comScore
  1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Maude
  8. The Braiser

What's with the name?

Allow us to explain.

hold on to your butts

Virginia State Senator Janet Howell Suggests a Rectal Exam Amendment to a Horrible Abortion Bill


In an attempt to “even things up” while the Virginia senate debated a controversial and upsetting anti-choice bill that would require abortion providers to force women to undergo a vaginal sonogram (an invasive procedure) before going through with the procedure, State Senator Janet Howell proposed an amendment — before obtaining a prescription for erectile dysfunction drugs, men would be subject to rectal exams and stress tests. And that makes Senator Janet Howell today’s official State Senatorial Hero.

The bill, which will be voted on officially in the Republican-led Virginia state senate this week, but has already passed in a voice vote, changes the “informed consent” component to existing abortion laws (because it is still legal), and now women seeking an abortion in the state of Virginia will be subject to a mandatory vaginal sonogram (used in early stages of pregnancy instead of the non-invasive device) to determine the age of the fetus. After that is done, the women must be “given an opportunity” to look at the ultrasound image before going through with the abortion. They have the choice to decline, but not after someone is there to tell them that there is a picture of their fetus they can look at, if they want to. Because what a woman needs the chance to do once she’s made the painstaking decision to end her pregnancy in a state of limited emotional manipulation is to be vaginally probed and then emotionally manipulated.

In protest, Sen. Howell proposed an amendment that takes a look at the genital goings-on of the opposite gender. Her idea? Require men to undergo an invasive digital rectal exam and cardiac stress test before receiving a prescription to an erectile dysfunction medication. Sen. Howell explained to The Huffington Post:

“We need some gender equity here. The Virginia senate is about to pass a bill that will require a woman to have totally unnecessary medical procedure at their cost and inconvenience. If we’re going to do that to women, why not do that to men?”

A purely symbolic gesture, the amendment was rejected — by just two votes. Sen. Howell did not expect it to pass (though she was “pleased” that it still garnered 19 votes), but it raised a glaring issue concerning the role politics has been taking in our privacy and our rights to our own bodies — that anti-choice politicians do not understand or care about the women’s side of the story when it comes to abortion. Feministe points out the serious, gigantic factor that is conveniently brushed off in the abortion conversation:

Right-wing politicians have positioned reproductive rights as about abortion and babies, not as what they really are: Fundamentally tied to the body. Laws like this force that conversation; they force politicians to explain why a procedure tied to female reproduction should included legally-mandated penetration and shame, while male reproduction gets a smile and a prescription.

That said, the sole female senator who voted against the amendment — Sen. Jill Vogel, who was a sponsor of the bill — said that she could not equate erectile dysfunction with pregnancy in this case.

Now, is a digital rectal exam and a cardiac stress test the same as a vaginal sonogram? No. And erectile dysfunction is not comparable to ending a pregnancy. There is simply no male health condition that is equivalent to pregnancy and birth. So no matter what was proposed, despite the degree of invasiveness, there will always be a case of comparing apples and oranges. However, that is still no excuse for politicians to have a say in what is going on inside of women’s bodies.

If anti-choice politicians are this concerned with the comings and goings of the vaginas of strangers, then we should all just start sending them monthly journals about our periods. Since they’re so interested.

(The Huffington Post via Feministe)

TAGS: | | |


  • Anonymous

    Again, I hate “anti-choice” and “pro-life.”  Just call it “anti-abortion” and “pro-abortion,” for crying out loud.

  • Anonymous

    No one is really “pro-abortion,” though. That has a connotation of being all “yeah, abortions for everyone!” No one wants that.

    It really is about being pro-choice, pro-privacy, pro-ability to control your own body, pro-letting medical professionals rather than politicians make rules about abortions.

  • Anonymous

    Agreed.  You can be pro-choice AND against abortions.  Its about having the right to decide for yourself.

  • Anonymous

    (Rereads hashtags carefully)

    Ah, VIRGINIA…

    Never mind.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=681460421 Lauron Haney

    Totally agreed. I feel like the “anti-choice” thrown in by the author at the end is off-putting. It is putting an author’s opinion in as a means of slanting the story. This would be the same if the phrase “anti-life” was used in it too.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=681460421 Lauron Haney

    I guess then using the standard “pro-life” and “pro-choice” terminology would be best then, since that is what the groups call themselves primarily.

    Thoughts?

  • http://twitter.com/burntbythesea Amanda Allen

    I sent her a “keep up the good work/I support you” e-mail, you should do the same!
    SenHowell@gmail.com

  • Anonymous

    That is generally AP style, yes. It makes both groups “sound” good.

  • http://twitter.com/repcory Not Cory Gardner

    But the this “standard” terminology has a serious slant to it too. Labeling one side as pro-life, necessarily means the other side is not pro-life. Who isn’t pro-life? Similarly, labeling one side as anti-abortion implies that the other side is pro-abortion, when they really care about the choice. 

    I am pro-life and anti-abortion, but I am pro-choice. The only opposite to my views on the subject would be “anti-choice.”Anti-choice certainly seems to have a slant to it, since it is different compared to the usual terminology, but that terminology was created by someone with a slant…

  • Zach Noel

    Pro-Life is suggesting that pro-choice is somehow not looking out for life.  Anti-Choice is suggesting that one side of the argument wants to prohibit choice without drawing a connection that either side is pro or anti life.

  • Zach Noel

    I feel that anti and pro choice describe the legal situation the most evenly and clearly.

  • Terence Ng

    SNAP. Love it. It failed, but if you’re going to lose, at least expose as much hypocrisy as you can along the way.

