Oklahoma vetos Governor and passes abortion law

[heavyg]

hurray for my state :bow:

Oklahoma vetos Governor and passes abortion law

by Carol .
April 18, 2008 11:32 AM EDT

In an overwhelming majority the Oklahoma legislature passed a bill that would require women to have an ultra sound to view the baby before having an abortion. Governor Henry vetoed the bill asking that it have an amendment that precluded victims of rape and incest, but the legislature voted down his veto and the law passed.

I have always felt that a woman should know what she's doing and if she still wants an abortion than go ahead. This requires actual viewing of the fetus.

I support the bill. Those of you that feel it is a travesty of justice to force this on a woman shouldn't live in Oklahoma. Those of us that feel it is a travesty of justice to force death on a fetus love it here.

[Heisenberg]

I don't mind the legislation. However, I do think the admendment should have been included. It's making an already painful situation worse.

[heavyg]

I don't mind the legislation. However, I do think the admendment should have been included. It's making an already painful situation worse.

I am 100% opposed to abortion. BUT I can see your point of view. From my point of view however, no matter what the circumstances the unborn baby is innocent and should not be punished (murdered)

[Cajuncowboy]

Allllrrrriiiiigggghhhhtttt Okies!


:bow:

[WoodysGirl]

Men never fully understand the ramifications of a woman making such a difficult decision. It's a life changing decision regardless of whether they see the ultra sound or not. Women are affected emotionally more than anyone can possibly know while even contemplating the decision.

I don't even understand the point of this legislation. Pretty stupid and unless they force the woman's eyes open, she could easily just look glance and look away, without even changing her position.

[heavyg]

Men never fully understand the ramifications of a woman making such a difficult decision. It's a life changing decision regardless of whether they see the ultra sound or not. Women are affected emotionally more than anyone can possibly know while even contemplating the decision.

I don't even understand the point of this legislation. Pretty stupid and unless they force the woman's eyes open, she could easily just look glance and look away, without even changing her position.

And it seems NO ONE ever considers the unborn childs rights or feelings. There are more than just the womans rights to consider.

[WoodysGirl]

And it seems NO ONE ever considers the unborn childs rights or feelings. There are more than just the womans rights to consider.
Well you consider the unborn child's rights. So there's one.

[heavyg]

Well you consider the unborn child's rights. So there's one.

lol true.....

[Bizwah]

I'm as pro-life as they come. Any legislation that restricts it is great in my book.

But I'm also a realist to a certain extent. I understand that our whole country's existence is based on compromise. I'm willing to compromise where possible on abortion.

Rape and incest make up a very small percentage of abortions.

[Bizwah]

Men never fully understand the ramifications of a woman making such a difficult decision. It's a life changing decision regardless of whether they see the ultra sound or not. Women are affected emotionally more than anyone can possibly know while even contemplating the decision.

I don't even understand the point of this legislation. Pretty stupid and unless they force the woman's eyes open, she could easily just look glance and look away, without even changing her position.

I guess not.

I do understand that a HUMAN life is precious. All efforts should be made to save that life.

I also think that if you decide to have sex, then you also should be prepared to accept pregnancy.....because that's how babies are made....and we all know that.

[Cajuncowboy]

Men never fully understand the ramifications of a woman making such a difficult decision. It's a life changing decision regardless of whether they see the ultra sound or not. Women are affected emotionally more than anyone can possibly know while even contemplating the decision.

I don't even understand the point of this legislation. Pretty stupid and unless they force the woman's eyes open, she could easily just look glance and look away, without even changing her position.

I've spent over 5 years of my life working with care centers who provide free counseling for women who have had abortions and you are absolutely right. The emotional distress they have after the abortion is simply awful. I know of more than one woman who killed themselves afterwards because of the grief.

Abortion is a horrific thing and as you said it's a life changing decision for her. It's an even bigger life changing decision for the baby.

Either the baby dies or it has the chance to become the first person to find a cure for Aids. Or Cancer. Or the common cold. Or the one who will bring peace to the Middle East.

But once they are killed, they will not have that chance.

