    #1.51 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:14 AM EST
    Neish1920

    Ok, what exactly is the problem here? It's form of sonogram performed on a woman to discover, either how far along a pregnancy has progressed, or to see inside the uterus for various problems a woman may be having. I have 4 children and this was done on me several times. It's tool that is used to help diagnose what is happening inside a woman.

    I have had two children since this technology came out. I have also had great insurance coverage each time. I have NEVER had this type of ultra sound done. Even with the though of complications, the usual, jelly-belly ultrasound sufficed just fine.

    What does one need to diagnose if they aborting the pregnancy anyways?

    • 5 votes
    #1.52 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:19 AM EST
    Canadian Dave

    Should Government be Allowed to Vaginally Probe Women Seeking an Abortion?

    Only if the government can rectally probe (with a firehouse) any politician supporting such a bill.

    • 5 votes
    #1.53 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:31 AM EST
    Neish1920

    Only if the government can rectally probe (with a firehouse) any politician supporting such a bill.

    thats still not fair, a rubber fire house would still be more flexible than a strait pastic probe thats not flexible, or soft....

    • 3 votes
    #1.54 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:59 AM EST
    ohiogal-479871

    Ok, what exactly is the problem here? It's form of sonogram performed on a woman to discover, either how far along a pregnancy has progressed, or to see inside the uterus for various problems a woman may be having.

    The problem is doctors are performing and billing a procedure that has no medical indication. It's only purpose is to please a few ideologues.

    sonagrams are already done before each abortion....so this is really a non issue.

    a transvaginal ultrasound is not performed before each abortion

    should non-medical professionals be given the power to order medical tests?

    Never!

    • 7 votes
    #1.55 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 11:09 AM EST
    Sarah-3043284

    This is beyond disgusting, and those who support it are downright scary. Keep your ideology out of my body.

    Than to add another layer to this, it is especially hypocritical coming from the party of "limited government".

    Abortion, whether you agree with it or not, is legal, and no one here can present a substantive case as to why it shouldn't be, because no here can prove when HUMAN life begins. Until than, if you disagree with it, don't have one, but keep your draconian philosophy out of women's bodies.

    This procedure is completely, medically, unnecessary, and I can't wait to watch the ACLU and NOW slap them with a law suit.

    • 5 votes
    #1.56 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:46 PM EST
    cowboygrandpa

    #1.48

    The monsters that would force a woman to go through that are like those who wanted the Spanish Inquisition to prove how holy they were.

    Evil and warped in their minds with no Spirit of God within them, only a hatred of people who do not think like them. God have mercy on those whose lives they affect. Please Lord remove them from power soon. I know this is not of You, but of our enemy whose goal it is to conquer and destroy, while trying to appear as a beacon of light.

    Please open the eyes of those who follow him Lord, and let them flee his evil ways. Your will be done and not his.

    I realize many do not agree with my beliefs. That is alright, you don't have to. But I'm still going to pray for people, because I believe in Him and His way. If even one person turns from the enemies way it is worth it.

    Peace to all who accept Peace.

    • 6 votes
    #1.57 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:01 PM EST
    MartyMoose

    It's hard for me to see how any of these laws would stand up under judicial review. Unfortunately, that process can be slow, but it seems like you could get some kind of hold placed on the law while it's being reviewed.

      #1.58 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:16 PM EST
      another headache

      Brite@ thank you. I have been suffering with terrible undiagnosed pelvic pain too. But even before this last episode I also had to have those stupid things a few times a year as well as the colonoscopies. As I am sure most people know, not all uteruses are "tipped" the same way. Some are, but others are retroverted or anteverted. this means that when they probe the probe bashes right into the body of the uterus. Some people even have to use different sexual practices to avoid the pain this causes. Mine is retroverted. This is how many people end up with IUDs that perforate (you hear at the end of the Mirena commercial about it may perforate? Well tipped uterus is a big cause of that) In any case, if they were to force someone to have this procedure I would say that in some cases it might actually take the "choice" away. If someone were prone to spontaneous abortion, had a weak cervix or was prone to miscarriage this could easily start it. You say you cramped for three days. I bled for at least 8 hours , maybe more I went to sleep after that, and then I was in pain for days after.

