Log In | Register
This week, a Virginia state House committee overwhelmingly approved a bill requiring women to receive an ultrasound before they can have an abortion.
. Because the majority of abortions happen in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, many women would have to undergo an invasive procedure “in which a probe is inserted into the vagina, and then moved around until an ultrasound image is produced
CNN Contributor Dana Loesch Defends Virginia;State-Sponsored Rape Bill As No Different Than Consensual Sex
Seeded on Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:32 PM EST
Article Source: Think Progress
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (11)
LOESCH: That’s the big thing that progressives are trying to say, that it’s rape and so on and so forth. [...] There were individuals saying, “Oh what about the Virginia rape? The rapes that, the forced rapes of women who are pregnant?” What? Wait a minute, they had no problem having similar to a trans-vaginal procedure when they engaged in the act that resulted in their pregnancy.
an unnamed Republican delegate made the same argument in support of the bill, saying women consented to being “vaginally penetrated when they got pregnant.
- 3 votes
#1 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:35 PM EST
Does there need to be a brighter line drawn between the two parties? This is what they call small government, this is what they classify and liberty, and freedom.
- 5 votes
The liberty is when they have the "liberty" to penetrate a woman's vagina
- 4 votes
#2 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:10 PM ESTUh, we might just have had an unintended, and uninvited glimpse into Ms. Loesch's personal life if she is really comparing the two. (s) Regardless, her comment is pretty gross. What an irresponsible thing to say.
This procedure is not necessary and there are other, less invasive, equally accurate ways to determine length of pregnancy.
- 4 votes
#3 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:03 PM ESTI believe this procedure is done when the pregnancy is too early along to be able to be picked up on sonogram.
- 2 votes
#4 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 5:19 PM ESTYep, during the first 12 weeks, when most abortions take place. I am pro-choice and would have no problem making abortion illegal after 12 weeks unless the mother's life is in danger. This procedure is wrong and is a clear violation of the fourth amendment.
- 3 votes
I've had ultrasounds (goopy version) in the end of the first trimester and I could see the babies in there just fine each time. They were checking for twins in my case.
As I posted on a seed earlier today, there are blood tests which can also determine, pretty accurately, gestational age. The two I had occurred in the first trimester. The doctors were questioning my pregnancy tests results, so I insisted they do the blood tests. They were very accurate.
So this hideous procedure isn't really necessary. It's just some legal form of humiliation and degradation.
- 5 votes
Skeptic,
Heaven forbid that they would want to put a woman through humiliation and degradation.
The Puritans used to make women wear a scarlet letter around their chests for humiliation and degradation if they were suspected of adultery ....I see us being led in that direction.
If any woman anywhere votes for a Republican they should have their head examined. Abortion may be the issue now, and they may be against abortion, but the day may come when the "powers that be" decide that something else that a woman is doing or not doing needs to be legislated against and then it will too late.
Ultra orthodox Jews in Israel (which has always had women's rights, including serving in the military) are beginning to whip girls that they determine are dressed immodestly. Women are being made to take different buses or sit in the back of the bus and walk on different sideways. You think that sounds extreme but that's just happened in the last several years.
Women better look at how quickly things have changed to take more and more power away from women and their own bodies and take care to stop this trend.
- 3 votes
#5 - Mon Feb 20, 2012 6:30 PM ESTRescue, I agree with every example you gave.
No one has said this straight out, but I think some men are terrified that they won't ever have a chance to be rich, resent that women have their own money, and in some cases, earn more than those men, and there's a concerted effort to eliminate women from the labor force so men can regain control. In the 70s, Dianna Pearce pointed out the "Feminization of Poverty". It's no accident that women and their children comprise most of those in poverty. Poverty is big business; the way men constructed our policies, it is perpetuated.
If any woman anywhere votes for a Republican they should have their head examined.
Well, they'd better think twice before voting for any Republicans or they are likely going to have other parts examined. That's blunt, but that's the way it's shaping up.
The Puritans used to make women wear a scarlet letter around their chests for humiliation and degradation if they were suspected of adultery ....I see us being led in that direction.
We're not just being led - we are being pushed at legislative gunpoint toward loss of our own personhood. Another underlying dynamic which no one has touched on (and I may be way off base, but given some of the comments and behavior from the right wing, I don't think I'm that far off) is that current minorities are expected to become the majorities in a couple of decades and the white men who have the power right now want to increase numbers of whites by forcing women into pregnancy. Again, harsh, but given what they've had the b@lls to say in public, I wouldn't be surprised at any discussion content along these lines in the backrooms.
I've been reading all these seeds about all these developments, rescue, and I don't even know where to put the rage, the outrage, the disgust. We already fought these battles decades ago. I was a Poli Sci major. If I'd walked into class with these arguments, I'd be a two-time college drop-out - because none of my professors would have tolerated this kind of rhetoric as making an argument, or persuasion, or a reasoned response. I'm also born-again. If God is big enough and powerful enough to give us all free will, who are these guys who spout "less government" while passing a law forcing women to undergo rape by instrument to back them down. Everyone stands before God. Everyone answers for their choices, whatever those are. Some guy has no right to tell some woman what to do. And I used to be a Republican, but I was never THIS kind of Republican. I still believe in my right to privacy, speech, religion, freedom from illegal search and seizure, and all the other rights, and born-again or not, Republican or not, no guy is ever going to rape or molest me again. Nor am I going to stand by quietly while some 'gang' of legislators sets others up for those same things.
And you're right. If there was ever a time for women to speak up, take action, and assert their own personhood, their own rights, their own interests - and those of their families - this is the time. This time, no one is going to fix it but us. We have the numbers and we can do this.
- 2 votes
There is that minor difference encapsulated in the word consensual. In fact, this law practically defines rape and I have no doubt that it will be found unconstitutional. Someoe should be making the case that, at a time of lessening state budgets, do we really need to spending time & money passing obviously flawed laws?
- 2 votes
#7 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:09 AM ESTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