[ninja]

And who pays for these ultrasounds? Let me take a guess? The taxpayer! I'm sure the knocked-up chick ain't paying a dime. And the knocked-up chick ain't gonna be affected by some blurry image. These knocked-up chicks don't give a rat's rear end about the baby. Sad, but true. These ultrasounds are nothing but a waste of money and time. The Democrats have brainwashed these chicks with words like fetus, viability, conscient, pro-choice. The Dems have suceeded to the point that even a highly educated doctor can pull a baby leg first out with the head remaining in the womb, use a scissors to poke a hole in the neck, suck the brain out and feel nothing. And almost every Democrat will vote to continue partial-birth abortions. Sick. Very sick.

[theebs]

The most disturbing thing about all this to me, without looking up the numbers if they even exist is I bet that the majority of women, or men and women who decide to have an abortion do it more than once. Or at some point they end up with children they did not plan on and do not want and then raise them accordingly anyway.

Like WG said I cant imagine the pain of going through that as a woman.

[iceberg]

The most disturbing thing about all this to me, without looking up the numbers if they even exist is I bet that the majority of women, or men and women who decide to have an abortion do it more than once. Or at some point they end up with children they did not plan on and do not want and then raise them accordingly anyway.

Like WG said I cant imagine the pain of going through that as a woman.

and i damn sure can't imagine going through it as a man either.... O U C H!!!

[theebs]

and i damn sure can't imagine going through it as a man either.... O U C H!!!


lol

You know what I meant. I am sure there are alot of people in relationships who do have abortions because they simply do not want or cant support children! I was talking the mental anguish and hardship both would suffer.

[ScipioCowboy]

Given the gravity of abortion and all its possible consequences, I would hope that a woman would want any available information on the procedure before making a decision.

[Marty R]

I guess not.

I do understand that a HUMAN life is precious. All efforts should be made to save that life.

I also think that if you decide to have sex, then you also should be prepared to accept pregnancy.....because that's how babies are made....and we all know that.


I'm not sure about this......In the case of rape, there is at least one person that didn't want to have sex....after all that is how babies are made right? Incest....while there are cases of consenting parties, I cannot for the life of me think of anyone, in their right mind that would participate in such an act and want offspring from it. I mean the 14 year old girl that is forced by a father or brother to commit the act, keep quite about it and then keep the child?
I am of two minds about abortion.. 1st and foremost is the right to life of all unborn people....but then again who am I to tell a woman that has been raped and is carrying a deviants child that she must have that child? Can you imagine what happens everytime that lady would look at that child? I can only imagine that she would have to think that she would have to remember the pain and suffering that concieved the child.... I couldn't even begin to comprehend the anguish the mother would go through...

[heavyg]

I'm not sure about this......In the case of rape, there is at least one person that didn't want to have sex....after all that is how babies are made right? Incest....while there are cases of consenting parties, I cannot for the life of me think of anyone, in their right mind that would participate in such an act and want offspring from it. I mean the 14 year old girl that is forced by a father or brother to commit the act, keep quite about it and then keep the child?
I am of two minds about abortion.. 1st and foremost is the right to life of all unborn people....but then again who am I to tell a woman that has been raped and is carrying a deviants child that she must have that child? Can you imagine what happens everytime that lady would look at that child? I can only imagine that she would have to think that she would have to remember the pain and suffering that concieved the child.... I couldn't even begin to comprehend the anguish the mother would go through...


I can completely understand that point of view. but #1. there is still the issue of the unborn babies rights. #2. how many abortions are actually for the reason you mentioned?

Along the lines of #2. How many pro-choice people would agree to ban all abortions with the exception of rape or incest?

[iceberg]

I can completely understand that point of view. but #1. there is still the issue of the unborn babies rights. #2. how many abortions are actually for the reason you mentioned?

Along the lines of #2. How many pro-choice people would agree to ban all abortions with the exception of rape or incest?

how many anti-abortion people would agree to allow all abortions for the overall health of the mother to stop it from being something done in a dark alley?

no one. most people have their stance and arguments seldom change it. life may.

[heavyg]

how many anti-abortion people would agree to allow all abortions for the overall health of the mother to stop it from being something done in a dark alley?

no one. most people have their stance and arguments seldom change it. life may.