      I looked online, because the picture that someone posted really looked alot smaller than the one they use on me. I found a website that sells transducers for transvaginal ultrasound machines---"USED (no less) LIKE NEW" (ugh). But I was thinking we should all chip in and buy one and try it out on the male panel who wants to take away contraceptive rights. Hey, it is not bigger than a good Mikey D's poop, so it wouldn't hurt old Santorum. He should volunteer to have one used on him, and we should be allowed to twist it around to check for ovaries--he might have them--I only have one--but they keep checking that side--so who knows. He should have to have one every time before he has sex, because--every sperm is sacred and they should be given a full physical before they are released onto the world.(euphemism included)

      http://www.absolutemed.com/Medical-Equipment/Ultrasound-Probes/Hitachi-EUP-Hitachi-EUP-V33W-Transvaginal-Transducer-Probe

      • 4 votes
      #1.59 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:19 PM EST
      rescue dogs62

      Daniel Halo,

      If I was in a club that was known for being led by a bunch of crazy misogynist I would quit the club or worked my ass off to change it before I started to accuse others of assuming things about them.

      And your assuming I'm not.

      • 2 votes
      #1.60 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:13 PM EST
      Daniel A. Hallo

      No RD, I’m assuming nothing. I was just making a follow-up statement adding to what you said to MDC, not you. And it was meant as a general statement of advise to any Christian who is offended by this. Sorry if you took it personally I worded it incorrectly. My Bad.

        #1.61 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:58 PM EST
        rescue dogs62

        Thanks, Daniel

        • 1 vote
        #1.62 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 7:44 PM EST
        Reply
        Polka14

        "We hear the same song over there. The very tragic human notes that are often touched upon involve extreme examples," said [Todd] Gilbert, R-Shenandoah. "But in the vast majority of these cases, these are matters of lifestyle convenience."

        So they simply don't care about women. They think the government has the right to interfere in the lives of the Female People if her decisions are about "convenience" to these male lawmakers. All that voted for this shameful law are a terrible bunch of fascists. This is fully in violation of Roe v. Wade if anyone cares. I think the anti-Female element in governments across the nation are strategically creating a negative image around abortion so they can eventually pass a total ban on it and send all Females that violate it to prison. I honestly think that this issue is justification for a Female uprising in Virginia.

        • 17 votes
        Reply#2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:03 PM EST
        Marquis de Laffayette

        I've been trying to come up with something intelligent to say, but I've got nothing. So I'll just say "no".

        I don't really understand the purpose of this. Is it to try to make women feel a connection to their fetus, and thus feel more inclined to give birth and raise the child? Or is it an attempt to make women have to think longer before making a decision, essentially attempting to wait them out the few months that they have before it's too late and the decision is made for them?

        • 15 votes
        Reply#3 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:03 PM EST
        Polka14

        It is done to demoralize and demonize a woman's choice. To make her feel terrible even if she was raped. These people that voted this bill into law are evil and are unfit to represent the Female citizens of Virginia.

        • 23 votes
        #3.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:50 PM EST
        SW Missouri Mule

        This is coerced rape of women in need of an abortion. There is no excuse for this invasive procedure but for Republican men to get their jollies by proxy.

        • 19 votes
        #3.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:52 PM EST
        PsychoDoc

        And what about the cost of the ultrasound?? Who's paying for that? This is just another barrier that they want to put in the way of women having a legal procedure. These people make me sick. And women had better get a clue and stop voting for these people!! If all women who are eligible to vote actually got out and voted, women would decide literally every election! Women are a majority in this country. So please, got out and vote, and make sure that you vote for your own best interests!!

        Because if you don't, you will have only yourselves to blame. And the downfall of the rights that the women who came before you fought and in some cases literally died for will be eliminated. Don't you owe your daughters better than that? And if you're a man who loves a woman, be it your mother, wife, daughter, sister, cousin or friend, I hope that you will also think twice when you vote. Are these the kind of laws you want the women in your life having to follow?? And how long do you think it will be before they start coming after your rights as well.

        I really don't want to live in the United Christians of Armageddon!