  • Terence Ng

    Second agreement. The idea of being “pro-abortion” is fallacious. It’s pro-choice specifically it is in favor of people being allowed to make the choice to have an abortion.

  • Terence Ng

    I think enough people have made the point clearer than I have. Deleted.

    I’ll reiterate Zach’s comment: The most accurate and unslanted labels are “anti-choice” and “pro-choice”.

  • Amanda W

    Male politicians should be excluded from voting on this issue, having a female representative appointed to vote in their stead for their jurisdiction.

  • http://twitter.com/JediCat1965 MickieMousseau

    When men can have babies, going through the barfing, hormones, body changing, bone popping and pain, then they can have an opinion about what a woman can do with her body. 

  • Anonymous

    Fighting non-consensual invasive procedures with more non-consensual invasive procedures doesn’t really do anything to advance ANYBODY’S rights. ) :   I know it’s tempting to retaliate this way, but I am against ANY coerced medical procedures.  The goal is freedom from oppression, not equal oppression for all.

  • Anonymous

    This Senator is a prime example of what is wrong in Washington. What is so wrong with giving the birth mother every bit of information before making such a big decision(abortion)?
    The Senator’s amendment is all about her own personal views on abortion. Why is she so worried that the birth mother might change her mind when she sees a living baby in the ultrasound? Isn’t it the right thing to do to make sure the birth mother is totally aware of what she is doing?
    The Senator isn’t making decisions in the best interests of the people. And, she doesn’t give a damn about men getting exams. Total manipulation of the process to push her agenda.
    If you let her do this, don’t complain about the inability of Washington to get anything done that really matters.

  • Anonymous

    “What is so wrong with giving the birth mother every bit of information before making such a big decision(abortion)?”

    Wrong question. The actual question is “what is wrong about forcing a woman to have an invasive procedure and then force her to pay for it to get access to something that should be her right in the first place?”

    My answer is plenty. Plenty is wrong with that.

  • Anonymous

    This comment is a prime example of what is wrong with people in the US.  I’m certain that any information regarding a pregnancy in my body is a matter for myself and my doctor.  I do not need a state law that requires me to have an invasive and unnecessary procedure meant only to shame and inconvenience me. 
    Perhaps the commenter misread the article and missed the part about it being to my cost to have this unnecessary procedure done.  I’m sure my insurance isn’t going to cover something it deems unnecessary and if I can’t afford to raise a child, how am I going to afford this?  With how other state assistance programs are treated (at least in my state) I don’t see any government agency willing to pay for this either. 
    This condescending comment assumes that I somehow will make the “wrong” choice without the state shoving a probe up my vagina.  The Senator at least doesn’t try to make me look ill-informed but instead outlines the hypocrisy in how the government treats gender and medicine. 

  • Anonymous

    Do you honestly think a lot of people are going in for abortions not knowing full well what it is they’re doing? Do you think that women are scheduling these appointments, going in for consultations, and in many cases, being harassed (by protestors, by strangers, by family and friends) for this choice under the impression that an abortion is some kind of hat?

    Or is it more likely that these women know EXACTLY what an abortion is, and why they need one, and to forcibly show them an ultrasound is not only pretty insulting to their intelligence, but an emotionally manipulative move to try and guilt women out of going through with a decision they have already made?

    You’re correct, this senator wasn’t actually concerned about men getting exams. But in drawing the parallel, she’s made an effective point: We’re fine with the government interfering in women’s health and bodily integrity, but slowing down the process of men’s abilities to have sex is going tooooooo far. This Senator HAS gotten something done that matters: Getting people (including her fellow Senators, presumably) to think about the way we are STILL approaching women’s health.

  • Guest

    How about the rights of ladies who need to know what they are doing from every viewpoint? You’re like the Senator, you don’t give a damn about anyone else but yourself.
    The government pays for many important things, why aren’t you just pushing that the
    government pay for these ultrasounds? I think the benefits of an ultrasound that would help many many women make a better informed decision about abortion FAR outweighs the
    inconvenience of an ultrasound to YOU!

  • http://twitter.com/RockShrimp Willow

    Pro-tip. The VA State Senate isn’t in Washington. And there’s a shit ton of things wrong with Richmond, but Sen. Howell isn’t one of them.

    If you can’t comprehend the article, I’m going to have to presume you can’t comprehend complex political processes or maneuvers either.

  • Anonymous

    Interesting that you won’t attach your name to your post, Guest.  I think it is because you know, fundamentally, you are wrong.  About the government paying for things you don’t agree with, I didn’t agree with the war, but my taxes helped to support it.  It is a part of the public good, and you don’t get to pick and choose where your tax dollars go, except with your votes.

  • Anonymous

    Also, nice double post to bump yourself to the top of the list.  You are pathetic.

  • Anonymous

    This makes me want to punch things, and so do some of these comments, but I see hope – in the women in politics fighting for women’s health, and in the narrow margin that the men’s version failed.

  • http://twitter.com/loverofGCW Happy Drunk Chick

    You idiot – if a woman wants a ultrasound in order to get more information about her pregnancy she can get one if she wants.  Your point does not make sense.  Right now there is no law that prevents women from getting necessary medical procedures and no law preventing women from being informed about said procedures.  The point is that this amendment would FORCE women to get a procedure that as they said is UNNECESSARY.

    And how insulting to say “a better informed decision.”  As said in the article – do you really think these women are making the choice lightly?  That their doctors are telling them nothing, and they just have no clue what an abortion is or means?  There is NO new information gained from this ultrasound – the age & size of the fetus would have already been determined. (hint that’s why it’s unnecessary).

