Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

I am just amazed at the folks who are up in arms to have a simple, painless transvaginal ultrasound on women who are pregnant...not virgins mind you. FYI, the size of the probe being used is about the diameter of a slender tampon. I manage an ultrasound department at a teaching hospital, so I have seen the probe. So give us all a break on the inference that the procedure is tortuous.

You probably have the patient's permission to do these probes, unlike the Virginia law which forces this state-mandated trans vaginel probe on women without their permission.

To have the same party that complains of government intrusion in private affairs mandating such a physical intrusion is quite the irony.

Originally Posted by djplong

To have the same party that complains of government intrusion in private affairs mandating such a physical intrusion is quite the irony.

It's way way way less invasive than the abortion.

Originally Posted by janmcn

You probably have the patient's permission to do these probes, unlike the Virginia law which forces this state-mandated trans vaginel probe on women without their permission.

They are mandating the ultrasound prior to the abortion. The comparison between what the woman goes through with the ultrasound and the actual abortion procedure is night and day. She won't even feel the ultrasound...and once the abortion is complete, she will wish she had stopped with the ultrasound. Why don't you google what actually happens with an abortion, or check out a youtube video. You might learn something, something very graphic, gorey, and painfully disturbing.

This is mandated terrorism on a woman. Her body, her choice. It is Federal law that gives a woman free choice. A state mandating invasive procedures violates her dignity.

'Nuff said on this matter, too.

I cant believe women will stand by and let theur rights be trampled by these groups. Its their body,their choice.

Originally Posted by buggyone

This is mandated terrorism on a woman. Her body, her choice. It is Federal law that gives a woman free choice. A state mandating invasive procedures violates her dignity.

'Nuff said on this matter, too.

How about the terrorism on the ody of the unborn child? A forcep is put through the artificially dilated cervix to tear each leg and arm off and pull it out. Then the body is crushed and torn from the head to pull it out. The head is also crushed to be pulled through the tiny opening. Talk about pain! Pain for both the mother and the baby. Violation of dignity? Who's dignity? I'd say there are two victims of an abortion. If a slender little probe can give the mom a birdseye view of the tiny face and hands, beating heart and gently closed eyelids-it could save mom a life of mental anguish and give a child a chance to someday read and post on a political forum while sipping a cool drink poolside in America's Friendliest Home Town.

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

How about the terrorism on the ody of the unborn child? A forcep is put through the artificially dilated cervix to tear each leg and arm off and pull it out. Then the body is crushed and torn from the head to pull it out. The head is also crushed to be pulled through the tiny opening. Talk about pain! Pain for both the mother and the baby. Violation of dignity? Who's dignity? I'd say there are two victims of an abortion. If a slender little probe can give the mom a birdseye view of the tiny face and hands, beating heart and gently closed eyelids-it could save mom a life of mental anguish and give a child a chance to someday read and post on a political forum while sipping a cool drink poolside in America's Friendliest Home Town.

I don't think the liberals can comment on your post. I'm not sure it's in their talking points. Liberals don't really want to know what's in there, they just think they have a constitutional right to kill it.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

I think this is really all about who has to pay for it. The laws being considered around the country are to allow insurance companies to just not be obligated to pay for birth control.
It's not to make hormonal birth control illegal.

Birth control would not be illegal, it would just not be covered by insurance. I don't see why it should, logically. What medical problem is it addressing. I think there is a reason beyond just preventing pregnancy that lead to a prescription of birth control pill, but I don't remember what. I'm sure someone is going to remind me.

I remember one snarky comment on this forum in another thread that if this is the case then Viagra shouldn't be covered. But men who are prescribed Viagra are prescribed this drug because of a medical problem and condition. This is not the case with birth control for a healthy woman.

Richie.... so sorry but on this point:

But men who are prescribed Viagra are prescribed this drug because of a medical problem and condition. This is not the case with birth control for a healthy woman.

Birth Control pills are used for conditions other than birth control. In fact in my teens I was given these pills in an attempt to control pain. I am providing a link to support this...

Now to the snarky comment, cause I said it..... The Catholic Bishops will not compromise on this issue. As a person who who was raised as a Catholic I can remember being told "Sex is for procreation NOT recreation." Viagra for men whose wives are unable to have children, under the teachings of the church, would be the same as the use of birth control.

But this brings up a larger point... Birth control prevents, to a large extent, unwanted pregnancies. Something I would think those who are against abortion would support. If the pregnancies are not prevented then the children produced have to be supported. But those who are opposed to birth control seem also to be opposed to safety net.

Seems silly to support the men to create, children but not support women to prevent them.


Sexism is alive and well.

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

TVII, I would love to be able to say that I am speechless! But LOL, ya gotta know that ain't gonna happen, especially on this subject! I can't even take this advice from Honest Abe-"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." Abraham Lincoln 16th president of US (1809 - 1865). Maybe not so smart after all. I also think that you and I both know a loving God who has already taken our punishment upon Himself (YEAH!)...since He and we all know that none of us is perfect.

This from Posh 08's link-'It’s time to show lawmakers that Virginians can see through this insidious attempt to undermine reproductive rights in Virginia and that we reject its goals of outlawing all abortion and attacking women’s access to common forms of birth control like the pill, emergency contraception and IUDs."