Dark Alley is not an issue to me. You can use that type of argument with anything from drugs to pet supplies. I do not have the percentages but I doubt the number of back alley abortions compare to how many "legal" abortions are conducted each year.

As I have stated in the past I am 100% against abortion. However, I am not so naive that I do not see that someone may need one if the mothers life is in danger.

[WoodysGirl]

how many anti-abortion people would agree to allow all abortions for the overall health of the mother to stop it from being something done in a dark alley?

no one. most people have their stance and arguments seldom change it. life may.
The question I would also ask is how many of the hard core anti-abortion people are willing to adopt and take care of the many unwanted children after they've been born.

I understand the anti-abortion argument, but I question whether that logic also extends to the caretaking after the child is born.

It's a very individual thing and it's easy to yell "Save the unborn children!" But then what about the already born children who live in orphanages and have no one to love and care for them? Maybe that's a separate discussion, I don't know.

Abortion discussions are never-ending...

[vta]

Abortion discussions are never-ending...

Well, with that statement, do we agree that there exists a very real problem in regard to abortion?

[heavyg]

The question I would also ask is how many of the hard core anti-abortion people are willing to adopt and take care of the many unwanted children after they've been born.

I understand the anti-abortion argument, but I question whether that logic also extends to the caretaking after the child is born.

It's a very individual thing and it's easy to yell "Save the unborn children!" But then what about the already born children who live in orphanages and have no one to love and care for them? Maybe that's a separate discussion, I don't know.

Abortion discussions are never-ending...

By the Grace of God my wife and I were able to have our own children. But I know of at least two couples that would gladly adopt if it didnt cost 20 grand. It shouldn't cost that much to adopt a child IMO

[trickblue]

The question I would also ask is how many of the hard core anti-abortion people are willing to adopt and take care of the many unwanted children after they've been born.

If they didn't allow adoption agencies to charge such exorbitant amounts of money, Americans would cease adopting overseas. My adopted daughter is from Kazakhstan...

[iceberg]

Dark Alley is not an issue to me. You can use that type of argument with anything from drugs to pet supplies. I do not have the percentages but I doubt the number of back alley abortions compare to how many "legal" abortions are conducted each year.

As I have stated in the past I am 100% against abortion. However, I am not so naive that I do not see that someone may need one if the mothers life is in danger.

hey, i was born and raised roman catholic. former alterboy. personally it's not a choice i'd make. however, i've come to find in my life that many times the choices i'd make for "moral" reasons are not the same as people i care a lot about.

that said, i won't allow my singular view to be the "default" view regardless of the argument.

as for the "dark alley" - you don't see them today because it's legal by and large. then, when it wasn't, it's not like it was reported unless something went vastly wrong and she ended up in the hospital anyway.

i can't make moral decisions for anyone but me. if a woman/couple makes a different moral decision, that's their call and if God doesn't like it, it's between those two/three. not me.

[WoodysGirl]

By the Grace of God my wife and I were able to have our own children. But I know of at least two couples that would gladly adopt if it didnt cost 20 grand. It shouldn't cost that much to adopt a child IMO

If they didn't allow adoption agencies to charge such exorbitant amounts of money, Americans would cease adopting overseas. My adopted daughter is from Kazakhstan...You'll hear no argument from on the expensiveness of adoption. I agree that they are expensive. Granted, I've only done some basic research, because it is something I plan to pursue in the near future. But after doing only some preliminary research on adoption, it seems that public adoptions are much less expensive than private adoptions.

But it still goes back to my point. It's hard for me to see how you can make a person have a child they don't want to take care of.

So maybe instead of focusing on whether a woman should or should not have an abortion, maybe focus on bettering the adoption procedures. Do that and there might be less abortions.

I don't know, just my thoughts.

[heavyg]

So maybe instead of focusing on whether a woman should or should not have an abortion, maybe focus on bettering the adoption procedures. Do that and there might be less abortions.

I don't know, just my thoughts.

No argument from me there

[trickblue]

You'll hear no argument from on the expensiveness of adoption. I agree that they are expensive. Granted, I've only done some basic research, because it is something I plan to pursue in the near future. But after doing only some preliminary research on adoption, it seems that public adoptions are much less expensive than private adoptions.