  • John Wao

    Well played, Senator, well played indeed.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/KBZL6FYRUDEDGMFYSEGC42IOQ4 LeahH

    What this senator did was satirical and ironically amusing, but in the end, I agree with those of you who state that having the right to choose is the issue at hand here; this is an invasive procedure that is unnecessary to the abortion process/issue.

    Also, has anyone checked the statistics on the Department of Health’s website concerning teen pregnancy, abortion rates, and other relevant statistics?

    The reality of the situation here is that we wouldn’t need abortions in domestic situations (i.e. barring situations if the baby wasn’t conceived willingly, the mother wasn’t at risk of dying, as well as other situations, etc.) if the US would consider allowing REAL sex education classes to occur in schools, as well as allow clinics such as Planned Parenthood and other organizations to open in areas that really need them.

    Too many young teens and even adults lack the necessary information to take care of themselves in a healthy manner. Abstinence is great in theory, but if we’re honest here, sooner or later teens and adults are going to be having sex, whether we like it or not. Either teach both abstinence and safety, or create the “problems” the majority of society bitches constantly about. And if you don’t believe me, take a look at other countries and their abortion rates. They seem kinda low in recent years, don’t they? GUESS WHY.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/P5ZO3JWXJHU4BO675ZKBC5SAIY Sarah

    Fair, but sadly, NOT advocating for invasive male procedures to protest ones for women will do nothing to advance women’s rights either. I agree with you – no non-consensual invasive procedures should be legislated to be performed on anybody, but at least here Sen. Howell has, at least in some small way, let men see what this type of legislation does to women.

  • Adam Whitley

    The problem is then they start making those stupid bumper stickers saying “it’s a child not a choice” and it just murks up the issue that much further.

  • Adam Whitley

    I must contest, not to side with any senator or anything but the arguments seem to make this as a case of men trying to legislate women’s bodies and sometimes that is the case BUT there’s plenty of women on the right who are just as if not more against abortions being legal. Also the religious component has made it so that people fully believe that life begins at conception and that murder is being committed.

  • Victoria Eden

    “If anti-choice politicians are this concerned with the comings and goings of the vaginas of strangers, then we should all just start sending them monthly journals about our periods. Since they’re so interested.”

    Pure gold right there.

  • Anonymous

    1) ‘Guest,’ if that’s even your real name, I encourage you to learn what an ultrasound is. Since you think you’re so smart.

    2) Your very first sentence is in contrast to your last sentence. You start off concern-trolling about how women need to *understand* abortion before considering one and then you automatically assume looking at a grainy, blurry, black-and-white photo of the outline of an unborn child is the same thing as educating yourself about what an abortion is? Lol, really? Your comment just proves that you yourself don’t understand what an abortion is and how it works if you think an ultrasound is some kind of magic prevention tool.

    3) Go fuck yourself for trying to paint the Senator as some selfish beast with a vendetta (I read your other comment claiming she’s got an agenda). Just like all people who can’t stand to have their privilege pointed out to them, you’re just pissy because the Senator called out the unfairness and cruelty of intrusive vaginal examinations. And you’re also pissy because for a MILLISECOND, you thought about how you might feel if you lost your privilege to reproductive health and had to be subjected to something just as equally intrusive and cruel in the form of having a doctor stick a medical tool up your ass. In short: The Senator is a BOSS. Don’t hate the playa, hate the game, honey. Plus, it didn’t even pass. So WTF are you so mad about? Get off our fucking boards with your whiny bullshit.

    4) Yeah… go fuck yourself. *turns off game console, turns on cable*

  • Amber Barnes

    Because a mandatory sonogram, while not only invasive and insulting to the intelligence of women as others have pointed out, also adds more and more money to the overall cost of abortion. 

    The most common seekers of abortion are lower class, poor and minority women. Women who dont have health insurance, no benefits from their job(s). Women who are already losing money by taking the time off work or school to go to these clinics, which are often several hours drive away (because so many have been shut down under financial starvation, threats of violence and death, lawsuits, or anti-choice legislators using things like zoning laws to force clinics out of their buildings) and depending on the state, have to either shell out the money for a hotel room or make repeat trips (due to mandatory waiting periods). 

    Abortion, thanks to the Hyde Amendment and other redundant legislation, is not covered by Medicaid/Medicare and there’s a push to make it so that private insurance is not allowed to cover it either. This means that the woman is forced very often to foot the entire cost of the procedure herself, which can be hundreds of dollars.

    Adding on extraneous procedures like this sonogram only raises that cost. Even with the increasingly thin funding PP is getting, the patient still accrues additional cost, which means that many women of color, poor, unemployed, or abuse victims either resort to disastrous other means of abortion or are forced to carry the unwanted pregnancy. 

    So not only does the sonogram add insult and injury to the already difficult choice of abortion for all women, but it also unfairly targets racial minorities who are much more likely to be poor or struggling financially to afford the procedure. 

  • Anonymous

    I don’t think that it is right to deny all the people of an ‘inherent-trait’-group their opinion in a matter just because they belong to their group and the matter does not affect their group directly. I don’t think that just because someone is born a man means he can never form a proper opinion on a female matter (and vice versa). Though in female matters it might be a bit more prudent to ensure men are educated than to ensure women are educated (and vice versa).  

  • Anonymous

    What I said to Amanda W. Men are capable of empathy, therefor their opinions do have value in principle.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VK7U6RFTAUIPW2JR2NGPBP2IYA super

    so where do people that support pro choice or pro abortion try to make abortions rare?    Why every year on the anniversary of the Roe Vs wade decision you almost never hear about Ms Roes current position on Abortion ;) 
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_McCorvey

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VK7U6RFTAUIPW2JR2NGPBP2IYA super

    With the exception of rape…in the 21st century with modern birth control and modern information there is no real reason to become pregnant unexpectedly.  You have the choice when you said yes in bed.  The fact that you did so after having a few drinks and oops forgot to use contraceptive because you were just so turned on doesn’t negate the choice you already had.  You had right then choose to accept the risks.  That is a CHOICE!!  All what people who are pro choice want is an opportunity to avoid taking responsibility for their actions.  You already had a choice now you just desire to have a second chance at making that choice again.     

