Friday, October 7, 2011

Bachmann: Mandate Sonograms for Abortion-Hunters


1. Who gonna PAY, for it, Mitch? Socialized medicine? If not, how can it be Constitutionally mandated? ...Among other problems of Constitutionality...

2. If (it's paid for by public revenue, and) it's only going to be mandated 'for those thinking of having abortions', it would sorely tempt pregnant women who intend to give birth, and want ultrasound (perhaps also urged by physicians, kin, friends, etc.) to take the no-cost-to-themselves route and pretend that they sought abortion but changed their minds.

3. What of those who, by the process, discovered significant health defects in the child and decided against keeping it alive?

4. In India and China, ultrasound is commonly used to discover the sex of the child, so that females can be aborted. In India, especially Rajasthan, breeding females has blamed on wives - often child brides - and used as an excuse to murder mothers and girl-children, often with particularly deliberate vengeful cruelty. What is to stop state-mandated ultrasound from being misused for vain and bigoted purposes?

5. The process is not nearly as invasive or painful as abortion... Probably no more than any one of the number of pelvic exams gynecologists consider a necessary part of PRE-NATAL CARE. How 'bout them healthy babies? How 'bout taking care of them in womb and out? Who should pay for 'em? If parents can't, should the state, or should they be aborted?

Click here: Michele Bachmann Proposes Mandatory Ultrasounds For Women Seeking Abortions

No comments:

Post a Comment