Virginia General Assembly: The "Personhood" Bill Passed in the House, Unborn Child A Person At Conception [AUDIO] | KissRichmond

Virginia delegates pass two of the most restrictive anti-abortion bills ever presented to a state legislature - NY Daily News

It appears that the Virginina House of Delegates has chosen to pass a law giving rights to the "unborn", basically they are declaring that life begins at conception! This does not mean that they have banned contraception. Contra is latin for against or opposite + Conceptio is latin for conceive= contraception. Therefore a contraception is something that is against conception, prevents conception, etc...This law is giving rights to the results of conception. Apparently, rights to those whose conception was not prevented. It does not outlaw methods to prevent conception.
I need to point out though, that IUD's are not a true form of contraception. The presence of a foreign body (an IUD-intrauterine device) in the uterus prevents the fertilized egg (conception has already taken place) from properly implanting into the uterine wall where it can gain nourishment and continue to grow and develop. This result in a very early miscarriage and the woman will never know she had even conceived.

Good post KatzPajamas. My mother had an illness at birth which seriously harmed by development during the first six years and me very slow to develop after that. I am not operating on a whole brain from what I hear. But, then again, I think that can be said of a lot of people about and IN politics.

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

TVII, I would love to be able to say that I am speechless! But LOL, ya gotta know that ain't gonna happen, especially on this subject! I can't even take this advice from Honest Abe-"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." Abraham Lincoln 16th president of US (1809 - 1865). Maybe not so smart after all. I also think that you and I both know a loving God who has already taken our punishment upon Himself (YEAH!)...since He and we all know that none of us is perfect.

This from Posh 08's link-'It’s time to show lawmakers that Virginians can see through this insidious attempt to undermine reproductive rights in Virginia and that we reject its goals of outlawing all abortion and attacking women’s access to common forms of birth control like the pill, emergency contraception and IUDs."


Virginia General Assembly: The "Personhood" Bill Passed in the House, Unborn Child A Person At Conception [AUDIO] | KissRichmond

Virginia delegates pass two of the most restrictive anti-abortion bills ever presented to a state legislature - NY Daily News

It appears that the Virginina House of Delegates has chosen to pass a law giving rights to the "unborn", basically they are declaring that life begins at conception! This does not mean that they have banned contraception. Contra is latin for against or opposite + Conceptio is latin for conceive= contraception. Therefore a contraception is something that is against conception, prevents conception, etc...This law is giving rights to the results of conception. Apparently, rights to those whose conception was not prevented. It does not outlaw methods to prevent conception.
I need to point out though, that IUD's are not a true form of contraception. The presence of a foreign body (an IUD-intrauterine device) in the uterus prevents the fertilized egg (conception has already taken place) from properly implanting into the uterine wall where it can gain nourishment and continue to grow and develop. This result in a very early miscarriage and the woman will never know she had even conceived.

Good post KatzPajamas. My mother had an illness at birth (some kind of fever) which seriously harmed my development during the first six years of my life and made me very slow to develop after that. I am not operating on a whole brain from what I hear. But, then again, I think that can be said of a lot of people about and IN politics. Your links are very good too.

Originally Posted by cologal

Richie.... so sorry but on this point:

But men who are prescribed Viagra are prescribed this drug because of a medical problem and condition. This is not the case with birth control for a healthy woman.

Birth Control pills are used for conditions other than birth control. In fact in my teens I was given these pills in an attempt to control pain. I am providing a link to support this...

Now to the snarky comment, cause I said it..... The Catholic Bishops will not compromise on this issue. As a person who who was raised as a Catholic I can remember being told "Sex is for procreation NOT recreation." Viagra for men whose wives are unable to have children, under the teachings of the church, would be the same as the use of birth control.

But this brings up a larger point... Birth control prevents, to a large extent, unwanted pregnancies. Something I would think those who are against abortion would support. If the pregnancies are not prevented then the children produced have to be supported. But those who are opposed to birth control seem also to be opposed to safety net.

Seems silly to support the men to create, children but not support women to prevent them.


Sexism is alive and well.

The point is; does the law require insurance companies to pay for Viagra?

It it doesn't, your argument is a moot point.

Also, no one on this forum has come out against birth control. Only the forcing of the Catholic Church to have to forfeit it's First Amendment Rights to pay for these drugs.

You're conveniently avoiding this Constitutional Issue.

The VA will provide Viagra free to you. That is Federal government. It is not being forced on men but is there free if they want it. Even Catholic priests could get free Viagra from the VA if they had served in the US Armed Forces (no questions asked as for their need).

Originally Posted by RichieLion

The point is; does the law require insurance companies to pay for Viagra?

It it doesn't, your argument is a moot point.

Also, no one on this forum has come out against birth control. Only the forcing of the Catholic Church to have to forfeit it's First Amendment Rights to pay for these drugs.

You're conveniently avoiding this Constitutional Issue.

Ok....so if the Obama Adminstration came out and mandated that the Catholic Church provide boner meds to all men then you this would be ok.

Did I get that right?

Forget that cause I knew I could count on the hypocricy of the CHURCH!!

Catholic Health Insurance Covers Viagra - Insurance - Families.com


They pay for boner meds.....