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R6ODYVHCB23JAQC33NPS5RLUN4 Kifre

    Wow! And here I was thinking that sometimes BC fails,can be prohibitively expensive or hard to get, and that a large number of schools still push abstinence only sex ed! But no, none of those seem to undermine your notion of meaningful choice.  
    And this whole “after a few drinks” business…how man consent eroding beverages are we talking about here?And lastly, and most perplexingly, why is seeking an abortion always considered *avoiding* responsibility? I don’t get why taking a legal, safe course of action to avoid a life changing and potentially un-managable event is seen as dodging responsibility .

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R6ODYVHCB23JAQC33NPS5RLUN4 Kifre

    So, how about the fact that checking a man’s cardiac health prior to prescribing him viagra actually does more to further the health interests of that man than the sonogram furthers those of the woman?  

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AOFTU2AM7WRZZFDC6SPN4XF6KQ Null

    I disagree. People are stupid. They screw up. Often. Condoms break or aren’t used, contraceptive pills aren’t taken properly (or are lied about), Plan B is not infallible, etc. I’d rather have the option around, because someone is going to need it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AOFTU2AM7WRZZFDC6SPN4XF6KQ Null

    They’re still fighting the cultural war of the 60s against casual sex. But you knew that.

  • Anonymous

    With the exception of rape? THAT’S your only exception? What about health concerns for the Mother? Health concerns for the CHILD? Would you make someone carry their child to term, knowing for months that it would die a few hours after birth?

    Beyond that, thank you for equating my choice with the desire to call mulligan on a drunken mistake. That’s how everyone who chooses abortion gets there, right? They’re so drunk, so horny and abortion is plentiful so who needs to be concerned about taking precautions anyway?

    The slutshaming is kind of strong, here.

  • Anonymous

    And the dude? Where is his responsibility in this? What are his consequences for “oops”? And if nothing, what kind of equality do you expect in a society where one group’s sexual behavior is given a free pass on consequences (STDs aside) and the other’s is considered solely accountable?
     
    And really, the ease with which you say only rape is an excuse is just ridiculous. What if the pregnancy is a danger to the mother’s health? What if the baby would be born with a serious deficiency? Who decides what qualifies as a serious deficiency? What about women who would lose their securities in life if they’d go through with the pregnancy? What about the child born from such a mother? What about women who believed pregnancy to be the step up to a deeper relationship only to find their man split on them? And in case of rape as a sufficient argument for abortion, then how should that be handled legally? Does one first have to go to court to prove rape before abortion is legal, or can it happen before but become a murder charge if the rape is not proven? What if the rape can’t be legally proven? What about the women who don’t report a rape out of fear for repurcussions? What about the women who can’t recognize/acknowledge they’ve been raped?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7GVNIKWG3S2UTHEQOMSZXT4M4 Anna B

    Also, I think the bigger point is that Sen. Howell’s true intentions wasn’t to pass the rectal exam bill–she already knew it wasn’t going to pass, but she was making a loud point. That, she did.

  • Anonymous

    I believe you hear pro-choice people trying to make abortion rare in excellent facilities such as Planned Parenthood. You might have heard of them. They are best known for their distribution of contraception and factual medical information (and they also do such things as low-cost pap smears and cancer screenings)! Isn’t it great that such a great non-profit exists?
    I’m sure you agree. They’d appreciate your donation. ;)

  • Jen H

    How about instead of before ED treatments, before they can get treated for rectal cancer?

    “Before we can remove this painful mass that’s literally sucking away your life I need to probe you at length and palpitate said mass–here, put your hand under mine, that’s where the thing is that can kill you. Now listen while I describe it.”

    Who cares if it’s not ‘reproductive’ thing; the shame on their faces would be so funny to watch!  

  • http://sdhardie.tumblr.com Sheila

    No, the only distinction is “pro choice” and “anti choice”. No one LIKES abortions so “pro abortion” doesn’t work. Nobody is really “anti life” so “pro life” doesn’t work either. You either support personal freedom to make one’s own decisions, or you don’t. So “Pro-Choice” and “Anti-Choice” are the only viable options. The anti-choicers know that “anti choice” sounds bad, that’s why they try to make it sound better by using “pro life”.

  • http://sdhardie.tumblr.com Sheila

    Spoken like a man.

  • http://sdhardie.tumblr.com Sheila

    Exactly!! Abortions would be nearly non-existant if the f’ing religious nut jobs would stop pushing for “abstinence only” “education”. arghhhhh

  • http://sdhardie.tumblr.com Sheila

    In my mind, there is only one question to ask of our elected officials: “Do you believe the United States government has the right and duty to make medical decisions for its citizens, be they male or female?” If they answer yes, don’t vote for them.

  • Anonymous

    Err I’m pro-abortion thank you very much. 

  • Tamra Burgess

    but what kills me (no pun intended): once fetus is born Bob McDonnell wouldn’t give two sh*ts about them, esp if NON-WHITE, POOR or wouldn’t support his confederate azz. he’d not only let them die, but try to find a Koch way to kill them

    but wait until his broke down state has more babies in foster care which will increase burden on state. oh foster care, that’s the mythical place that pro-lifers think is magical DISNEYWORLD 24/7 for UNWANTED, NEGLECTED KIDS

  • Adam Whitley

    I’m going to say that it’s not spoken like a man because I don’t speak like that.

