So out of curiosity, how accurate are the invasive probings that I've heard about?
So out of curiosity, how accurate are the invasive probings that I've heard about?
Not sure what you mean by accurate, but I had an ultrasound (to test for a medical condition, not for pregnancy) and they shove a wand in your vagina and twist it around. It's not fun.
I'll make the low-lying joke here, since no one else has:It's on his Twitter background. So I beat everyone to it :D
"The guy even has 'Rape' in his name! No wonder he's all for this!"
So out of curiosity, how accurate are the invasive probings that I've heard about?
Not sure what you mean by accurate, but I had an ultrasound (to test for a medical condition, not for pregnancy) and they shove a wand in your vagina and twist it around. It's not fun.
Well, I mean "How good is it at detecting an actual heartbeat with a high rate of precision?" How effective is the actual ultrasound. For that matter, what affect (if any) does it have on the fetus?
You mention that the ultrasound thing isn't fun. So that raises one question for me. With the way new discoveries are being made in science, will there ever be a new and less invasive technique that could do the same thing as these ultrasounds?
So out of curiosity, how accurate are the invasive probings that I've heard about?
Not sure what you mean by accurate, but I had an ultrasound (to test for a medical condition, not for pregnancy) and they shove a wand in your vagina and twist it around. It's not fun.
Well, I mean "How good is it at detecting an actual heartbeat with a high rate of precision?" How effective is the actual ultrasound. For that matter, what affect (if any) does it have on the fetus?
You mention that the ultrasound thing isn't fun. So that raises one question for me. With the way new discoveries are being made in science, will there ever be a new and less invasive technique that could do the same thing as these ultrasounds?
You know, nobody trying to really address posts like this is the very fucking reason I started the "On Trivializing Abortion" thread. FFS. I understand that you guys don't like this, but I have questions that would be cool to be answered. Hell, I think that you'd do right by helping people with real questions by addressing them. That is, instead of mocking this bill, maybe you should actually fucking help people understand why it's so shitty.
I viewed it as one of those bills that was self-evidently shitty. From a constitutional perspective, there's no way this could pass the undue burden test laid out by Casey. It's just a fail from the get-go.So out of curiosity, how accurate are the invasive probings that I've heard about?
Not sure what you mean by accurate, but I had an ultrasound (to test for a medical condition, not for pregnancy) and they shove a wand in your vagina and twist it around. It's not fun.
Well, I mean "How good is it at detecting an actual heartbeat with a high rate of precision?" How effective is the actual ultrasound. For that matter, what affect (if any) does it have on the fetus?
You mention that the ultrasound thing isn't fun. So that raises one question for me. With the way new discoveries are being made in science, will there ever be a new and less invasive technique that could do the same thing as these ultrasounds?
You know, nobody trying to really address posts like this is the very fucking reason I started the "On Trivializing Abortion" thread. FFS. I understand that you guys don't like this, but I have questions that would be cool to be answered. Hell, I think that you'd do right by helping people with real questions by addressing them. That is, instead of mocking this bill, maybe you should actually fucking help people understand why it's so shitty.
So out of curiosity, how accurate are the invasive probings that I've heard about?
Not sure what you mean by accurate, but I had an ultrasound (to test for a medical condition, not for pregnancy) and they shove a wand in your vagina and twist it around. It's not fun.
Well, I mean "How good is it at detecting an actual heartbeat with a high rate of precision?" How effective is the actual ultrasound. For that matter, what affect (if any) does it have on the fetus?
You mention that the ultrasound thing isn't fun. So that raises one question for me. With the way new discoveries are being made in science, will there ever be a new and less invasive technique that could do the same thing as these ultrasounds?
The thing is, those questions are irrelevant within the debate of abortion. regardless of the medical technologies invasive nature or accuracy the final choice still belongs to the woman involved. As such, all things like these bills and the person-hood bills do is attempt to shame, guilt trip, badger and traumatize pregnant women as well as deny access to healthcare for poor women.
If the technology becomes much more accurate and less invasive it would be great for any pregnant woman especially those who wish to see how the development is going and such, however doing such things with women who are trying to seek an abortion is just plain anti-woman abuse.
The thing is, those questions are irrelevant within the debate of abortion. regardless of the medical technologies invasive nature or accuracy the final choice still belongs to the woman involved. As such, all things like these bills and the person-hood bills do is attempt to shame, guilt trip, badger and traumatize pregnant women as well as deny access to healthcare for poor women.
If the technology becomes much more accurate and less invasive it would be great for any pregnant woman especially those who wish to see how the development is going and such, however doing such things with women who are trying to seek an abortion is just plain anti-woman abuse.
This, so much. Regardless of the test's accuracy, this completely completes violates women and shouldn't have another second wasted on it.
The thing is, those questions are irrelevant within the debate of abortion. regardless of the medical technologies invasive nature or accuracy the final choice still belongs to the woman involved. As such, all things like these bills and the person-hood bills do is attempt to shame, guilt trip, badger and traumatize pregnant women as well as deny access to healthcare for poor women.
If the technology becomes much more accurate and less invasive it would be great for any pregnant woman especially those who wish to see how the development is going and such, however doing such things with women who are trying to seek an abortion is just plain anti-woman abuse.
This, so much. Regardless of the test's accuracy, this completely completes violates women and shouldn't have another second wasted on it.
Well, you have to keep in mind that this is only "anti-woman abuse" because of the stigma of getting an abortion to begin with? Maybe one day society will move beyond this kind of crap.
