How refreshing!
The TX Republican primary ballot will include questions on 5 “red-meat issues,” including this one:
Ballot Proposition #5: Sonograms
The TX Legislature should enact legislation requiring a sonogram to be performed and shown to each mother about to undergo a medically unnecessary, elective abortion.
What question would love to see on a primary ballot?
[HT: Monte at StandForLife.net]
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I would love to see Darfur funding on the ballot.
I think we need to get our own act straight in America before we can start worrying about Darfur.
I like these sonogram laws. Education is key in this fight to stop elective abortions. People must Face the Truth!
The “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” scenario played out in hospitals, under the auspices of protecting mothers, has to stop.
Mothers should not only see their babies but should also have to watch a film of an actual abortion. If mothers had factual information about the reality of abortion, many of the unborn would be spared.
In so many instances, women think it’s just a blob of tissue.
I agree with the Bedbug. Show them an abortion! I have watched 4 abortion videos, but I was 100% turned off after the first one! You cannot deny that human bones are formed. I sort of expected to see a period type clot extracted! Not so.
I remember reading of a saline abortion. The mother was so surprised when her child cried. She reached down and felt a head. She related that she felt she had been denied the truth and claimed she had no idea that her child was so developed.
One can’t help reaching the conclusion that abortion clinics and doctors sanitize this whole procedure because it’s a money maker. They know darn well that if women saw the carnage of abortion, most of them would be sickened.
Abortion propaganda has been incredibly effective. How else has a global population been sidetracked into arguments about viability and when life begins, when that “life” is staring them in the face? How else has society come to accept killing children in the womb and believing it’s not actual killing, simply a medical procedure?
Anyone who would deny that propaganda has been used only has to look at how even the wording has been doctored to make abortion more acceptable.
Why call it Pro Choice? Why not Pro Death?
Instead of pregnancy termination, why not call it human termination?
If Hitler had dismembered unborn children, no one would have quibbled about whether these were children or not. If Hitler had plunged scissors into a flailing newborn’s head and sucked out its brains, people would have expressed outrage; yet the same thing is done with partial-birth abortion.
It’s amazing to me that these women preach about “women’s health” and “Safe abortions for women” yet look at all of the chemicals and sharp objects introduced into a woman’s body just to kill the baby. I cringe in pain just thinking about it! I can’t even stand a pap without tensing up, let alone allowing someone to open up my cervix and stick a sharp knife up there. No way. No way!! No wonder the majority of the women I spoke to about abortions opted for twilight sleep…It still isn’t going to change the fact that in the end, they will have a dead baby! It’s so sad.
The movie, 22 Weeks, should go a long way to raise awareness.
Americans live in more prosperity in recession than many countries in their best economic times. Our greatest troubles as Americans are whether or not we agree with the president and whether or not we can get a house with a pool and a dog and those sought-after picket fences. But our brothers and sisters in Darfur worry about the survival of their young children. Their children can’t play too far from wherever they call home for the day without stressing over being shot. There’s no food. No water. And the world has ignored them.
We can’t wait. Our brothers and sisters in Africa need to know that they are part of us and that we intend to be there for them as a family should be.
This is just a cynical ploy to try to force women to bear children against their will, and to require this is a violation of their rights.
If a pregnant woman wants a sonogram,fine.
Let her have it. But women should not be forced to have one.
Mr Berger-
Aside from the minor point that viewing an ultrasound in no way FORCES a woman to continue her pregnancy, though it does take us closer to the true informed consent that pro-choicers claim women are already giving….
A pregnant woman is already bearing a child. The only two options are to let the pregnancy finish naturally and let the child live, or have an abortion and, well, you know the truth (or you wouldn’t protest with such anger and venom in your many posts.)
I have counselled literally hundreds of women in crisis pregnancies. Not even one time has one of those women come back to say, after giving birth, that they made the wrong choice. Many, however, after an abortion, would do anything to change their choice.
(Gloating alert- look away if you don’t want to get riled up further….)
My agency is having our brand new 4D ultrasound machine delivered this week, and I CAN’T WAIT to start showing women live vision of their own children’s beating hearts and waving arms, free of charge, while I reassure them that they and their beautiful little one deserve better than abortion. Some will still choose an abortion, but many more will have their eyes opened and will choose love instead of death.