  • Adam Whitley

    You’re right there should be more unwanted children in the world so people can learn their lesson! ::cue eye rolling::

  • soule2soule

    I beg to differ on this statement.  Our school has a very high pregnancy rate and does teach birth control.

  • soule2soule

    Although I do understand what is trying to be done here, the question is really about when we consider life to begin.  I believe life begins at conception, therefore, abortion is murder.  Others I know do not agree, but with that being said, we do not end the lives of people who are disabled for any of a variety of reasons so why would it be acceptable to end the life of a baby just because it has not left the womb yet?  Or for that matter if it has nothing at all wrong with it?

    I agree that we make our choices prior to having concentual sex.  In the number of cases where it is not concentual, harmful to the mother, etc. I understand the dilema.  But still do not agree with abortion.  Most abortions are not done under these circumstances anyway.  If you do not want children, the options are there and the education is there.  If it is not, then take the responsibility to get it or take the time to teach it to your children.  The answer is personal responsibility, not abortion.

  • Anonymous

    Abortion is about choice. Both from the man and the woman. If you choose to have sex, then there is a good chance a baby will be created that will require responsible action by both sexes.
    As much as a man who walks away from his responsibilities when he knows he’s gotten a woman pregnant disgusts me, also, when I know of a woman who chooses to have an abortion after having consensual sex and creating a baby, it equally disgusts me.

    Lets drop all the talk of religious groups, right wingers, whether it’s a state senator or US Senator abusing her power, or any other subject that might cloud the subject. Having an abortion, in most cases, is about a woman too careless and lazy to just take precautions or not have sex. That is the time when a woman should make her choice.

    The only point that people should remember through all these discussions is that a living child is being killed. A baby, that with normal responsible care on the part of the woman,
    and the man, would go on to be a teenager, a young adult, and most likely, a parent themselves.
    No matter how pissed off and rude you get, you can’t get around that fact.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R6ODYVHCB23JAQC33NPS5RLUN4 Kifre

    No, the question HERE with regards to THIS bill, is how far will the state go to add expense, inconvenience, and  frankly humiliation into the equation for a woman (but not men) seeking a legal medical care relating to their sexual health.  VA could try and pass a personhood law – which would be problematic for different reasons – but they’re not.  So the question really isn’t “when we consider life to begin.”

    Idk, seems to me that if we want people to ‘be responsible’ we’d treat them like adults rather than whittling away their autonomy with laws designed to shame them.

  • Jen H

    Except a woman didn’t always have sex by her own free will. This bill would say to those women, ‘it was your fault someone decided to use your own body against you; now listen how I describe the way they get to use it against you for the next nine months at least.’

    Even IF they adopt that child out, they have to go to sleep knowing that somewhere out there, a rapist’s child lives and breathes. Seeing that it’s en proen there’s a genetic component to whether a perobecomsexually violent, she gets to lie there knowing she just doomed someone else to the horror she suffered through.

    Also, it’s not a baby at conception. Doesn’t look like one, doesn’t act like one, just a ball of cells that quickly begins quickly to vampirize the mother’s body. It feeds off her blood, and can cause anemia, diabetes, circulatory collapse andan make her go blind. Even assuming she survives the birth–and even in this day and age, that is far from certain–our new mother now has to either find a suitable home with people who might by some miracle prevent this thing she spawn from becoming a sexual predator, or else raise it herself and every single day get reminded of the worst night of her life. If she’s lucky, maybe she’s married and at least has help raising this  devil thing—but if she’s going for an abortion, probably not. So now she has to find a way to work and support them both while still arrangin for childcare. The number of companies who provide free employee childcare is still depressingly small. Women still make less money than men, so things will always be tight and she may have to go on those dreaded welfare systems. The same ones that religious nutjobs like you want to cut, to punish women like her. Oh, and the beauty of it is, even if she gets food subsidized, things like diapers, warm clothes, heat in the winter, shoes and inevitable doctors’ visits are all still there to bankrupt her! And again, the religious right wants to say she doesn’t need or deserve them, because she has a uterus. Even if she can  get low-income housing–again, not a certainty–it will be in an area given to drugs and crime, thus ensuring this child is perpetually trapped in a cycle of poverty that brings it back around to its origins when it rapes someone else.

    Break the cycle. The only real reason to support that st is if you hate women and think they should suffer because of their gender.  

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/K7XMFYPOVGHCDCVOIPF6VZH5L4 SHERRYB

    Not pro-abortion, pro-choice.  Get it right.  Just because I’m pro a woman’s right to choose doesn’t mean that I would get one myself.  I think it’s an awful decision to have to make, sad and wrenching and every situation is different.  It’s also that sad and wrenching aspect that makes it MY decision not yours.  It’s a decision I have to live with not you and I would never presume to make that kind of decision for anyone else including you. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R6ODYVHCB23JAQC33NPS5RLUN4 Kifre

    “Having an abortion, in most cases, is about a woman too careless and lazy to just take precautions or not have sex. ”

    Misogyny and slut shaming are pretty disgusting too.

  • Anonymous

    There’s a huge difference between being disabled and being an embryo or fetus. A disabled person generally doesn’t immediately die if bereft from support. An embryo and fetus do. Also, a disabled person does not require one specific other person to ensure they remain alive, while an embryo and fetus do.

