Invasive Ultrasounds For Women - How About Rectal Exams For Men?

Come on GF you know very well the premise of this is totally wrong, in order for it to be correct you first have to prove that a fetus is an independent sentient person, you cannot .. scientifically it is not, the Jews were and are. Abortion is not religious, race or social level restrictive, where as the murder of Jews was .. There is no comparison.

It would be like me saying that the pro-lifers want a country ruled by a tyrant, simply because they want to remove the right of a part of its population to own part of their own body .. I would not be correct in that assumption, and neither is the comparison between pro-choice and the Nazi's, its emotive at best and just plain lying at worst.

 

It can hear as early as 4 months after conception, so how can it not be sentient?

 

Yup, I'm all for this ....which is the


TOPIC !!! Yoohoo everyone.... the TOPIC isn't abortion......


Men MUST prove that they really have an "erectile dysfunction" before being given Viagra...afterall they might be getting Viagra for a reason some people wouldn't approve of...some people might think that's immoral...so men should be forced into any and all examinations, and be forced to look at the results and have counseling giving them alternatives like NOT having sex because you're old and had enough sex or they're not married, or he's too young for Viagra, ...or if they have sex they will produce a baby then the poor little man will have to actually support it or go on Welfare....YUP, men should be subject to complete analysis and public disclosure of their personal medical history...

Oh, and how about a public list of all those men who can't get it up??YES! Let's PUNISH them for having sex or haha wanting to have sex!

 

The law is the law as I hear time and time again from a few. Don't get me wrong, I know what I brought up was complete crap. I was illustrating just how damaging a bad law can be. As for sentience? This is determined by the will of a majority - something people will never agree on. It is why I never bring up the sentience argument. There is no way to prove it either way, even if there was people would still butt heads on the issue over semantics of it. As for the comparison of the murder of the jews? A short time after the Bolsheviks had a hey day with the Christians that makes the holocaust mild in comparison. But it is not discussed much in history books for some reason.

This is true. Although I shouldn't lump all left wingers in the same camp, you got me there.

 

VERY few abortions are done after 3 months, something else for you to learn.

 

Depends how you understand hearing, it is quite a complex system. Even some deaf people can "hear", unless the actual physical parts of the hearing system are damaged. There are people who have perfect hearing systems, who still cannot hear. The signal goes into the cochlear duct causing vibration of endolymph (a specialized fluid) where the signal is converted into an electrical impulse that is transferred to the cochlear and vestibular nerves. The brainstem sends the signal to the midbrain and then subsequently to the auditory cortex of the temporal lobes of the brain where the electrical impulses are interpreted as the sounds that we experience.

Also, just because something can here does not make it sentient, all animals can hear, are they sentient?

sentient - endowed with feeling and unstructured consciousness.

A fetuses nervous system though fully formed at 9 weeks does not have the essential part of the brain that interprets the pulse sent from those nerves ie, there is no sensation of pain, or touch.

 

Can't agree, sentience is determined by a number of measurable factors . .such as comparison between fully developed brains and under developed brains . .I seem to remember reading that a scientist offered up a paper stating that he had taken readings from an aborted fetus that showed brain waves at 6 weeks . .however a group of college science students disproved this by taking almost exactly the same readings from a bowl of Jello.

 

Might be why it matches the Jello. It was already dead. Haven't seen the study, not much that I care to. But I digress.

This is why I said this.

It doesn't matter to the typical pro-lifer whether it is playing chess in the womb or whether it is a potato. They want it to live.

 

Actually it wasn't .. but you are right, it will always be a point argued

Believe it or not so do the majority of pro-choice people, we just feel that the rights of the woman outweigh the rights of the fetus, and when you take away the scientific evidence, the religious dogma, the economic factor .. it really boils down to the right of the mother v's the right of the fetus.

 

No it does not, obviously, since the ability to perceive any environmental stimulus is indicative of sentience.

Of course it does.

Of course they are.

A non-standard "definition", and pretty questionable given the underlined modifier.

It doesn't need any of those to be sentient, obviously. All a human being needs to be sentient is consciousness of its own existence.

 

LOL! Guess men really really want to avoid the issue in the topic.....I wonder why that is????

 

AAWWWWW, whatsamadda, guys....don't want to think about something forced into YOU???

