It really is out of line.

Good lord that is an un nerving picture. Even for someone who has fathered and knows the true meaning of the words "don't look down".
To help with the new Teapublican messaging, I think Frank Luntz would prefer you to show a picture of a cross shaped thermometer placed under a cabbage leaf out in the 'where babys come from' cabbage patch.
YOU are showing what republicans actually mean by smaller government. That will not do.
And while you're at it please use the Spanish words for 'cabbage patch'!
Should their be any doubt

Republicans, elected by money, hated by common sense.

...ladyparts.

How many of those dunderheads have a medical degree?

Drafting a bill for required uniform of the day for the females. Spent 2 1/2 days on it just this week.

Remember last year when two MI woman legislators were sanctioned for daring to utter that apparently despicible word?

I would like to see and hear that floor debate.

Get them the f**K out of of our bodies and our lives.

I've no choice but to have this device shoved up inside me. Against my will. By anyone's definition, that's called rape.

I am really tired of seeing these bills introduced in different states. Does anyone know if these are ALEC bills?

Truly, these are some sick minds behind these laws. Utterly sick and depraved.

A cursory check of the ALEC website reveals no legislation specific to transvaginal ultrasounds or other anti-abortion bills.

But you have to look CLOSER.

Success, as they say, breeds success. Whether fostered and funded by ALEC, I do not know, but an organization calling itself the Bioethics Defense Fund (Law in the Service of Life)--has followed the blueprint put forth by ALEC on the corporate level and applied it to the Right-wing Right-to-Life legion.

Like Alec, BDF offers not just "models" for the kinds of oppressive laws we've seen in the past few weeks, but also offers legal guidance in order to enable a cooperating state legislator to tailor the model law to that of his or her own state:

http://deaniemills.com/2012/02/28/the-vast-rightwing-conspiracy-55.aspx

somewhere behind all these bills that are so much alike. I had looked around ALECexposed but couldn't find anything that applied and I was sure there was some billionaire-funded group of rwnjs writing this legislation. I will bookmark the site you have liked for further research.

You do good work.

There is such a thing as a patients bill of rights. You can't make a medical procedure mandatory.. it could also be considered torture as well.

They're not painful, but they are uncomfortable and embarrassing. Of course when it comes to reproductive health we ladies are use to uncomfortable and embarrassing. But to force women to have these in the hopes of convincing them to have the baby is just insulting, wastes money, and is an invasion of privacy.

That is between a woman and her doctor. I talked to a woman who had them for other reasons, and they were painful for her.

This is a political circus that is abusing women's rights. The politicians need to butt out.

They are very intrusive & each time I am brought to tears by the experience.

The fact that my state now requires them to shame & punish women against their will MAKES ME CRAZY!

It is shameful that they are using this for political gain. It's a valuable procedure when needed, but this is complete intrusion on womens' rights.

And it's one thing to have one if you're trying to get information about a wanted pregnancy. It's another if you're a rape victim, you know? I can't even imagine being forced to submit to that after being raped in order to be able to have an abortion.

I say without shame that they were by far the worst experiences of my life, and mine (like yours) were medically indicated. That's why I'm so infuriated by clueless lawmakers forcing women who want to exercise their legal right to go through these for no other reason than to punish and humiliate.

And there's going to be a lot more of these guys in office. Just saying...

bullies and jackbooted christofascist thugs.

The bullies had best watch their backs and their food. Women have had just about enough. You pull this anti-woman crap and lock us in the kitchen, and we'll still have the knives and herb lore.

No more of that, right? Enough.

The GOP overreached with the war on women and teabagger agenda. They were certain they had a moral high ground. Voters rejected them as extremists, turning what appeared to be a victory for the GOP into a victory for the Democratic Party.
Now Democrats face a similar problem. A vocal minority is pushing an agenda that is going to be perceived by voters as extremist. Embracing them will lead to an election day bloodbath...putting a bunch of people like cited in the OP in power. Is that what you want?

No one in government has any intention of taking your guns away. But you may have to get a license and a background check and you may have to register your firearms. Just like you do with your car.

How is that the same as having the state government passing a law to stick a transvaginal wand into you because you were raped and it resulted in a pregnancy that you want to terminate or because a pregnancy will kill you?

If you think they're the same thing you're thinking is fucked up.