  • http://twitter.com/SylviaSybil Sylvia

     ”they have to go to sleep knowing
    that somewhere out there, a rapist’s child lives and breathes [...] she gets to lie there knowing she just doomed someone else to the horror she suffered through”

    Thank you so much for reminding us all that evil is genetic. And here I was starting to think I was an actual human being with actual human rights. I guess all the children born of rapists (and with a minimum of one in six American women surviving rape, there are a lot of us) should just turn ourselves into the cops now before we DOOM someone to the pain our mothers suffered.

    Seriously, though. A million good reasons to support the right to choose and you decided on genetic evil.

  • Jen H

    It’s been proven, cher. Sad to say, and maybe not all chilren of rapists will go on to hurt someone else, but why take the chance? You kill a dog that has rabies, even if it’s the dumb type of rabies, the kind that just makes the animal want to cower and hide. Why not do the same here? Harm reduction, that’s all.

  • http://twitter.com/SylviaSybil Sylvia

    1) Got a link with your so-called proof? That’s not evo-psych, I mean. Something with hard science behind it. Until then, I call bullshit.

    2) The children of rapists, such as myself, are PEOPLE. Not DISEASED ANIMALS. Shit, what is wrong with you that you even thought to type that?

  • Anonymous

    Your theory would only work in a world where every pregnancy was wanted, was the result of a loving relationship, every couple conceiving children had the money to properly raise that child and every pregnancy was perfect and smooth and no mother has medical problems or particularly challenging pregnancies due to circumstances out of her control… ever.

  • http://twitter.com/C4bl3Fl4m3 Cable Flame

    I beg to differ on “anti-choice” being unslanted. The accurate and unslanted labels are “anti-legal-abortion” and “pro-legal-abortion”. Or, if we’re also talking about birth control “anti-legal-contraception” and “pro-legal-contraception”. No value judgements either way there, just talking about support on laws. They’re unwieldy, but they’re ACCURATE.

    Anti-choicers believe in various choices… adoption, childrearing, having relatives raise the child. Pro-choicers can be, personally, for themselves, anti-abortion. The terms “pro-life”, “pro-choice”, “anti-choice”, and “pro-abortion” are all slanted terms.

    And, FWIW, I’m pro-legal-abortion.

  • http://twitter.com/C4bl3Fl4m3 Cable Flame

    I prefer “pro-legal-abortion” and “anti-legal-abortion” as stated in my above comment. No value judgements either way there.

  • http://twitter.com/C4bl3Fl4m3 Cable Flame

    I fail to see what this has to do with girl geek culture. (Yes, women are affected by these issues, but what does it have to do with geekery?) It just seems like a TON of flamebait. I come here to escape politics. (Living in Washington DC, it’s VERY hard to do.)

  • Terence Ng

    I disagree. The term “choice” is specifically referencing the freedom to choose to have or not have an abortion, not all the variety of choices available for someone who is pregnant, let alone in any context for any problem or issue conceivable.

  • http://twitter.com/valliant Kat

    Also, the cost and physical danger.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JR2Y33CNRLLY2OGAYZKJDYZ2UI G

    I hope she reintroduces it and reintroduces it and reintroduces it – who knows, a tired legislature might accidentally vote aye one time, lol. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Personally I’m waiting for the first lawsuit based on battery.

  • Gee Are

    If you care to get out of your bubble of ignorance, than you would see that these women have many reasons to get an abortion. Very few of them are because they are because they are careless and lazy, as you put it. A good chunk of abortions are due to the pregnancy being diagnosed as too dangerous to continue.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/UPX6UBH4QESU6CIXPIWKPAVCTA WisePati

    Because it is not always pro-abortion, though it is always anti-abortion.  I myself would prefer that every baby is born wanted and is conceived in love, but that is not the case as long as there are MEN out there willing to rape or commit incest.  Abortion should not be used as birth control, but only when birth control fails.  In a perfect world there would be no need for abortion, but self control has gone out the window.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/UPX6UBH4QESU6CIXPIWKPAVCTA WisePati

    What about incest?  What about rape in marriage?  What about the failure of birth control?   When they say the pill is 99% effective they mean it,  1 percent of people get pregnant even on the pill.  I agree that people need to think more before they act, but in this society with its emphasis on sex and hormones running rampant I doubt it is possible. I hope that someday you are not in a position to regret one of YOUR choices, but then maybe you are perfect.

  • Anonymous

    even geeks have the right to not have forcible vaginal probes wrapped in condoms inserted in the doctors office…

  • Anonymous

    It’s obvious that no one here has had a sonogram probe or you’d realize that your argument makes no sense.

  • Anonymous

    Oh, you are drinking the kool aid. There are no such facts in existence. 50 million abortions were diagnosed as too dangerous to continue? You are a moron.

  • Anonymous

    That’s right.

  • Anonymous

    At conception it is a human being. Did you take bio in High School?

  • Anonymous

    What? Dumb type of rabies? What the hey? Boy, I hope you don’t vote.

  • Anonymous

    And what if it has something wrong with it? So what? You think then it’s okay to kill it?

  • Anonymous

    So? What’s your point? A baby is dependent on someone to ensure it remains alive.
    ost of us are until we’re about 18.

  • Anonymous

    No the question is when does life begin because few on this post know the answerv and most of America hasn’t a clue.

  • Anonymous

    Who cares what McD thinks–don’t people have families anymore–is everyone always looking to the state for a freakin handout? Thwen you complain when they’re up your whazoo? What the hell is wrong with you people.

  • Anonymous

    The anti-life, money making, lie peddling politicians are determined to take all self-respect away from women.

  • Anonymous

    Casual sex is what dogs do.

  • Anonymous

    Believe life begins at conception? How old are you? That is when life begins you clown.