        • 14 votes
        #3.3 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:57 PM EST
        demmie-1555521

        Republican lawmakers don't want abortions, gays, atheists, etc, but hate what the Muslim countries do to their people. They're starting to act just like them. I don't see any difference. The next thing you know, we will be following in the footsteps of Hitler, with Nazi eugenics. Don't think for a minute that this hasn't been brought up. California comes to mind. Virginia is getting one step closer.

        • 7 votes
        #3.4 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:31 AM EST
        Reply
        willard

        of course not.

        My wife, a nurse, says the procedure is expensive. So, the cost itself will stifle the thought because they'll FORCE the woman to pay for the procedure. It will be interesting if the "procedure" causes an abortion wouldn't it.

        Sorry christian bastards intruding on everything. As far as I'm concerned the whole of christianity is condemned to stupidity b/c of these people. Insanatorium now claiming that the president doesn't practice the correct 'theology'. God damned a$$holes.

        Sorry Grisham, this stuff is beginning to make me REAL angry.

        • 26 votes
        Reply#4 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:09 PM EST
        magnoliaave

        @willard...."christian bastards" is over the top!

        • 4 votes
        #4.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:26 PM EST
        Topcat Roosevelt

        magnoliaave
        @willard...."christian bastards" is over the top!

        And invasive vaginal procedures dictated by the state is not?

        • 25 votes
        #4.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:05 PM EST
        newsblog903

        Well they certainly are hiding under the banner of Christianity. Poor Jesus, if the man only knew what people are doing and saying in his name I'm sure he'd be furious.

        • 17 votes
        #4.3 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:07 PM EST
        newsblog903

        And they are bastardizing Christianity and have been doing it for 2000 years.

        • 18 votes
        #4.4 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:11 PM EST
        MJL-3

        No they should not

        But my question is if this is refused, by Patient Privacy rights they can refuse tests, what happens no abortion?

        I think the GOP have just totallly gone off their rockers.

        • 15 votes
        #4.5 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:10 PM EST
        MYOB-1251250

        HELL NO!

        • 4 votes
        #4.6 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:54 PM EST
        PonGoad

        Willard and MJL-3

        My wife, a nurse, says the procedure is expensive. So, the cost itself will stifle the thought because they'll FORCE the woman to pay for the procedure

        I think the GOP have just totallly gone off their rockers.

        I just had a scary thought come to me.....Don't tell me that the GOP is passing laws to abuse women just for profit. I hope this is not the case, but it sure sounds like it.

        Pon

        • 5 votes
        #4.7 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:10 AM EST
        Bye

        The doctors in Oklahoma are embarrassed as well as all the smart people in Oklahoma should be.

        Jesus Christ. This is NOT the United Theocracy of America. The GOP and the right wing idiots (who think they're idealogues) need to stop pushing their Christian religious agenda on all us Americans. The whole @!$%#ing country doesn't believe like you and they DON'T HAVE TO....because this is The United States of America.....we know you want it to be the American version of Islam. Only Christian right? Everybody believes or......WHAT?

        I'd like to see a republican TRY to probe my vagina.....

        Obama/Biden 2012

        • 10 votes
        #4.8 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:44 AM EST
        Baron Brian

        Folks, I'm a Christian and glad of it---this madness is NOT Christianity.

        In fact, I don't have the words to express how much I am AGAINST this. And in my church, and in a lot of other churches across this land, there are millions of good Christian people who are also totally against the GOP/ right wing-nut perversion of our faith.

        @Lisa Lee,

        This is why I'm glad my wife and I are past the "baby" stage of our lives. I would gladly punch the lights out of any doctor who tried to force such a procedure as this on my wife against her will.

        Just try not to kill the fool, okay?

        • 3 votes
        #4.9 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:30 AM EST
        WmRAllen

        In fact, I don't have the words to express how much I am AGAINST this. And in my church, and in a lot of other churches across this land, there are millions of good Christian people who are also totally against the GOP/ right wing-nut perversion of our faith.

        Good. May I suggest a well-publicized, oft-repeated public statement in response to each and every news story about some idiotic action by a so-called "Christian" group that only seems interested in using the faith as ammunition in the culture wars?