No gun control legislation affects me in the least, since I don't own any, and never have. I do have hobbies that have varying degrees of govt regulation...some of which is reasonable, and some of which is simply attacking easy targets for no real purpose.
That is how gun control will be examined by voters. That which is directed at keeping guns out of the hands of those who will (or already have) use them illegally will be considered reasonable, and will get broad support. Those that appear to just target gun owners, and will have little to no effect on gun deaths, will be perceived as unreasonable and pandering to an extremist group...Just like the vaginal ultrasound probe bill was.

"You want us to have to undergo background checks to buy a gun? We'll allow the state to mandate rapes if you want an abortion."

If that were true, it would be done per the doctor's orders. Why the need for legislation?

I have three kids and I never had one.

I'm glad I live in a state where abortions are still relatively easy and safe, although we do have a parental notification law that was recently passed regarding teenagers. There are some ideologues, ALEC types, in our legislature who would like to change that, but I think it would be a big lift for them. Abortions have been legal here since before Roe v. Wade because of our constitution's privacy clause.

I know FL and our Rick Scott Republicans have done quite a job on women's rights. Not sure of the exact status now of the ultrasound. We fought back on one several years ago and won.

I would have to look it up to be sure.

I know we have the parental notification law.

during the primary election in 2010. That's when Joe Miller won the R primary for Senate over Lisa Murkowski because all the fundies came out for the abortion thing. When the general rolled around, Lisa was able to win her write-in because Joe was too extreme. Lisa was always pro-choice when she was a state rep. She's gone a little rightward since being a US senator, but I think she's still basically pro-choice.

The privacy clause in Alaska's constitution is very strong. It's also why we've had basically legal marijuana here since the 1975 Ravin v. State case.

Okay, great. If that's true, the doc prescribes it. They're just admitting that the legislation is superfluous bullshit.

Hypocrites . Where is the 'keep government out of my healthcare!' crowd of lunatics now?

I believe was the full title of the bill in question.

Doc should have to demonstrate it on himself first.

but i bet most would enjoy that.

what an image.

Basically. The "consent" is coerced, so it isn't consent at all.

and vote every damned Republican out of office at the next election. They have that ability, and they should use it. Such a thing would put an end to this bullshit once and for all, nationwide.

"Women of Michigan: Republican Legislators Want to Stick Something Inorganic in Your Vagina. Vote for Democrats and Send a Message."

The ad should feature that doctor, holding that instrument. A very clear message.

Would make a great ad.

to "Women of Arkansas". We, too, are having same problem here in AR. Thanks

make anyone else want to go out and commit violence? Maybe it's just my antidepressant kicking in.



(to any government spies present - no, I'm not going to do anything)

person and her doctor.

Geez ...

Bake

For impersonating a doctor.

I would shove it so far down their mother-fucking throat that they would be able to enjoy their very own trans-duodenal ultrasound.

are taking contraceptives? Why should they be disturbed by this device being shoved into the place where they reside in the womb? Shouldn't these fetuses have some rights to not be disturbed by this large, bulbous device imposing itself into their peaceful environment?

OMG that is so weird. Thanks for sharing.

Lou

I think most women decide wisely and carefully. Politics has no place like this in personal reproductive decisions. Yes, it is just wrong to force something like this.

I am pro-life, I am pro-choice. I think the labels have been misused.

I don't believe it should be legal, but it is. That's a fact. This kind of procedure with these vaginal probes is just a method of torture, in my opinion.

This is alarming.

When a "conscience clause" can allow a woman to die.

During her stay at the M. Pierogow Regional Specialist Hospital in Łódź in August 2004, the doctor refused to perform a full endoscopy. He stated that “my conscience does not allow me to do this,” but did not formalize his objection or direct the patient to another doctor. The doctor justified not performing a full endoscopy by referring to his fear of endangering the life of the fetus. At the end of August 2004 mother of the woman and the woman's fiancée urged the doctor at the clinic in Łódź to commence any necessary treatment, irrespective of the consequences for the life of the fetus, to save the woman’s life. This was in vain. Why? Because the doctors were more concerned about the fetus. The woman lost the fetus on 5 September 2004. It was removed and the doctors removed an abscess. But then it was too late for intervention to help her. On 29 September 2004 she died of septic shock caused by sepsis.

Executive Order -- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's Consistency with Longstanding Restrictions on the Use of Federal Funds for Abortion

The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly created health insurance exchanges. Under the Act, longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience (such as the Church Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 300a-7, and the Weldon Amendment, section 508(d)(1) of Public Law 111-8) remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

Our medical experts have determined that your life was not in danger and you could have carried the pregnancy to term. And, by the way, you owe us $9,000.”