But it still goes back to my point. It's hard for me to see how you can make a person have a child they don't want to take care of.

So maybe instead of focusing on whether a woman should or should not have an abortion, maybe focus on bettering the adoption procedures. Do that and there might be less abortions.

I don't know, just my thoughts.

Well I wasn't actually arguing the abortion thing, but rather the adoption issue...

I am Pro-Life, btw, but I stay out of these discussions except for rare occurrences...

[WoodysGirl]

Well I wasn't actually arguing the abortion thing, but rather the adoption issue...

I am Pro-Life, btw, but I stay out of these discussions except for rare occurrences...Same here...

[Marty R]

I can completely understand that point of view. but #1. there is still the issue of the unborn babies rights. #2. how many abortions are actually for the reason you mentioned?

Along the lines of #2. How many pro-choice people would agree to ban all abortions with the exception of rape or incest?

There are several arguments to be made, that's for sure, and I don't want to make them for the pro-abortion side... it just isn't in me.

BUT for reason #2, incest and rape...I would argue far to many. There are some sick, twisted individuals out there, and to make someone raise a child under those circumstances in unfair to the mother as well any potential child born from said circumstances. I'm so glad I'll never have to make that type of decision.

[ChldsPlay]

If abortion was illegal again, I for one would have no sympathy for those that chose the back alley route. If a mother suffers problems from such a procedure, then she should have thought about that before she broke the law and killed a baby. A CHOICE would have been made, and made poorly. I would hope that as soon as she recovered physically she would then be taken to prison for a long time. I think harsh punishment for the crime would deter most of those back alley issues. Really the term abortion should just go away and it can be called what it really is, and the same thing it's called when it's beyond 9 months of life: murder.

As for rape/incest, as awful as that is, it is not the fault of the baby, and it should not be punished to ease the suffering of another. Give it up for adoption if you must.

And while there definitely needs to be drastic change in adoption procedures in the US, being raised in an orphanage is still a better alternative than killing the baby.

The only thing I'm somewhat conflicted about is if the mother's life is in danger. Personally, if it's a either the baby dies or the mother dies situation. Where one lives and the other dies, I say let nature take it's course and leave it up to God. If it's pretty black and white where the baby has absolutely 0 chance to make it, and the mother will die if nothing is done, then I might consider it.

[heavyg]

One of the things that has always bothered me about abortion is this. A women leaves her home on her way to the clinic to abort her unborn child. While on the way to the clinic someone runs a stop sign and kills the mother and unborn child the person who ran the stop sign is charged for double homicide. Now either that unborn baby is a life or it isn't. Why is it when he ran the stop sign it was a life. But just 20 minutes later when the doctor is sucking it out of the mother its just a "fetus"

[iceberg]

If abortion was illegal again, I for one would have no sympathy for those that chose the back alley route. If a mother suffers problems from such a procedure, then she should have thought about that before she broke the law and killed a baby. A CHOICE would have been made, and made poorly. I would hope that as soon as she recovered physically she would then be taken to prison for a long time. I think harsh punishment for the crime would deter most of those back alley issues. Really the term abortion should just go away and it can be called what it really is, and the same thing it's called when it's beyond 9 months of life: murder.

As for rape/incest, as awful as that is, it is not the fault of the baby, and it should not be punished to ease the suffering of another. Give it up for adoption if you must.

And while there definitely needs to be drastic change in adoption procedures in the US, being raised in an orphanage is still a better alternative than killing the baby.

The only thing I'm somewhat conflicted about is if the mother's life is in danger. Personally, if it's a either the baby dies or the mother dies situation. Where one lives and the other dies, I say let nature take it's course and leave it up to God. If it's pretty black and white where the baby has absolutely 0 chance to make it, and the mother will die if nothing is done, then I might consider it.

glad you have an open mind on this.

like i said, no opinions ever change. but they sure heat up a lot.

[CowboyFan74]

A guy recently called in on a talk show and said, "I'm a liberal socialist. My wife and I have been trying to have a baby for a long time now and recently she had a miscarriage. If society says it's not really a living being then why have we become so emotional over our loss? I'm reconsidering some of my past views."


Some people can't see it for what it is till it hits home...