        It seems that in almost every story about Santorum, the WBC, the endless social-conservative attacks on the cultural gains by women, blacks, and other minorities, or after the psuedo-pious weigh in on the natural disater of the moment, we see a lot of commentary along the lines of "don't mistake ME, a good Christian, with those other guys..."

        The problem is, those other guys are the only ones being loud and obnoxious about it...

        • 5 votes
        #4.10 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:05 AM EST
        SW Missouri Mule

        It isn't the doctor trying to force the procedure. It is the lawmakers forcing the doctor to perform the procedure. It is the lawmakers forcing the woman to undergo the procedure. Put the blame where it belongs, in the Republican politicians in the state House and Senate and Governors office.

        • 3 votes
        #4.11 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:09 AM EST
        Reply
        greg81082-4115372

        The GOP culture war marches on. This is absurd and unconstitutional.

        • 19 votes
        Reply#5 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:10 PM EST
        rescue dogs62

        This wrong on so many levels, but heinous particular for victims of either rape or incest, as it's rape all over again.

        • 22 votes
        Reply#6 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:11 PM EST
        cowboygrandpa

        :~(( :~((

        As if the victims haven't suffered enough already.

        That makes me angry enough to break bones again !!!

        • 9 votes
        #6.1 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:10 AM EST
        Reply
        FlNutmegger

        The ultrasound legislation would constitute an unprecedented government mandate to insert vaginal ultrasonic probes into women as part of a state-ordered effort to dissuade them from terminating pregnancies, legislative opponents noted.

        This is so sick!! How many women, the ultimate victims of this atrocity, voted for it?

        • 16 votes
        Reply#7 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:28 PM EST
        pjw-708550

        The bill's Chief Patron is Delegate Kathy Byron a republican from central Virginia.

        • 2 votes
        #7.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:39 PM EST
        FlNutmegger

        Then I want proof that she has submitted to this procedure! Have her post pictures in living color. What a moron!

        • 7 votes
        #7.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:32 PM EST
        Reply
        ScienceGuy-356641

        One conservative pundit claimed on CNN that the procedure is no more intrusive than having normal sexual relations. She is right. The procedure is indeed no more intrusive than having intercourse … with a rapist!

        • 29 votes
        Reply#8 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:32 PM EST
        Polka14

        It is rape as it will be done without the consent of the Female citizen. Rape by our government and so many praise it even now for doing what they believe is "necessary for the common good".

        • 18 votes
        #8.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 1:36 PM EST
        Topcat Roosevelt

        One conservative pundit claimed on CNN that the procedure is no more intrusive than having normal sexual relations.

        Only difference is the women CONSENTS to have intercourse, unless criminally violated, she has no choice with the state mandated rape, a double rape of a woman already violated...The female legislators should enter a bill calling for the unneeded measuring of the male penis for any procedure, along with a colonoscopy...

        • 16 votes
        #8.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:03 PM EST
        ScienceGuy-356641

        "... colonoscopy."

        This was already proposed. Alas, the additional legislation failed -- Republicans were opposed to the amendment out of fear that the procedure would damage their well-hidden heads.

        • 14 votes
        #8.3 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:13 PM EST
        Reply
        newsblog903

        This is disgusting. It won't be long before someone wants to put up a bill stoning women for getting pregnant even in the case of rape and incest because she needs to be punished. This is sadism. This is an abomination. Shame and a curse on all who support this.

        • 21 votes
        Reply#9 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:10 PM EST
        skeptic-227981

        Surely the ACLU is going to challenge the "state-rape" laws. This is rape under duress with an instrument. Period.

        Where's the AMA on all this, I wonder?

        It also ties into the uproar by the GOP about covering birth control, abortions, and diagnostic tests for women. Since this procedure falls into those categories at some level, the GOP is trying to carve out the cost factor, foist on women, and further economically disadvantage them. Does anyone have any figures on whether or not the insurance industry is lobbying for this procedure to be done and paid for by the women over and above their premiums and other costs? What do the makers of these devices stand to gain from all this?

        • 15 votes
        Reply#10 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:34 PM EST
        Grisham

        I'm not sure about the health premium costs, but they're also looking at passing a bill that would see women charged with wrongful death as a civil lawsuit for women who 'kill a fetus'.