Her voice breaking, D.J. Feldman, a Washington, D.C. federal employee, recently spoke to the press about her struggles with her insurance company after she aborted a much-desired pregnancy because of a fetal diagnosis of anencephaly (the absence of a major portion of the brain, skull and scalp). The insurance would only cover abortion in the case of rape, incest or a threat to her life, so the fact that if Feldman had continued the pregnancy, it would have been both physically and emotionally grueling—resulting either in a fetal demise, a stillbirth, or a live birth of a newborn who would quickly die—had no effect on the insurance company’s decision.

The primary culprit in this situation is not really Feldman’s insurance carrier, however, but the U.S. Congress. For decades it has imposed such unconscionable restrictions on abortion coverage for federal employees, as well as on women in the military, Native Americans using government provided health facilities and women on Medicaid in a majority of states.

More than a dozen countries have liberalized their abortion laws in recent years, including South Africa, Switzerland, Cambodia and Chad. In a handful of others, including Russia and the United States (or parts of it), the movement has been toward criminalizing more and different types of abortions. In South Dakota, the governor recently signed the most restrictive abortion bill since the Supreme Court ruled in 1973, in Roe v. Wade, that state laws prohibiting abortion were unconstitutional. The South Dakota law, which its backers acknowledge is designed to test Roe v. Wade in the courts, forbids abortion, including those cases in which the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest. Only if an abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother is the procedure permitted. A similar though less restrictive bill is now making its way through the Mississippi Legislature.

Sheldon, a mother of four at the time (a fifth child had died as an infant), was then a practicing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), outside of Boston. The LDS leader in Massachusetts at that time, called the "stake president," was a Harvard-trained physician, Dr. Gordon Williams, and he counseled Sheldon to follow her doctor's advice to terminate the pregnancy and protect her own life, so that she could continue caring for her four living children.

...According to an account later written anonymously by Sheldon for the LDS women's journal, Exponent II, it was after receiving this counsel from her Williams supporting the potentially life-saving procedure that she experienced an uninvited visit in her hospital from her Mormon bishop at the time, 36-year-old Mitt Romney, who adamantly opposed the abortion.

"He regaled me with stories of his sister and her retarded child and what a blessing the child had been to the family," Sheldon wrote of the incident. "He told me that 'as your bishop, my concern is with the child.'"

There was no empathy forthcoming from Romney, according to Sheldon, no warmth or sympathy. Moreover, Sheldon contends, Romney cast doubt on her story about the stake president's approval. He simply didn't believe her. He threatened to call him and track him down. He didn't seem to care a lick about her personal well-being.

You know, a zealot is a zealot. And their "solutions" are usually idiotic.

It's what extremism does in the long run.

In fact, that's exactly what I did say about them. But, aside from that, I'm not sure what other thread runs through them all.

However, I suspect that I don't look at these instances the same way that you do, because I don't see it through the issue of controlling women's reproductive choices. Anything can be taken to the extreme, whether it's pro-life or pro-choice.

I don't think anyone else has a right to dictate these decisions.

This area, like that of education, has been subject to right wing propaganda for so long that it has tainted what should be a very clear life decision for a woman and her doctor.

Pro-lifers frame it differently, and I, for one, think of it not as a reproductive choice, but as a right to life. I do understand your point of view, however much I disagree with it.

That's what I was showing you in the links I posted. The church's belief nor the belief of any religion or group should allow a woman to die because she is giving birth.

I think that anyone who doesn't is a zealot. And a nut.

Because the phrase is 'pro-choice', not pro-abortion.

Whatever.

and I'm not trying to pick a fight.

When I got pregnant I had a choice. Like most women I chose to keep the baby, but it was not without some deep thought about the consequences of that choice. I knew that it would change my life completely. I was not married and I was poor and I was forced to think about what kind of life I could give the baby. At the time it meant I had to quite college and get work that could give me the opportunity to make a living to support myself and my child and I knew that it would mean getting a lousy job. Whatever plans I had for a career and economic success were gone.

But I had a choice. No one tried to force me to do anything. My parents were supportive of any choice I made. And in essence that is the crux of this entire debate because none of us has the right to choose for others. It's that simple. All you or I or anyone else has is the choices we make for ourselves only. It's a fundamental human right.

But, I do not agree with it. It is not mine. I see things differently.