Which is worse? A woman “forced” to give birth to her child …
or a child forced to be dead by an abortionist?
Here’s my question:
“Should every woman in the state of Texas, when she is informed that she is pregnant, be sent to a week-long education camp where she goes through 80 hours of education concerning the process of being pregnant, abortion options, cost options, and birth options. Included in the education process will be virtual 3D renderings of the baby, every two years from birth until death. Furthermore, the state will pay for various writers to be present to write hypothetical life stories of that baby and what they might become in life.”
I know I’m being sarcastic here – I just laugh at the double-talk from the GOP. “Don’t get between me and my doctor!”…”but get in the way of other people’s decisions!”.
Posted by: Robert Berger at February 14, 2010 8:45 AM
“This is just a
‘cynical’
[based on or reflecting a belief that human conduct is motivated primarily by self-interest]
‘ploy’
[a devised or contrived move : stratagem
to try to force women to bear children against their will,”…
whatabergler,
If you are suggesting that requiring a pregnant woman to view an real time image of the pre-natal human embryo/fetus in her uterus, BEFORE she consents to an elective surgical procedure designed to kill said pre-natal human, is based on a belief that most humans are by nature ‘selfish’, then we plead ‘innocent as charged’.
If you are suggesting that requiring a pregnant wome to view a real time image of her ‘baby’ before she submits to an abortion is a ‘ploy’ to get her to open the door to her heart and the window to her womb, then we are doubly ‘innocent as charged’.
But to suggest that a woman who changes her mind after viewing the real time images of her pre-natal child would be to ‘force her to bear a child against her will’ is not only oxymoronic, it is on your part, MORONIC.
If she freely chooses life or freely chooses death for her pre-natal child, then she has not been ‘forced’.
She has exercised her free will.
What is about the word ‘CHOICE’ that you do not understand?
yor bro ken
I love it when RINO comes in and reveals himself for the wolf in sheep’s clothing he’s always been but denies being so vehemently. I just want to say for the record that I saw through you like a sheet of glass from the moment you opened your yap, and I’m just delighted that you’ve come here to prove me right day after day.
I’d get in the way of someone else’s decision to plow through a retirement home in a stolen tank. I’d get in the way of someone else’s decision to blow up a neonatal intensive care unit. And the government does too, routinely. Because they should. Because someone’s right to be seen by a physician that they’re paying for isn’t killing someone else. Even poor people can be seen by a physician at any time; it’s against the law for anyone to be turned away from care at any hospital (but don’t tell Michelle Obama that!).
You’re purposefully being disingenuous…or are you really that stupid?
These laws are totally reasonable and why would they not be allowed? If one was to argue that sonograms were not needed then I would wonder what they were hiding? The truth? The knowledge that this baby inside you actually is life?
x –
(shhhhhh)
you cracked the code. I’m really not a republican.
What was the first hint? I would have thought it was my name – see, ‘GOP’ stands the Republican party – so I would have thought that was your first hint. No need to be excited that you took the costume off the wolf. Yes, it is true – I used to vote straight party GOP. I don’t anymore. You should be proud.
Do you not see the double talk though? GOP wants smaller government, and multiple things on the list from Texas concerns the expansion of governmental power? Do you not see the issue with that?
Nice work cracking the code though – I’m proud of you.
Yep, let’s not forget the RU486 pill that’s also killed both unborn children and women alike. Another poison for women to put into their bodies.
Robert Berger, I am going to once again make an example out of you. First of all, you don’t have a uterus, so stay out of this. Second, cut the bull! The only reason you support abortion rights is because there is something in it for you. It will allow you to use as many women as you like for your own sexual gratification, and you won’t ever have to marry her or pay child support. What the heck would you care if your woman dies on the abortion table. It’s obvious you don’t care about your babies. Pro-life men are the only men who really do care about women! Robert, you only care about you!!
You’re making a lot of assumptions about me.
I’m not that kind of guy. I’ve never behaved that way and I don’t approve of men who are sexually rapacious and irresponsible.
I’m pro-choice because I realize how dangerous it is to make abortion illegal, and how futile and counterproductive it is.
