Virginia Republicans pull out

As many of you may already know as this was in the news last week, the Virginia Republicans amended their forced sonogram bill to keep the forced sonograms but no longer require that a vaginal probe be inserted. As an aside, Texas already has a forced sonogram law, and Alabama is now looking to formulate such a bill. Big government in private lives.

With regard to the Virginia legislation, the intro in the article below is a little misleading. The bill is still going forward and will require women seeking an abortion to get a medically unecessary sonogram. What is "optional" is insertion of a vaginal probe. One side signficance from a poltical standpoint was that Governor McDonnell apparently looking to advance in the national stage and justify his requested amendment, referred to abortion as a "medical procedure," which is never referred as such by the anti-choice people.

McDonnell, Virginia Republicans back off mandatory invasive ultrasounds

RICHMOND — A controversial bill that would require women to get an ultrasound before an abortion is now in doubt after Virginia Gov. Robert F. McDonnell diluted the measure Wednesday by making it optional in many cases.

The legislation initially sought to require ultrasounds, which early last week prompted opponents to raise concerns over the procedures’ potentially invasive nature. In many cases, the ultrasounds would require a vaginal probe to establish gestational age.

On Wednesday, citing concerns over that intrusiveness, McDonnell (R), an abortion opponent who had repeatedly said he would sign the bill, asked state lawmakers to amend the measure. House members approved the governor’s amendments, but the bill’s Republican sponsor in the Senate said she would try to pull the measure for the session.

“Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state,” McDonnell said in a statement. “No person should be directed to undergo an invasive procedure by the state, without their consent, as a precondition to another medical procedure.” He did not comment further.

Confusion over the legislation and ultrasounds — and considerable national media attention — preceded the unraveling of the bill. The original measure stated, simply, that a woman needed an ultrasound before an abortion. Many lawmakers did not understand that at the young fetal age abortions usually occur, the invasive vaginal ultrasound would be needed to establish gestational age, as required by the bill.

McDonnell, who is often mentioned as a possible presidential running mate, tried to strike a balance between supporting his conservative base and supporting a bill that immediately drew opposition as a severe end-run against abortion rights.

“Bob McDonnell’s political future is not enhanced by vaginal ultrasound legislation,” said Stephen Farnsworth, a professor of political science at the University of Mary Washington. “But make no mistake about it: Governor McDonnell was painted into this corner by his own Republican legislature. This is an example of that old adage, ‘Be careful what you wish for.’ ’’

Republican lawmakers on Wednesday in essence said that an abdominal — or “jelly-on-the-belly” — ultrasound before an abortion would still be required but that vaginal ultrasounds would be voluntary.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/mcdonnell-virginia-republicans-back-off-mandatory-invasive-ultrasounds/2012/02/22/gIQAUmzEUR_story.html

Originally posted by moon1969
As many of you may already know as this was in the news last week, the Virginia Republicans amended their forced sonogram bill to keep the forced sonograms but no longer require that a vaginal probe be inserted. As an aside, Texas already has a forced sonogram law, and Alabama is now looking to formulate such a bill. Big government in private lives.

...[text shortened]... irginia-republicans-back-off-mandatory-invasive-ultrasounds/2012/02/22/gIQAUmzEUR_story.html

Sonograms are often necessary in abortions to determine the age of the fetus. This impacts the way the abortion is carried out.

Originally posted by dryhump
Sonograms are often necessary in abortions to determine the age of the fetus. This impacts the way the abortion is carried out.

Ya that used to be up to the doctor and the woman in Texas to decide. Now it is required by the state in Texas, even when a sonogram is not medically necessary. And looks like this will be the case in Virginia. Big government in private lives interferring in the doctor/patient relationship. Also, what is interesting is that whether the woman or the state pays for the unecessary forced sonogram, it is a waste of money.

Originally posted by moon1969
Ya that used to be up to the doctor and the woman in Texas to decide. Now it is required by the state in Texas, even when a sonogram is not medically necessary. And looks like this will be the case in Virginia. Big government in private lives interferring in the doctor/patient relationship. Also, what is interesting is that whether the woman or the state pays for the unecessary forced sonogram, it is a waste of money.

