Texas Wants Women to Listen to Fetal Hearbeat Before Abortion

**tower-obsession** · February 25th, 2011

I have to say again, that if I were to become pregnant as a result of rape, I would NOT have an abortion. But adding to that, I don't think I would give the baby up for adoption either. I thought about this long and hard after my daughter brought up the subject a few years ago, and I concluded that I would keep the baby and raise it (and love it), because that baby didn't rape me, that baby never did anything to me. All that baby knows how to do is eat, poop, and trust that it will be taken care of. I don't expect anyone to understand my thinking, but that's what I would do.

If I were to decide on an abortion, I wouldn't want to have to sit through a forced ultrasound, be forced to listen to the heartbeat, or sit through some doctor's lecture about it. I don't think I have a right to do that to someone else either. Just because I wouldn't do it, doesn't meant I have the right to judge others for it.

**CorbinKale** · February 25th, 2011

Originally Posted by Sigmund

Mr. Kale,
I beg your pardon. However, Your posts, so far, are 'off topic'.
The topic, was should Texas (or any state) require that women listen to fetal heratbeats, and be subjected to a 'lecture' by a doctor before they have an abortion.

Your initial post was fairly broad in scope, addressing many issues with regard to abortion. From that, I gathered the general topic was abortion and what was right or wrong, such as the Texas proposal. I didn't want to go too far down the paternity / child support road, as that could be a whole new thread.

To address the Texas proposal specifically, yes it is right and proper. That is State's business. If the citizens of a State disagree with State legislation, they can campaign to repeal it, or they can move to a different State that more closely matches their philosophy. If this sort of thing was mandated at a national level, I would fight it, as unconstitutional. Because that power was not delegated to the Federal government in the Constitution, it is reserved to the States.

**JohnDalglish** · February 25th, 2011

Originally Posted by CorbinKale

My emotional state in that situation would probably override my logical thought process.

Hi,

Hmm, so you 'ass-u-me' anyway.

I'm with Tery, I don't see why men have a vote on this subject.

Long days and pleasant nights

**CorbinKale** · February 25th, 2011

Originally Posted by Tery

Once again, we see where it leads when religion is allowed to dictate law. It's NOT your decision unless you are a woman in a situation where this could be something you might have to think about. Men DO NOT have a say in it. Sorry, no. When they can carry a fetus to term then they can make the decision. Until then, keep it in your pants or STFU.

My wallet?

**hossenpepper** · February 25th, 2011

Even the perfect pregnancy is a life and death risk to the mother. Every birth is a potential risk of death for the mother. This is why they get more say. Period. Until it's born, the mother assumes all the health risk.

Even illogical Texans (especially males) can understand that, hopefully. And again, if you aren't experienced with this matter, you should really save your opinions for your little world where it means something. I am expressing my opinion as I am experienced with this both personally and professionally. Unlike some, I don't jaunt to Google to form my opinions about everything.

**cat in a bag** · February 25th, 2011

I am in complete agreement with tower. I became a mom at a young age, 18, and a lot of people were pushing for me to have an abortion. But I knew in my heart that I would never ever be able to look myself in the mirror again if I did that. I chose to go forward, and I took care of him myself until I met and married my husband 8 years later. Did I receive help from my family, both financially and emotionally? Yes, but more emotional than financial. Was it hard? Absolutely, it was the hardest thing I have ever done. But I don't regret it for one second.

And for the record, the father walked away when told of the pregnancy, and I did NOT pursue him for any financial help. The state went after him, and I was against it whole heartedly. The state went after him I did receive assistance from the state, but only while I was attending college, and then I immediately got a job. The only way I could avoid the state from going after him was to go on record as saying I did not know who the father of my child was. I was not going to do that, I already had to find a way to hold my head up and keep going, I was not going to say something like that. So I was awarded the astounding amount of $50 a month. I never took him back to court on my own looking for more, he has never had anything to do with either of us since. That child is now 18 and in college himself.

So, while it would not be a choice I would or could make for myself, I do not hold it against a woman who does choose to, it is her choice. Sitting through an ultrasound and listening to the heartbeat makes an already very tough decision that much harder to make, and it is cruel to do so.

**CorbinKale** · February 25th, 2011

Originally Posted by JohnDalglish

Hi,

Hmm, so you 'ass-u-me' anyway.

I'm with Tery, I don't see why men have a vote on this subject.

Long days and pleasant nights

Because male babies are being murdered, too?

**Connie Reader** · February 25th, 2011

Originally Posted by CorbinKale

My point is that if abortion is not murder, Petersen would have been convicted of one count of murder and one count of practicing medicine without a license, rather than two murders.

The baby Mrs Peterson was carrying could have survived outside of the womb at that point, therefore, murder in the eyes of the law. In most cases, abortions are performed within the first three months, a time which a fetus CANNOT live without the mother. Call it murder if you wish, but saying that is only an opinion.
Luckily we live in a country where women are able to make a choice about their bodies and until that fetus is capable of life outside the womb, it is part of the mother's body and the decision lies with her. Yes, that isn't fair to men who, for whatever reason, decide they want that baby and the mother does not. Men will never know the toll pregancy takes on the body, physically and mentally, and until they come up with a way for men to have babies, it's just something they have to swallow.
Women fought for centuries to be able to command what happens with our own bodies and this Texas practice is just a way of trying to control women. It's sexist and cruel and it's stinks with religious fanaticism.
As I said before, we have so many children in this country who have no one to love and care for them and to care more about a fetus than a fully formed, thinking, breathing on their own, trying to find their way in this world person is appalling.

**Connie Reader** · February 25th, 2011

Originally Posted by CorbinKale

I provided a link for easy verification of the law.

It is only fair to give the father the same option for abortion as the mother has. Either that, or allow the unwilling father to legally abdicate all financial responsibility, the same as the mother can with abortion. If either of those policies were made law, I am certain that the incidences of unwanted pregnancies would plummet. It would certainly remove the incentive for that classic fraud.

I use that arguement, not to really advocate for a man's right to abort his child, but to cause an outcry against a man having any control over a woman's body. Once we establish that, it is easy to refute the claims that the man is responsible to keep a woman from getting pregnant, or that he should be legally responsible for her offsring should she choose to not kill them. If all choice belongs solely to the woman, so does all the responsibility.

But that is getting off topic. If the difference between murder and legal abortion lies solely in the opinion of the killers, how can that be good law? It certainly isn't applied equally with regard to the parents. In fact, a good case could be made for gender discrimination.

Saying such a statement as "...lies soley in the opinion of the killers" is asinine and inflammatory. Shame on you.

When a man can truly share the burden of pregnancy then he can have an equal say in what happens.

Native Americans used different herbs to bring on a miscarriage if the timing of the pregnancy wasn't right (too close to winter or they didn't store enough food or if a sickness was in the camp. You can search history books from all different countries and read about the ways women controlled when they brought a child into this world. The Victorian era ushered in a new age of sexism and these practices were kept under wraps, but they didn't die out.

Every situation is different....but the option for choices should be (and thank goodness it is in this and most countries) the same. I'm grateful for intelligent and like-minded people who stand up for women's rights.