But those kind of men exist, and making abortion illegal won’t stop any of them from treating women terribly.
Remember the great old saying? Never assume, because it makes an ASS out of U and Me.
No Robert. Have you seen the conditions of these mills? Are you aware that many women are killed by legal abortions? Did you know that abortionists have raped, molested, and stalked their abortion patients? Do you agree with the way a woman’s insides are ripped out during an abortion? Did you know that women have serious regrets after abortion? Many women have killed themselves following abortion. How many are dead from breast cancer brought on after abortion???
Way to miss the point there, o quick one.
You never should’ve been voting republican in the first place, because you never actually were one. You just vote for the flavor of the week, until you need something. Then you vote for whoever tells you they will give you what you want. How republican is that? And yet you make a big deal out of “I USED TO BE A REPUBLICAN!! LOOK AT ME!!!” No, you used to vote republican because you didn’t know any better. Now you vote democrat because you don’t know any better. “Uninformed voter” is not a party affiliation.
Heather, your staement about all those women supposedly being killed by abortions, and being raped etc, and filthy conditions etc, are a crock. Your exaggerating so wildly as to be beyond belief.
Since Roe v Wade, the number of women who have died from legal abortions in America is a miniscule fraction of all which have happened.
People have a much greater chance of dying in heart or other surgery than from abortion.
But if you look at poor countries where abortion is illegal,women have been dying in droves from botched illegal ones.
Rumors abut the abortion breast cancer link are nothing but scare tactics. Abortion related suicieds are extrmely rare, and many women feel relieved and liberate dafter abortions.
And don’t forget that women can always get psychiatric counselling if they have any emotional problems resulting from abortions.
A women has a much greater chance of being hit by lightning or drowning in her bathtub than dying from an abortion.
xalisae –
With all due respect to your great knowledge, wisdom, and kindness – you’re full of it.
I used to vote GOP because I thought they gave a rat’s behind about the middle class. After the Bush cuts, Medicare Expansion and two wars (all not paid for, thank you very much) – I realized that their concerns were not the same as mine. It was hard to get my head around a party that says they are for smaller government, yet got rid of PAYGO and put in place the largest entitlement program in my generation (not sure about yours – you seem much older than me, but I’m not positive).
I was and am quite informed – and if you’d like to dismiss me as uninformed – if that is what helps you sleep better at night, knowing your little place in the world is lined up just how you like to control it – well, keep that line of thinking.
Ex-GOP, it makes no sense that you would go from one party spends “too much” to a party that spends way more.
Sorry, it just doesn’t make sense. Try to get the smaller government party to be even smaller, don’t run to the big government party in protest.
I like how here you’re griping about entitlement programs, but in other threads you constantly moan about how SOMETHING needs to be done about HEALTHCARE!
I guess you’re only a republican when it comes to progams that you don’t want to take part in…
Well… that’s just it, EGV: you’ve stated plainly that you no longer vote GOP (as a matter of course). Fine. But who’s your *replacement*? The Democrats are the only other major party in the game… and they’re far worse on all the counts you mention! Are you voting Constitution Party, or something?
Or if you pick and choose between GOP and Dems, how on earth would you ever find a Democrat (assuming you don’t live in the UP) that lines up with your values enough for you to vote for them? What realistic choices does the “party of death” give you, even re: your fiscal concerns?
Right now, it sounds as if you’re taking out your disgruntled feelings toward the GOP by voting Dem… which is a bit like trying to stop a headache by cutting one’s head off.
x –
There’s a massive difference between an entitlement program and reform.
Paladin –
In a sense, you are correct (in regards to taking disgruntled feelings out towards the GOP) – this last election, I voted both sides of the aisle, and I figure to do that going forward as well. There are GOP folks who I think are doing things for the right reasons and working for the common citizen -and I think there are Democratic folks who I view the same. The GOP really threw me for a loop when they eliminated PAYGO, passed big programs, and then hammer on the Democrats for tax increase talks when the GOP won’t cut their spending to allow the tax increases they harp on. At least the Dems are honest about it – they will tax people higher but you’ll get more services and they do better budget wise (at least over the last 30 years). The GOP yells about raising taxes, but they don’t have any sort of discipline to back it up. Huckabee pegged them right – they are “budget busters” and it’s a bit of a two-faced morality issue for me.