The thing is, those questions are irrelevant within the debate of abortion. regardless of the medical technologies invasive nature or accuracy the final choice still belongs to the woman involved. As such, all things like these bills and the person-hood bills do is attempt to shame, guilt trip, badger and traumatize pregnant women as well as deny access to healthcare for poor women.
If the technology becomes much more accurate and less invasive it would be great for any pregnant woman especially those who wish to see how the development is going and such, however doing such things with women who are trying to seek an abortion is just plain anti-woman abuse.
This, so much. Regardless of the test's accuracy, this completely completes violates women and shouldn't have another second wasted on it.
Well, you have to keep in mind that this is only "anti-woman abuse" because of the stigma of getting an abortion to begin with? Maybe one day society will move beyond this kind of crap.
It's not just the stigma about abortion, it's the fact that the procedure is invasive and very uncomfortable. For instance, a rape victim would probably be triggered by having to undergo this completely unnecessary procedure.
The thing is, those questions are irrelevant within the debate of abortion. regardless of the medical technologies invasive nature or accuracy the final choice still belongs to the woman involved. As such, all things like these bills and the person-hood bills do is attempt to shame, guilt trip, badger and traumatize pregnant women as well as deny access to healthcare for poor women.
If the technology becomes much more accurate and less invasive it would be great for any pregnant woman especially those who wish to see how the development is going and such, however doing such things with women who are trying to seek an abortion is just plain anti-woman abuse.
This, so much. Regardless of the test's accuracy, this completely completes violates women and shouldn't have another second wasted on it.
Well, you have to keep in mind that this is only "anti-woman abuse" because of the stigma of getting an abortion to begin with? Maybe one day society will move beyond this kind of crap.
It's not just the stigma about abortion, it's the fact that the procedure is invasive and very uncomfortable. For instance, a rape victim would probably be triggered by having to undergo this completely unnecessary procedure.
I did mention that the medical technology plays a role earler. If we can both eliminate the stigma and find ways to make the procedure better, things would maybe be much less...hated.
Meh, maybe it's a naive dream. I guess I still dare to dream it, though.
The thing is, those questions are irrelevant within the debate of abortion. regardless of the medical technologies invasive nature or accuracy the final choice still belongs to the woman involved. As such, all things like these bills and the person-hood bills do is attempt to shame, guilt trip, badger and traumatize pregnant women as well as deny access to healthcare for poor women.
If the technology becomes much more accurate and less invasive it would be great for any pregnant woman especially those who wish to see how the development is going and such, however doing such things with women who are trying to seek an abortion is just plain anti-woman abuse.
This, so much. Regardless of the test's accuracy, this completely completes violates women and shouldn't have another second wasted on it.
Well, you have to keep in mind that this is only "anti-woman abuse" because of the stigma of getting an abortion to begin with? Maybe one day society will move beyond this kind of crap.
It's not just the stigma about abortion, it's the fact that the procedure is invasive and very uncomfortable. For instance, a rape victim would probably be triggered by having to undergo this completely unnecessary procedure.
I did mention that the medical technology plays a role earler. If we can both eliminate the stigma and find ways to make the procedure better, things would maybe be much less...hated.
Meh, maybe it's a naive dream. I guess I still dare to dream it, though.
I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure there are more reasons besides abortion to perform this invasive kind of ultrasound.
The thing is, those questions are irrelevant within the debate of abortion. regardless of the medical technologies invasive nature or accuracy the final choice still belongs to the woman involved. As such, all things like these bills and the person-hood bills do is attempt to shame, guilt trip, badger and traumatize pregnant women as well as deny access to healthcare for poor women.
If the technology becomes much more accurate and less invasive it would be great for any pregnant woman especially those who wish to see how the development is going and such, however doing such things with women who are trying to seek an abortion is just plain anti-woman abuse.
This, so much. Regardless of the test's accuracy, this completely completes violates women and shouldn't have another second wasted on it.
Well, you have to keep in mind that this is only "anti-woman abuse" because of the stigma of getting an abortion to begin with? Maybe one day society will move beyond this kind of crap.
It's not just the stigma about abortion, it's the fact that the procedure is invasive and very uncomfortable. For instance, a rape victim would probably be triggered by having to undergo this completely unnecessary procedure.
I did mention that the medical technology plays a role earler. If we can both eliminate the stigma and find ways to make the procedure better, things would maybe be much less...hated.
Meh, maybe it's a naive dream. I guess I still dare to dream it, though.
I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure there are more reasons besides abortion to perform this invasive kind of ultrasound.
You totally missed my point. I was saying that maybe some day we'll have technology that makes the ultrasound obsolete.
I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure there are more reasons besides abortion to perform this invasive kind of ultrasound.
If they invented ultrasounds that were just wands that you wave over the stomach they would insist on the vagina shaming wand insteadAFAIK heartbeat can be detected through noninvasive means by about 8-12 weeks of pregnancy. In fact, the Arkansas bill (http://staging.arkleg.state.ar.us/ftproot/bills/2013/public/SB134.pdf), horrible as it is, specifically requires abdominal (ie. over the stomach) ultrasound and sneakily implies TVUS in early pregnancy by using the wording "the use of medical devices as determined by standard medical practice". So no required probings in that bill, "only" denying abortion based on relatively-comfortably-measured fetal heartbeat. Which IMHO is way worse.