Whyever not?

Just because you don't need it or don't want it and your doctor doesn't either, that's no reason some legislator shouldn't demand you do it...LOL!!!

 

Go and look up what sentient/sentience means, before making obtuse comments that are daft

Of course it doesn't, prove otherwise

Not in the same way we understand sentience of humans, and the god squad would burn you at the stake for thinking otherwise

Well if you class the dictionary definition as non-standard and questionable then you would be right .. maybe a little science will educate you

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=when-does-consciousness-arise

or another dictionary definition - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sentient
or how about the Oxford Dictionary - http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sentient?q=sentient

and in order to achieve that it must be aware of its surroundings ie perception, a fetus is not aware of itself of its surroundings . .prove me wrong.

 

And How About Rectal Exams for MEN?


No men brave enought to discuss this lovely thought...it IS the topic......

 

Probably because it is a retarded topic, and it was discussed already.

/thread...end the weirdness.

 

That's no reason to go off topic, this thread is still about rectal exams.... Which hasn't been discussed for some odd reason

 

"""WWAAAAAHHHH, it's not fair to even joke about MEN being FORCED into unwanted medical procedures, it's only women who should be forced!!""


The legislator was just making a very good point about sick sexist attitudes.............

 

Reproductive rights are reproductive rights ...if some man wants Viagra HE should be controlled also....he shouldn't mind having a FORCED examination....and no one else should mind having any forced examination BIGGER GOVERNMENT wants to give them....

 

So the woman wants to have a suction hose jammed up her (*)(*)(*)(*) and she is complaing about a little ultrasound probe?!

She does have a choice. She can choose not to get an abortion.

Besides, the woman does have a choice between which doctor inserts the probe. Just like she had a choice about which penis insemeninated her.

 

I want a law that says any man wanting Viagra or wants to fly on a plane(he could be hiding explosives ) or wants to force any medical procedure on women is FORCED to get a rectal exam....what's the big deal?


Bigger, more intrusive government is what righty Anti-Choicers are all about....let's give it to 'em!

 

No woman WANTS to have suction hose jammed up her, but it is NECESSARY to avoid a worse situation. A vaginal ultrasound is NOT NECESSARY. You just want to add additional punishment and torment for the woman.

Having chosen abortion, it is unlikely that she will unchoose abortion just because anti-choicers put roadblocks in her way. Punitive unnecessary roadblocks.

She doesn't necessarily have that choice of doctors, but what difference does it make?

 

It is also avoidable by not having sex. Sex is not a need or a right, it is a privilege. And if she didn't choose to engage in a behavior known to cause pregnancy, she would not be in the situation she is in. Barring the rarity of rape. Plus, abstinence is free - don't cost me nuffin'. That being said, I wish men wouldn't leap at the chance to diddle about just any girl's nethers either.

Valuing life over convenience does not make one a misogynist. No matter how much you think we men love punishing women, it is simply inaccurate. And by labeling us that way is telling a lie.

But having to mandate a vaginal ultrasound is a little wonky to me, doesn't make much sense unless the fetus is being particularly shy. Sometimes you actually have to, but not commonly.

 

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Does no good to tell a pregnant woman she "coulda" avoided it. She already knows she's pregnant and the question now is what to do about it.

It's not just men, there are some women on that punishment wagon too. But it's not a lie, and it's revealed very clearly when anti's say things like "she "shoulda" not had sex" or "she "shoulda" kept her legs closed" or "she "shoulda" thought of that before."

Medical decisions should be left to medical experts, not politicians nor those with a particular ax to grind.

 

Good post....don't you agree that anyone who loves to post photos of men hitting women, anyone who wants women forced give birth because they shouldn't have had sex (it follows that they need to be punished) are indeed, misogynists??

 

You're right, it does no good to tell a stupid woman these things, however, a smart woman will realize the egregious mistake she made and do the best she can to make it right. It also does no good to provide an easy out courtesy of the taxpayer's dollar - not only take away a natural learning curve, but the taxpayer's wallet is now lighter. Everybody loses that way.

And some how you translate this into us wanting to see them punished? That we hate women? Are misogynistic? Complete crap. But all of those "shoulda's" you listed are perfectly valid. I have to live with the outcome of my decisions, what makes pregnant women so special eh?