  • Anonymous

    What about the word “specific” do you not get? Anyone can volunteer or have a job to take care of children or disabled people. However, there’s only one person who can take care of a fetus/embryo. We don’t force people to sacrifice part of their time and life to take care of others – we’d consider that a form of slavery or even abuse. Comparing the forced care of a fetus/embryo to the voluntary care of children or disabled people is saying that slavery and abuse are okay. The two cases are not comparable in the least.

  • Anonymous

    It is dehumanizing the child and making it property that is the enslavementin the argument. That’s the abuse. Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    So disabled people are enslaved?

    Seriously, all I went into is that your comparison stinks and makes no sense. Everything else I did not go into. So this thing about dehumanizing what you mistake for a child? Not relevant to what I said.

    Gotta ask though, what kind of ‘property’ is forced on people?

  • Anonymous

    Mistake for a child? When does human life begin?
    Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    Disabled people are enslaved? Are you insane?
    Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    Only a person who is totally ignorant of history could say the comparison makes no sense. You are obviously such a person. Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    A baby does.

  • Anonymous

    Personal attacks are the last ditch effort of someone who knows they are wrong. In particular the fact you keep responding without me saying anything is pretty revealing – does my opinion keeps you frothing at the mouth that long? Poor you.

    I’m not medically educated, so I couldn’t tell you the exact time it takes for a fetus to become considered a child. A fetus can at the earliest survive outside the womb at five months pregnancy, so I think that makes a good limit to start considering a fetus/baby a person and deny abortion (give or take special circumstances such as a severe deficiency being discovered at that point and the parents choosing to not make the child suffer).

  • Anonymous

    Shame? Are you nuts? What shame is there in a sonogram?

  • Anonymous

    Ever hear of Obamacare?

  • Anonymous

    You are an idiot.

  • Anonymous

    Fully believe? It’s scienctific facvt when life begins–fertilization=conception.

  • Anonymous

    Look it up. Human life begins at conception. No one owns another human being–if we did, it would be called property as in slavery times. Since we all started developing at conception, this is an issue of human rights–no parent owns their child whether in the womb or out of it.

  • Anonymous

    Do children own their parents then? Does the state own women then?

  • Jen H

    Do you deny it would be hilarious to see those in power brought low? Then you are more the fool than I, Small Brain.

  • Anonymous

    People are not property. The state makes and enforces laws–the state is merely clarifying a healthcare procedure necessay prior to surgery-a surgery to kill a child. Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Jen H

    See that right there is proof you have nothing to say and that no one should respect you as a person. If you’re spouting stupid tripe like that it means you are mentally bankrupt and have no original thoughts in your head, ever.

  • Jen H

    BUHBUHBUH MAH PWECIOUS SLUTSHAMING!!!! UHBAW!!!!!

  • Anonymous

    That’s an answer to your stupid question.

  • Anonymous

    All your posts are show your stupidity. By stupidity I mean you have never researched anything you talk about. You just repeat propaganda–and don’t even know what propaganda is.

  • Anonymous

    Go read your history. How did slavery work in this country? What were the laws that supported it? I’m very sorry for assuming I was talking to an intelligent well-read person.

  • Anonymous

    Really, you bully. How dare you suggest that you are the only one that deserves respect. You have no clue what the word even means. Prove me wrong-let’s see your though provoking definition. Go ahead- make me laugh. Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    And I hate it when people call themselves intelligent but work from the stupidest of assumptionss that everyone on the internet is a USAian.

  • Anonymous

    It’s not about religion. It’s about information. The left blocks access to facts. Their followers believe propaganda. They argue for propaganda and are not even aware that they have been duped.
    Religions just agree with the scientific fact that biologists know exactly when life begins. The left pretends the answer is unknown. Go do research. Go consult an obstetrician, a neonatalogist. The information is everyone except in left-wing ideological banter.
    No one is legislating women’s bodies–you are just a pawn who drank the kool aid and now espouses it as your “belief” systyem.

  • Anonymous

    The procedure is not invasive. Consent is built into the procedure because a woman administers the probe herself under the direction of a med. tech. Amniocentisis is
    invasive, dangerous and women who are clueless request it.

  • Anonymous

    In my experience it is always others, like you, that use the word intelligent when discussing me. No one could possibly use that word to describe your uninformed, bullying diatribes.

  • Anonymous

    Virginia State Senator Jan Howell should be voted out of office immediately largely because she is too stupid to represent people because she doesn’t even bother to do the slightest bit of homework or research before she opens her mouth. She is equating a woman’s pregnancy with a man’s life and death battle with a deadly disease and comparing the two and threatening men’s health? This is a sick woman.

  • Anonymous

    Dude, your mud-throwing is starting to bore me. It’s sleepy time over here, so I bid you a good night. 

  • Anonymous

    Many men don’t walk away. Many men have begged the woman to have the baby and let him raise his child. Why isn’t that spoken of here? Why don’t men have any right to protect the unborn child that is half created by them? There is case after case where men want their children and the girl spits in his face and aborts the child for spite. Wake up, America. Abortion is a disgusting, despicable, bit of eugenics spun by Margaret Sanger–see Buck v Bell. Educate yourselves.

  • Anonymous

    This in from Jen H. –resident genius on this forum:
    It’s been proven, cher. Sad to say, and maybe not all chilren of rapists will go on to hurt someone else, but why take the chance? You kill a dog that has rabies, even if it’s the dumb type of rabies, the kind that just makes the animal want to cower and hide. Why not do the same here? Harm reduction, that’s all.

  • Anonymous

    Rabies? The dumb kind? Brilliant.