And it is not that I am not willing, or able, to understand your point of view. I am. And, I work very hard to try to come around to that point of view, because I give a shit. I am a woman, too. I am a Democrat, but not a one-issue Democrat. The stand that most Democrats take on abortion does not deter me from voting a straight Democratic ticket, because I consider myself pro-life, in all regards. And the Rethugs plans usually end in death for many, whether it's wars, poverty, racism, etc.

I have been on this forum for eight years, and unlike many here, I have never chosen not to speak my mind on this issue. I don't hide in the shadows, hijacking threads, or spewing bullshit, or disrupting. I have not arrived at my views on this issue without much thought, or reason.

But I disagree with you. I am anti-war, anti-abortion, anti-death penalty. All for the same reason. If someone could prove to me that life does not begin at conception, or at least prove WHEN it does begin, I would support abortion AT that point.

This is so wrong and should be completely illegal.

It's tantamount to rape, and it takes medical practice decisions out of the hands of doctors and their patients where these decisions should be made.

See if their 'heads' are clear.

here's a letter that's well written by someone from "Stop the War on Women in Arkansas" facebook to AR rep: (with her permission and she asks that we copy to rep in our counties)

Allen Kerr, Rep for District 32 (R aka good freakin' luck)

Representative Kerr,

I urge you to vote NAY when SB134 (the Fetal Heartbeat Protection Act) comes up for a vote in the house. This would be one of the most strict abortion laws in the country. I've attached a peer-reviewed medical article in regards to this. Consider, sir, this study (the second attachment down) conducted by the World Health Organization and published in The Lancet. In localities where abortion is illegal, abortion rates do not go down. They are comparable to countries where abortion is legal. Further, septic abortion (which leads to massive infection and, often, death) and other complications of unsafe abortion are the leading cause of maternal mortality in areas where abortion is outlawed. Basically, women still seek abortion procedures, and in the shadow of criminalized behavior, many of these procedures go horribly wrong. Recall when abortion was illegal in the U.S. Women like Gerri Santoro, who feared for her life at the hands of an abuser when she fell pregnant, died as a result of unsafe illegal abortion procedures. Her two daughters were left motherless. There were many others. You are not saving babies, Representative Kerr. You are, in effect, sentencing those babies AND those mothers (who often already have children they are raising) to possible maiming, sterilization, or death. You are hurting mothers, sisters, wives, daughters, and their families. A woman's healthcare choices should remain between a woman, her doctor, and her God. Please reconsider your position and stay out of these very personal choices. Further, please do not vote for a bill that will, ultimately, cost the State time and money in litigation due to its violation of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Additionally, I am aware that you voted in favor of The Insurance Exchange Abortion Band and the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. I am disheartened that my Representative would waste time and my tax dollars by approving of such REDUNDANT (in the case of HB1100) and UNCONSTITUTIONAL (in the case of HB1037) legislation. As one of these bills is obviously unconstitutional, the time and cost of imminent litigation is wasteful. As a scientist and a childbirth professional, I am appalled that you would vote in favor of such an unscientific bill as HB1037. I have attached a peer-reviewed scientific article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The medical literature states that the response of a fetus to a noxious stimulus is quite similar to the response of a fetus to ANY stimulus. The neural connections that are crucial components of the brain's pain-processing software are not developed until at least viability, even as late as weeks 29-30. You, sir, have not done your homework and I am absolutely appalled that you would venture to speak for a family's healthcare choice on such unscientific and unconstitutional grounds.

Please stand up for the women of Arkansas and their families. You may not be a woman, but it is your job to represent us. WE elected you. Please vote NO on SB134.

My head is spinning. I absolutely can't believe it has gotten to this point.

dear god in heaven.

That's some soul-sick ugly stuff these patriarchal peewits have in mind

plain and simple. I'm sorry but forcing a woman to have something jammed in her vagina that she DOES NOT WANT is rape. Fucking assholes.

It's sad what it's turned into.

And we jump on OTHER countries for torture???

Yep, ladies and gents, that's exactly what that heinous probe looks like. And, to add to the fun, the woman has to insert it HERSELF until the tech (or whoever is doing it) can take over and manipulate it until they get the images they want. Kind of like a divining rod shoved up your vagina. And if it bumps an organ -- it's painful as all hell.

There are NO words for how I feel about transvaginal ultrasounds, and I can just imagine the emotional scarring that some women will suffer if they are forced to have one of these for no good damn reason.

Let's call it what it is: Cruel and punishing, and if these asshat lawmakers think that after having one a woman will change her mind -- again...there are NO words.