        You can read more about that here: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-02-14/virginia-abortion-legislation/53097654/1

        • 12 votes
        #10.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:43 PM EST
        skeptic-227981

        Grisham, it's worse than that. Some states are calling for women to be charged with felonies if they have abortions, too.

        Iowa House File 2298, p. 6 of 10, Section 707.7

        http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/linc/84/external/HF2298_Introduced.pdf

        The woman who introduced this is an obnoxious member of the Tea Party, who is so unpopular, she has decided not to rerun in the next election. Too bad she made it in the first time.

        I'm pretty sure a majority of women of voting and child bearing age, will not vote GOP in November.

        • 17 votes
        #10.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:28 PM EST
        Reply
        common sense-353470

        Owners of vaginas living in Virginia should be very very afraid.

        • 16 votes
        Reply#11 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:47 PM EST
        Grisham

        Owners of vagina's anywhere in the States should be afraid. More than one State has mulled over or tried to pass laws like this one.

        • 18 votes
        #11.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 2:49 PM EST
        skeptic-227981

        No, owners of vaginas should be utterly pissed off, militant, and totally motivated to put a stop to all this sexist nonsense.

        • 18 votes
        #11.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:19 PM EST
        lib50

        This is war.

        • 4 votes
        #11.3 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 11:30 AM EST
        Moby's ManCave

        Owners of vagina's?

        I didn't realize they were for sale? /sarc :)

        • 2 votes
        #11.4 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 10:12 PM EST
        Reply
        NC Slim

        So, I guess that motto ain't true: Virginia is for Lovers. Virginia is not fit for human habitation. I pray some smart, young lawyer challenges law. And, I hope those in the Old Dominion vote out all the supporters of this heinous measure.

        Can a rider be added? Have a tiny probe inserted in the male (fill in the blank). Ouch! Forget it!

        • 12 votes
        Reply#12 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:09 PM EST
        FlNutmegger

        Can a rider be added? Have a tiny probe inserted in the male (fill in the blank). Ouch! Forget it!

        I have that done too and trust me it isn't fun either. :>((

        • 7 votes
        #12.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:00 PM EST
        Reply
        Poorworkingman

        Now, that's I call "Small Government". LOL

        • 10 votes
        Reply#13 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:24 PM EST
        MJMullinII

        As written by a 'viner most probably smarter than I :) --

        "I'm a small government conservative! Now outlaw everything I don't like."

        • 13 votes
        Reply#14 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:31 PM EST
        MNniceguy

        Its RAPE! .

        • 15 votes
        Reply#15 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:32 PM EST
        MJL-3

        MNniceguy

        Yes it is rape

        • 13 votes
        #15.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 3:39 PM EST
        Reply
        Shannoscubie

        I don't know about other state laws, but this Virginia one doesn't say ANYTHING about trans-vaginal ultrasounds. It's about determining gestational age. This is what it actually says in Paragraph 1-B:

        The ultrasound image shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community, contain the dimensions of the fetus, and accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable. Determination of gestational age shall be based upon measurement of the fetus in a manner consistent with standard medical practice in the community in determining gestational age. When only the gestational sac is visible during ultrasound imaging, gestational age may be based upon measurement of the gestational sac.

        I had a trans-abdominal ultrasound 15 years ago that accurately pegged gestation at 6wks.

        I think this law is egregious enough as it is without everyone getting freaked out about what it's NOT.

        • 2 votes
        Reply#16 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 4:10 PM EST
        digcreation

        are they not requiring that gestational age be determined with a trans-vaginal ultrasound?

        • 1 vote
        #16.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:05 PM EST
        Shannoscubie

        are they not requiring that gestational age be determined with a trans-vaginal ultrasound?

        Nothing I've read in the bill says so. So unless I'm reading the wrong bill or reading the right bill wrong, there's nothing about T-V ultrasounds, nevermind their being required.

        • 2 votes
        #16.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:14 PM EST
        SW Missouri Mule

        My understanding is that they are requiring the TVU to be used regardless if needed to determine gestational age. I believe in one state it said that it would be used if the abdominal ultrasound did not show the fetus clearly.