And if the Dems are the “party of death”, I don’t know if the GOP is much better. Abortion laws haven’t changed and aren’t changing – so go for the party that is going to lead to socioeconomic conditions that will lesson abortions, and lead to fewer people getting pregnant when they don’t want to.
Surely we can do better – I mean, Germany has a rate half of what we do? Is that from having super strong conservative leanings?
Actually, when it comes to abortion, yes. As another poster here pointed out the other day (I think it was hippie?) abortion is far more restricted and regulated abroad than in the states. So, yeah.
“There’s a massive difference between an entitlement program and reform.”
And apparently this difference is whether or not YOU want a slice of the entitlement pie. Thanks for clarifying.
Haha. I quit voting for someone “just because it seems like they REALLY CARE!” after my very first ballot cast, for Nader. No politician “really cares” (with VERY few exceptions), but you should treat them all like they don’t rather than vote only for the ones who do, because even if they CARE, it doesn’t mean they’re going to be doing the right thing. And Nader might’ve cared his little heart out, but after I grew up and actually started reading about positions, I found out that the things he really cares about aren’t really good for the nation as a whole, no matter what his intentions might be. How ignorant.
I’m actually 29 years old. I’m not really that ancient, but isn’t it funny the sort of aged wisdom one conveys when blessed with common sense!
I’d go third party before I would vote for a Democrat (unless they espouse the sort of ideals I can appreciate, which by and large they RARELY do), even in protest. As off-target as the republicans have gotten in the past, why on Earth would I vote for someone that not only will not exactly fulfill my wishes, BUT ACTIVELY WORK TO THE CONTRARY?! But, it’s not this level of stupidity you’re operating on, oh no. You reveal yourself here:
“…they will tax people higher but you’ll get more services…”
You are willing to sell out your country in exchange for being given the things you want. Period. So, you’re not operating based on the absolutely stupid supposition that you merely vote democrat in protest, but you only SAY that you do in order to get your precious entitlement in the guise of “reform” (which is akin to you urinating on my leg and then proceeding to explain to me that it is raining in my localized area with nary a cloud in the sky to be seen).
x –
You seem pretty angry for just being 29 years old. If I were you, I’d sit back, watch a funny movie, take some deep breaths and relax. Seriously – think about it. Going to say a little prayer for you right now.
Relax.
Breathe.
Relax.
Such is life when you have the misfortune of learning that by and large your whole generation is made up of morons at a very young age. SOMEONE has to do the thinking around here, and you’ll find when you’re the only one in your demographic who does, it’s easy to become frustrated.
Comedy is actually one of my favorite genres next to horror. I just watched Youth In Revolt the other day. It was funny at times, but as with so many movies these days, emphasized sex far, far, FAR too much.
EGV wrote:
[…] this last election, I voted both sides of the aisle, and I figure to do that going forward as well.
Well… okay. But I hope I’ve made it clear that I’m not “Pro-GOP”, so much as I’m “anti-any-party-that-champions-abortion-and-other-forms-of-state-sanctioned-murder-in-their-very-platform”. Every time you pull the lever (or punch the chad, etc.) for a Democrat, you solidify their pro-death agenda, regardless of your intentions… and I, for one, don’t see any social or economic issues that could “balance” that one out.
The GOP really threw me for a loop when they eliminated PAYGO, passed big programs, and then hammer on the Democrats for tax increase talks when the GOP won’t cut their spending to allow the tax increases they harp on.
Right… I’m not arguing against that. But why not vote in some true conservative GOP candidates (or vote third party), rather than vote for the Party of Death?
At least the Dems are honest about it – they will tax people higher but you’ll get more services and they do better budget wise (at least over the last 30 years).
(??) By multiplying the deficit interminably, and by cementing mammoth new entitlements which make the old ones look puny in comparison? Mathematically, that doesn’t make sense…
The GOP yells about raising taxes, but they don’t have any sort of discipline to back it up.
