For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
Ultrasound Cacophony: The Left’s Newest Pro-Abortion Lie
Written By : Warner Todd Huston

In the Commonwealth of Virginia the left has a new attack against those that want to regulate abortions. The legislature in the Old Dominion introduced legislation to require ultrasounds to be performed before an abortion could be performed. Idiotically, leftists cried foul claiming the requirement is somehow “like” getting raped. Yet a new study show that the left’s favorite abortion mill, Planned Parenthood, performs ultrasounds before abortions in 99% of its operations.

Talk about making fools of themselves, the left has done it again.

First, let’s look at the left’s claim, though. Speaking for the pro-infanticide set, Dahlia Lithwck at Slate makes the case:

This week, the Virginia state Legislature passed a bill that would require women to have an ultrasound before they may have an abortion. Because the great majority of abortions occur during the first 12 weeks, that means most women will be forced to have a transvaginal procedure, in which a probe is inserted into the vagina, and then moved around until an ultrasound image is produced. Since a proposed amendment to the bill—a provision that would have had the patient consent to this bodily intrusion or allowed the physician to opt not to do the vaginal ultrasound—failed on 64-34 vote, the law provides that women seeking an abortion in Virginia will be forcibly penetrated for no medical reason. I am not the first person to note that under any other set of facts, that would constitute rape under the federal definition.

Apparently, this absurd line of “reasoning” is “spreading like wildfire” among the far left.

Not only is this “rape” claim an absurdity made merely to cause fear and loathing, but the law doesn’t require a transvaginal ultrasound in the first place. The law leaves the method up to the physician.

But there is more to the hypocrisy of the left’s ultrasound attack. Many types of abortions by absolute necessity require invasive vaginal insertions of medical instruments. So, how is an ultrasound “like” rape, but the abortions that require vaginal insertion of instruments isn’t? There is no logic at all to these screaming mimis and their claims.

Further, now we are discovering that most of the abortions that occur in the left’s favorite abortion mill, Planned Parenthood, already have these ultrasounds performed before abortions are undertaken.

Surveying 72 of the abortion businesses that sold the abortion pill to women, the researchers found abortion facilities frequently use vaginal ultrasounds before an abortion to determine the gestational age of the baby or afterwards to determine of the abortion was complete. In fact 99 percent of the abortion facilities surveyed always or sometimes performed an ultrasound in association with the surgical abortion — while just one percent did not.

If their own infanticide factories already do these things, why is the left suddenly against the bill in Virginia? Only because they are against all regulations whatever. They want abortion at will for any reason and that, as we say, is that.

There simply is no logic at all to their tactics here.

2
  • bill

    Perhaps a less intrusive but just as effective law would be to require abortion seekers to see a video of a live abortion-  actually watch the baby being ripped to pieces.  I would love to hear the pro-death community’s rationale for objecting to that. 

  • JoeBritton

    Look Huston. The Dems are happy the right wing, especially the male right wing, is back on the road talking about women’s sexuality, contraceptives or abortion or whatever.

    The independent female vote is in their bag now thanks to guys like you.

    • Toastrider

      And frankly, I’m mystified as to WHY independent women voters would EVER vote Democrat again after the Dems pulled out all the stops to defend then-President Bill Clinton, a man who literally could not keep his dick in his pants or his hands to himself. A philandering, sexual predator.

      I’ll give you fuckwits credit, you have a spin machine that would make Goebbels green with envy.

    • gfchicago

      There you go again talking out of your ass.  In no way is this talking about a woman’s sexuality or  contraceptives.

      In the article as Huston pointed out, planned parenthood and other abortion facilities already require ultrasounds before abortions.

      As far as contraceptives go, we should not have to pay for women’s sexuality or a man’s for that matter.

      Contraceptives are relatively cheap so why should we as a society have to pay for them to get laid?

    • BinDSM

      Really?! You’ve polled all of them? All those Christians? Jews? and Muslims? a great deal of whom find abortion abhorrent? 

  • huckupchuck

    I’m frankly surprised that the whole distinction between a government mandated medical procedure (i.e. the Virginia law) and a voluntary agreement to a medical procedure (i.e. Planned Parenthood) are even considered parallel cases.  It kinda exposes your hypocrisy regarding the whole contraception hullabaloo of recent weeks.  If a pregnant woman objects to Planned Parenthood’s requirement of an ultrasound before getting an abortion, then that pregnant woman can choose not to avail themselves of Planned Parenthood’s services and can seek services elsewhere.  But a pregnant woman under Virginia’s law has no ability to refuse an ultrasound.  It’s a case of government forcing a medical procedure on a woman before obtaining a legal abortion.  There’s a big difference here, and I would have thought you small-government conservatives would have understood that.

    • BinDSM

      Because the abortion has medical and psychological implications, mandating a procedure that’s not really ‘medical’, (running a wand over your skin that has no effect on your physical condition health). isn’t really a violation of the woman’s body. Is it an overreach, maybe? But then if abortion wasn’t legal, the law would be mute, right? And until we wise up to the negative effects of abortion to the mother, not to mention the violation of the babies rights, anything that discourages abortions and forces a reversal of RvW is accectable to many conservatives.

    • mightysamurai

      But a pregnant woman under Virginia’s law has no ability to refuse an ultrasound.

      Really? Because last I checked, the Virginia state government is only requiring an ultrasound for women seeking an abortion. Seems to me that if a woman doesn’t want the ultrasound, she can simply choose not to abort.

      The government requires all sorts of medical procedures before certain decisions can be made. Before having a sex change you are required to submit to a psychological evaluation. Before taking a job as a firefighter or police officer you’re required to take a physical. And the number of things that require mandatory drug screenings are countless.

      We aren’t against any of those government mandated medical procedures, so why should we be against this one?

Advertisement
Featured Video

Who Is Brett Kimberlin?

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info