        • 3 votes
        #16.3 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:25 PM EST
        Shannoscubie

        The language in the Virginia ultrasound bill says an ultrasound is ONLY to be done for the purpose of determine gestational age. At least that's the way I read it (I could be wrong, though). A traditional ultrasound is quite sufficient for that, even very early on. Like I said, I had a regular ultrasound 15 years ago for gestational dating that accurately pegged it at 6wks (maybe 7).

        Don't get me wrong. I hate this bill. But I don't think we should spend our time and energy being so outraged over things that are NOT in it.

        • 4 votes
        #16.4 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:31 PM EST
        Brite

        Shanno - for most women it's the only way to determine gestational age. AND transvag or not - It's added cost and time.

        • 6 votes
        #16.5 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 11:43 PM EST
        ohiogal-479871

        are they not requiring that gestational age be determined with a trans-vaginal ultrasound?

        Which is absurd. They can do an abdominal ultrasound. Hell they can even tell if the pregnancy is less than 12 weeks by seeing if the uterus can be palpated or not. trans-vag is not indicated medically and there was absolutely no reason to pass this law.

        • 3 votes
        #16.6 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 11:17 AM EST
        Reply
        Fed up with Republicans

        The Republicans only believe in mandating what they believe in which is things like sticking a probe up a woman and it doesn't matter to them if it violates her privacy her vagina or her religion.

        • 10 votes
        Reply#17 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:15 PM EST
        Socrates1

        Hmm....one member against....the rest for...a well rounded discussion.

        As someone else so eloquently put it, "What's the problem?" This is not a new procedure dreamed up just to annoy people. Frankly, it's not as if other things haven't also been inserted. I'm not sure where the consistency lays when the same people arguing here for keeping government out of the issue also often argue for the government to subsidize abortions and to force others to provide insurance for others who may choose to avail themselves of the procedure.

        In addition, I find the following a bit interesting.

        The House also passed an amendment that declares life begins at conception. And they aren't the first House to do that and I doubt they will be the last. Despite warnings from the medical community, the GOP controlled Oklahoma Senate has passed the same sort of bill.

        Here's a comment from another member in response to an article I wrote on abortion earlier...

        No Socrates, I am not accepting your premise at all. You asked me if I would be willing to kill a baby, I said I would not, I stated, "The current law does not state that abortion is killing a human being, nor does it state that its ok to kill a baby that has been born already, it gives specifics as to when an abortion is legal to perform and that is BEFORE the fetus has developed into a baby". A baby is a living breathing human being that can live outside the womb, a fetus cannot live outside the womb, a group of cells cannot live outside the womb. These two things are not human beings, and they are not babies.

        #1.15 - Sat Feb 4, 2012 12:17 AM EST

        Note how the "evidence" as to when a fetus became a baby was determined by law, rather than the science I suggested.

        I wonder how this same person might now react to the law which has determined that life begins at conception.

        • 2 votes
        Reply#18 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:31 PM EST
        digcreation

        I'm not sure where the consistency lays when the same people arguing here for keeping government out of the issue also often argue for the government to subsidize abortions and to force others to provide insurance for others who may choose to avail themselves of the procedure.

        on the one hand someone is being forced to submit to an invasive procedure, and on the other the procedure is made available for everyone to choose or not.

        • 10 votes
        #18.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:34 PM EST
        rescue dogs62

        Socrates,

        . Frankly, it's not as if other things haven't also been inserted

        Sorry, but I find that a crass statement.....and what would you say to a 10 year old victim of repeated incest?...."well things have been inserted before, so what's the big deal?"

        • 15 votes
        #18.2 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:52 PM EST
        digcreation

        or less extreme, you've probably had, or will have, a proctology exam. what if that were required by law at every annual doctor visit? its a good idea to have one, and most men do anyway.

        • 6 votes
        #18.3 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 6:57 PM EST
        Grisham

        Hmm....one member against....the rest for...a well rounded discussion.

        Awwww...poor, poor victim. Come here and I'll give you a hug.

        I guess you make two. No one controls who does and does not make a comment. It's their choice to make one or not too. Stop playing the victim.