Granted (for many of them). But surely you see that the Democrats are worse, even in that regard? I can only wonder how much you dislike “fiscal lack of discipline”, if you’re willing to vote for the willful and mind-boggling “drive to debt” that the Dems are pursuing with every ounce of their beings, simply to protest the GOP lack in that regard! It’d be a bit like supporting a willful mass-murderer, simply because the opponent happened to kill someone while driving drunk! If your problem is with [x], why vote for a party that promises to increase [x] beyond measure? You really need to explain this to me…
And if the Dems are the “party of death”, I don’t know if the GOP is much better.
See above. If I reword it, you might see the flaw in your reasoning: “If the Nazis were horrific, I don’t see how the USA, which allowed some war crimes to be committed under its own watch, is much better.” Would you consider that a good reason to enlist with Hitler? This is almost a textbook example of “cutting off your nose, to spite your face”!
Abortion laws haven’t changed and aren’t changing
If Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and the Dems for whom you voted have any say in it, they WILL change… dramatically, and for the worse. That doesn’t bother you at all?
so go for the party that is going to lead to socioeconomic conditions that will lesson abortions,
…by enshrining abortion as a “right”, which can be obtained free, with taxpayer funding? Your reasoning astounds me.
and lead to fewer people getting pregnant when they don’t want to.
Mm-hmm. By promoting condom use, which maintains the myth of “consequence-free sex” and inflames new generations to “jump in the sack” (aided and applauded by Planned Parenthood and its K-12 public school curricula). That’ll decrease unintended pregnancies and abortions? I don’t think so, friend.
Why does every pro-life bill contain a loophole? Ban abortion funding except blah, blah, blah. Sonograms prior to abortion except blah, blah, blah. Call me simple minded, but it seems that the exceptions at the state level led to the ruling of the presumed “right” to exterminate persons within the womb. Our legislators, judges, doctors, pastors and every member of society either sees the preborn child as an innocent human being with the right to life, or they see something else. Banning taxpayer funding of abortion is not the equivalent of the right to life, neither is the demand for a mother to see a sonogram. I see the preborn child as an innocent human being with the right to life and deserving of protection of their life by law, what do you see?
Cathy wrote:
I see the preborn child as an innocent human being with the right to life and deserving of protection of their life by law, what do you see?
:) It’s such a breath of fresh air when someone talks with plain sense!
I see as you see… though I’d be interested to hear the answers of others to that sensible question…
Robert, You are in the dark! There is plenty of material out there to support my claim. You are dreaming. For one, it’s easy to pull up a public records request. I have many from the abortion clinics. I also have a 911 tape to send to Jill from an abortion clinic. Allow me to do that, and then if Jill plays it, you are welcome to try to rip me down. You had better get ready.
Paladin –
Hope all is well.
Just two thoughts on your last post.
You still use the “party of death” as if the GOP is the “party of life”. Quite frankly, neither party passes many laws in regards to abortion. When the Dems are in power, there’s a bit more federal funding dollars around. When the GOP is in power, there’s a few less dollars around. I know you are trying to guilt me in regards to voting for a “party of death” – but it’s almost laughable if you think about it. If we swept the GOP back into office, are things going to change? With history as the judge – no – so the choice really is the same.
So again, I go back to the other variables. Socioeconomic is a big one, and I believe that the Dems are better for the lower class. Again, that is debatable – I get that. But my fundamental belief is that if the laws aren’t going to change, than lets change the dynamics so less people feel that abortion is the right choice.
Last though – in regards to taxes. You talk more about the stereotype than the reality. If you are as smart as you seem, then you know that most of the spending that is in place would have been here regardless of the Obama-McCain election. You also know that the last President to balance the budget was a Democrat. Then the GOP took over, eliminated PAYGO, passed entitlement programs – and when asked about it, make statements like “it was standard practice not to pay for things” (O Hatch)
Any smart economist out there is saying that we probably didn’t spend ENOUGH in regards to the recession. And yes, spending levels going forward are too high. I like the GOP basic thought on social security reform. They have good basic thoughts on Medicare reform, except that when it actually comes up for vote, they then all of the sudden are against what they previously say they are for. So again, when you talk about voting for a crazy party of debt – I must look at the recent history – who balances the budget and who enacts entitlement plans, goes to war(s), and cuts taxes – without paying for it – and the proof goes beyond the rhetoric.