I find it funny that a person in favor of a national health care system could argue with a straight face about big government getting involved in medical decisions. I don't agree with these laws, but you're argument is disingenuous to say the least.

Originally posted by dryhump
I find it funny that a person in favor of a national health care system could argue with a straight face about big government getting involved in medical decisions. I don't agree with these laws, but you're argument is disingenuous to say the least.

The point is that Republicans who claim to be the party of less government are for forced sonograms.

Originally posted by moon1969
The point is that Republicans who claim to be the party of less government are for forced sonograms.

Not all republicans are for this.

Originally posted by dryhump
I find it funny that a person in favor of a national health care system could argue with a straight face about big government getting involved in medical decisions. I don't agree with these laws, but you're argument is disingenuous to say the least.

His argument is sound: the matter of whether or not to get a sonogram should be kept strictly between the doctor and the patient. Done. No need for fascist dictates from on high in such situations. As for a national health care system, it would provide health care to all regardless of ability to pay, which has nothing whatsoever to do with getting the government between a patient and his or her doctor. In fact it eliminates all barriers between patient and doctor.

Nice exercise in hare-brained sophistry on your part, though. Pin a tea bag on your chest.

Originally posted by dryhump
Not all republicans are for this.

I wonder which Republicans in the Virginia Senate were against the bill that would have mandated the state-sponsored rape of women seeking an abortion? I suppose there might have been 1 or 2....? But I haven't the time to find them tonight.

Originally posted by moon1969
The point is that Republicans who claim to be the party of less government are for forced sonograms.

I find it....curious that Republicans are the ones claiming to care about unborn children, but generally seem to be against any state intervention to help children who are already born.

Hmm. Maybe pro-lifers don't really give a fig about life, and actually are far more interested in...


...power?

Originally posted by Soothfast
I wonder which Republicans in the Virginia Senate were against the bill that would have mandated the state-sponsored rape of women seeking an abortion? I suppose there might have been 1 or 2....? But I haven't the time to find them tonight.

Dave Albo may be reconsidering. The debate is apparently killing his wife's libido.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vbLsy9eKBlI

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
Dave Albo may be reconsidering. The debate is apparently killing his wife's libido.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vbLsy9eKBlI

I can guess what video that is. The stand-up routine by the neanderthaloid legislator who can't even bring himself to say the word vagina?

Originally posted by Soothfast
I can guess what video that is. The stand-up routine by the neanderthaloid legislator who can't even bring himself to say the word vagina?

The RHP automated censor feature would not let me have the original thread title "Virginia Republicans pull out of vagina".

Originally posted by dryhump
Not all republicans are for this.

Maybe so but it is clear that Republicans in Virginia and in Texas who formulated, pushed, and voted for these forced sonogram bills claim to be for less government.

Originally posted by Soothfast
As for a national health care system, it would provide health care to all regardless of ability to pay, which has nothing whatsoever to do with getting the government between a patient and his or her doctor.

Agreed. I started to make that point earlier but I didn't.

Instead, just thought it better to make the point that Republican social conservatives and christian fundamentalists who now control the Republican party and have for decades (not many Rockefeller country-club Republicans in the lead) want a christian theocracy and governnment in our private lives.

Originally posted by Soothfast
His argument is sound: the matter of whether or not to get a sonogram should be kept strictly between the doctor and the patient. Done. No need for fascist dictates from on high in such situations. As for a national health care system, it would provide health care to all regardless of ability to pay, which has nothing whatsoever to do with getting the g ...[text shortened]...

Nice exercise in hare-brained sophistry on your part, though. Pin a tea bag on your chest.

Ask skin cancer patients in the uk if the nhs gets in between doctors and patients.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8824659/Death-sentence-as-NHS-watchdog-rejects-skin-cancer-drug.html
Or prostate cancer patients.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/men_shealth/8797295/NHS-rationing-body-rejects-prostate-cancer-drug.html

It's a perfectly legitimate point considering moon is arguing stridently against "big government" coming between doctors and patients. I don't agree with this legislation (as I already said) but your argument against these regulations is laughable in the face of reality. You support a single payer system that will have to cut costs somehow. How will they do that? By picking doctors and picking treatments.