        This is not a new procedure dreamed up just to annoy people

        Of course not. It's just one being forced on women for no good reason other than to humiliate them and against the advice of the medical community who is best qualified to make the decisions.

        Frankly, it's not as if other things haven't also been inserted.

        I agree with RD on the crass. Frankly, I think it's a downright rude and ignorant statement.

        Here's a comment from another member in response to an article I wrote on abortion earlier...

        Not interested in comments from other articles. Discuss it there in that article. This article you can discuss here.

        • 15 votes
        #18.4 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:29 PM EST
        ohiogal-479871

        As someone else so eloquently put it, "What's the problem?" This is not a new procedure dreamed up just to annoy people

        Ah, dear Socrates, where would we be without you. This may not be a new procedure, but this is a new indication that is not found to be medically necessary by anyone but ideologues. In this day in age an abdominal ultrasound, beta hcg, a physical exam, and a doctor with two brain cells working can figure the dates of an early pregnancy. If OB is rolling out a trans vag for gestational age I suggest to any woman to run for the hills.

        • 5 votes
        #18.5 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 11:29 AM EST
        Socrates1

        Yes...where would you be without me....

        The same people complaining about government here, are the same ones who want abortions paid for by that same government.

        As to the comment above....

        on the one hand someone is being forced to submit to an invasive procedure, and on the other the procedure is made available for everyone to choose or not.

        You mean, on the one hand the government suggests that if you get into bed with me, I get something out of it, while on the other hand people wish to be able to choose and have those who are against the procedure pay for it?

        Keep the government out...fine....but don't whine when you invite the government in, and it decides to do something you don't like.

        • 1 vote
        #18.6 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 11:36 PM EST
        digcreation

        You mean, on the one hand the government suggests that if you get into bed with me, I get something out of it, while on the other hand people wish to be able to choose and have those who are against the procedure pay for it?

        no I don't mean that. in fact I don;t even know what the first part means. What does the government get out of this? And why should the government get something out of a citizens medical choices?

        but don't whine when you invite the government in, and it decides to do something you don't like.

        a) I'm not whining, I'm standing up. And b) the purpose of checks and balance sis to let the government in but keep an eye out for it going to far. You just rejected the premise for our style of republic.

          #18.7 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 11:42 PM EST
          Socrates1

          I disagree.

          Either.

          A. The Government is not asked to pay for abortions.

          or,

          B. Those who accept the money accept the restrictions.

          I'm in favor of A.

          • 1 vote
          #18.8 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:05 AM EST
          another headache

          yeah, but it isn't an either or. It is about women making decisions about their own bodies and their own healthcare. If it is legal and it is, end of discussion. If people who can afford to pay for it because it is a medical procedure that they and their doctors agree is right for them. It is nobody else's business. They can't say if you accept foodstamps we are going to give you a colonoscopy just because that is where the food goes.
          Jeesh.

          • 3 votes
          #18.9 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:31 AM EST
          SW Missouri Mule

          The government does not pay for abortions except in the case of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.

          • 4 votes
          #18.10 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:25 AM EST
          Socrates1

          another headache...the question about whether it is "only" the woman's body is still up for debate. On the other hand, I've decided that I might just support this law for several reasons, which, thanks to this article be Grisham, suggests I might need to write a response.

          • 1 vote
          #18.11 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:50 AM EST
          another headache

          well if what is potential life in a woman's body is up for debate, maybe we should be checking what men are putting into women's bodies, but checking inside men's bodies. It has now been concluded by some researchers for instance that Fetal alcohol related defects can be caused by sperm damage. So maybe if we are going to be checking things we should start with sperm. You know go right up into those testicles and check them out. I am sure we can find a probe for that, and it would be much less dangerous for the fetus. So if someone is pregnant and they want to check it out so invasively , I say start at the source that is least dangerous for the fetus.

          The penis and balls.

          • 5 votes
          #18.12 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:50 PM EST
          ohiogal-479871

          Yes...where would you be without me....

          Maybe we would have a conversation where people could stick to their original post of "what's the problem with this (not new) procedure being mandated by the government" instead of moving the goal post to "people who want abortions paid for by the government."

          Such as . . .