  • Anonymous

    OMG! Listen Jen. Why doesn’t the girl who has a baby out of wedlock do a little thinking. How about she tells the government to go screw itself and she moves in with her favorite Aunt or cousin. They share the housework and share taking care of the beautiful baby. They take turns going to work–day shift/night shift and start saving their money. They stockpile tons of cash and buy a small house with an extra little apartment way out of the bad neighborhood. They rent out the apt. and that money pays their mortgage. They work, save their money and buy a sensible car. Then they pay cash for a trip to disney with the little kid and have a blast. WHY the hell would anyone let the government dictate their lives UNLESS they’re in the game to try to rip off the government–guess what? They lost long ago and the government they thought they were getting over on destroyed their lives, their families and their neighborhoods.
    Time to grow up and get to work and stop pretending you can’t provide for yourself.

  • Anonymous

    Of course women make less than men; men put in more hours than women do.

  • Anonymous

     I’m sorry but you are an idiot that doesn’t know what they are talking about. An ‘invasive procedure’ means that something enters the body, in this case the ultrasound probe. It doesn’t matter if the woman administers it herself.

    You are a moron.

  • Anonymous

    You never learned how to use pronouns?
    Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    Yes it matters when one speaks of consent and that’s the topic we’re discussing. Focus. Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Jen H

    Except that it isn’t, because it doesn’t answer anything.

  • Jen H

    I never once stated I was the only one deserving of respect, I just explained that I now know you aren’t. And really? You’re honestly stupid enough to need someone else to define ‘respect’ for you? Wow, I used to think you were actively evil but now I just pity you as the pathetic small-brained loser you’re rapidly proving yourself to be.

  • Anonymous

    Isn’t it?
    Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    Grow up and just write the definition. I know it scares you to actually learn something, but try it you may be surprise yourself. Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Jen H

    On the contrary, I’m doing a rather massive project on it right now, so lots of research goes into it. You’re just a sad misogynist who wants to control women. I pity you.

  • Jen H

    For some reason I can’t reply to your most reason post so you get my response up here, deal with it.

    No, I will not define ‘respect’ for you, because you don’t deserve any. Your lack of human decency, empathy, and blatant disregard for women who want to make their own choices about their own bodies has proven this over and over. Until I read your comments I always thought the patriarchy was a myth, a boogieman conjured up by manhating lesbians but now I see the truth—the patriachy is any man who tries to demand things from a woman, and thinks he should have the right to do so solely because he has a penis and she does not. I will define that for you, and it’s easy to do; just get up from your computer and go look into a mirror.

    That grimacing, ugly face staring back at you? That is the patriarchy. That is you. That is what is wrong with society. You know what you have to do, Sparky–go take one of the guns you surely have lying around your shack, pop its muzzle between your lips, think of the president, and pull the trigger. Go on, nip off and do it now, there’s a good boy. The world will be that much better for your absence.  

  • Jen H

    No, it isn’t. Are you honestly delusional enough to think you typed out more than you really did? Don’t answer that; the layers of irony would warp your pathetic mind.

  • Anonymous

    I’m a woman, you moron.

  • Anonymous

    Let’s talk about what you think about rabies cause that’s really funny.

  • Anonymous

    What do you think mandatory immunization means?

  • Anonymous

    Maybe you should start using your brain and think instead of your senses.. Anti-life and pro-life translates to Death v Life. Choose Life.

  • Anonymous

    Men should have the right to defend the life that they helped create.

  • Anonymous

    No one has the right to kill another human being because they feel like it.

  • Anonymous

    Exactly.

  • Anonymous

    Slut slamming. What does that mean? Women who have no respect for themselves or their bodies?

  • Anonymous

    What about use your brain. All of these scenarios are about people who behave like idiots. A baby with a deficiency? So what? They shouldn’t live? You’re deficient and no one wants you dead.

  • Anonymous

    What about it? None of that is the baby’s fault. The child is half made by the mother. The violence of rape (2% of abortions) or incest (even less)–this is out of 100%–isn’t going away because someone has an abortion. If people were properly educated about how their bodies worked, they would enter the emergency room right after said crime and get a DNC. The fact that no one knows this is a problem. The fact thast no one knows that sperm live inside a woman for up to 72 hours is a problem–women have a responsibility to figure out how their body operates. Read the dam,n owner’s manual–it’s called the female reproductive system and stop making excuses for your own stupidity.

  • Anonymous

    You know any unwanted children? Were you one?

  • Anonymous

    Slut SHAMING. And it’s nothing a quick google search won’t answer for you. But I have a sneaking suspicion an answer isn’t quite what you’re looking for.

  • Anonymous

    So, Adam, when does human life begin–I’m assuming you took bio and thast you attended a high school.

  • Anonymous

    WELCOME!! How many of your children have you killed so far?

  • Anonymous

    Right. Planned Parenthood referred 387,000 people for abortion and 186 for adoption. Great record.

  • Anonymous

    Right. Why say no when you can live your life like an alley cat!

  • Jen H

    That proves nothing. Women can internalize misogyny just like men can, as you have so handily proven.

  • Anonymous

    Please include the numbers of people who never even got pregnant in the first place, thanks to the low-cost contraceptives they picked up at PP. That’s a more honest picture.

  • Jen H

    Yup, clearly delusional. Permit me to feel sad and embarrassed on your behalf?

  • Anonymous

    Ha!
    Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    Dozens. 

  • Anonymous

    Low cost? They’re free-you paid for them.
    Sent from my BlackBerry® powered by Virgin Mobile.

  • Anonymous

    I suppose you go to college, don’t you?

  • Anonymous

    And still can’t get a man to stay with you? You should be sterile by now.

  • Jen H

    Guest/ms34667whatever seems to have vanished, but yes, I am in college now. and it’s become readily obvious you are not and never were.

  • Anonymous

    Where did I say I was single?