          The same people complaining about government here, are the same ones who want abortions paid for by that same government

          Never knew anyone was complaining about mandating women who are pregnant to get abortions the way they are complaining about mandating that women who want abortions to get vaginal ultrasounds.

          If a woman was getting a vaginal ultrasound because her doctor recommended it and she agreed to the procedure, then I see no problem with her getting it and it being covered by her insurance, gov't or private.

          But that isn't the issue, this is a strawman argument you've brought up to deflect from a mandated procedure by non-medical professionals to tell women and their doctors what they should be doing.

          • 2 votes
          #18.13 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:27 PM EST
          Reply
          proffi53-1

          sometimes i wanna yell " shaddup n git yer butt outa the front pew" ya concerned for the innocent, but if they're innocent they're heaven bound anyway. ya concerned for the sinner, git yer ass up n haul it to yer preyer closet. otherwise git yer busybody, @!$%# disturbin noses outa everyone's pants and keep yer hands offa our constitution. ya twistin it round like a mobiuos strip soze it ain't got but one side, boy that jes ain't right nohow. my grams wuz here, she'da whacked you with the song book n made ya kneel on pencils! or to put it other terms, the voiciferousness of your self deluded verbosity is only matched by the size of your amygdala, and the corrosive catalyst you provide to sectarian strife. or to putr it your way, POOPY HEADS!

          • 2 votes
          Reply#19 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:08 PM EST
          maria lyn

          Delete me if you have to but my answer is (HELL NO).

          • 4 votes
          Reply#20 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:32 PM EST
          john-482021

          The sexually perverted fake christian GOP has found another home. It is Virginia. People dumbed down enough to vote GOP deserve what they voted for here in this trailer park trash state. As for me, I am almost ready for retirement and can move away from these sexual perverts in the Republican party into another country. I would stay and fight for freedom and constitutional rights for everyone, not just fake christians, but I don't think sanity can win in this perverted state or even the country. Not enough people interested in getting rid of trash like this in our government. I have had enough of fake christianity ruling our country and our states.

          • 8 votes
          Reply#21 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:39 PM EST
          MrIndia

          I would support this law as long as there is another law that allows anal probing of anyone who supports the republican party.

          • 6 votes
          Reply#22 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:10 PM EST
          FlNutmegger

          HeeHee, sounds like a plan to this old Independent! ;~))

          • 5 votes
          #22.1 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:13 PM EST
          Reply
          steven-791492

          I would agree with this law, it every time a pasty old white republican goes begging for the little blue pill, at his doctors office.... he has to strip naked and jerk off in the exam room.... to prove his junk is broke.

          • 7 votes
          Reply#23 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:22 PM EST
          VIVA-796465

          i think it is fast becoming the government's business to probe everything except itself

          then the mentality that if the govt is paying for it, or providing access to the service then.........they will crawl up in there, plenty of freebies with plenty of strings attached..............

            Reply#24 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:34 PM EST
            lambnlions

            Should Government be Allowed to Vaginally Probe Women Seeking an Abortion?

            According to the 1977 transcript of the hearing before Congress, MKULTRA projects on behavioral modification, drug acquisition and testing took place over the better part of a decade, from 1953 through 1964.

            Perhaps best known for administering the psychedelic drug LSD to unwitting participants, MKULTRA actually was composed of 149 (known) projects, each their own names, across 86 universities and institutions, that dabbled in everything from harmless hypnosis to horrific human testing. No one was spared

            Here try this on for size...

            http://science.discovery.com/tv/dark-matters/documents/pdf/95mkultra.pdf

            In short, """ NO""".

            • 2 votes
            Reply#25 - Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:47 PM EST
            Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3
            Leave a Comment:
            You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
            You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
            (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
            Newsvine Privacy Statement
            As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
            FUN STUFF:
            • Leaderboard |
            • E-Mail Alerts |
            • Top of the Vine |
            • Newsvine Live |
            • Newsvine Archives |
            • The Greenhouse |
            COMPANY STUFF:
            • Code of Honor |
            • Company Info |
            • Contact Us |
            • Jobs |
            • User Agreement |
            • Privacy Policy |
            • About our ads
            LEGAL STUFF:
            • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
            • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
            • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com