New Pattern Amongst Rep's With Abortion: Stupidity

I wanna go on record that watching a live child birth did nothing for me... It was pretty shocking when they faked it in that one Seth rogan movie though... I did not see it coming lol...

If you only want them to have the choice then why not propose something like after school sessions that are available for the kids to sign up for and attend?

It's still tax payer money funneled through gov't hands to whatever the intended project... these days governments are still pretty strapped for cash as well... and as much as you'll say it is necessary and as much as it might even be necssary or a positive step the hurdles still remain... taking a higher moral stance and yelling louder or making sarcastic statements doesn't take away from the reality of the situation...

Are you ok with shaming teens as a means to an end? I sometimes wonder where the disconnect is... I mean I barely had any sex-ed classes beyond an expteremely basic one in the 5th grade and I'm clean and have no unwanted babies... budget cuts are a program killer... and when you get pressure from the parents at the school or the community in general...

I can't speak much on the adoption process as I'm not really familiar with it... I've thought about adopting myself as it's come up in previous relationships but I don't think I ever really would and for me it's not so much a cost thing but when I think of having a child I like the idea of having my own... not to say other kids are defective or worse or anything just that's what I want... I also think that when people go to adopt they're looking for something specific at times... I don't know if encouraging adoption is the easiest or even the right thing... or how you would even do it unless they wanted kids... the only moral viewpoint that counts is the safety of the child and his continued positive welfare... We should really reform our foster program... I think it's pretty shoddily run atm and for your purposes could always be a window into adoption...

Pfffttt...I thought most people had their introductions to sex education after school, but not in the sense of a formal program. LOL!

If you only want them to have the choice then why not propose something like after school sessions that are available for the kids to sign up for and attend?

I did misunderstand you because on the one hand you're saying that you should make the classes available and if they want to take them they can and if they want to opt out or parents can yank them from the program or whatever and now you're saying that only after you've been armed with the knowledge from a sex ed or health course can you go about doing whatever your choice is...

Did the two years your school had the program drastically reduce the amount of unsafe sex kids were having at your school?

Is there a point at which we become responsible for educationg ourselves? I do understand your desire to educate kids and such but I'm just curious if you think there is an age or some kind of line we cross where we then become responsible to educate ourselves or rid ourselves of ignorance or are we forever reliant on the government to educate and tell us this is how this is or that is how that is?

Edit: so after they've taken a health or sex ed course now are they personally responsible for their own actions? Is it still the state's business to take care of them when they've aremed them with the knowledge not to make decisions like these?

What I meant is that once you've been armed with the knowledge from a sex ed or health course then whatever you do after that is your choice.

AUSTIN, Texas — Round two of Texas' fierce ideological battle over abortion limits began Monday, with demonstrators filling the state Capitol and riot police on standby less than a week after a Democratic filibuster and hundreds of raucous protesters threw the end of the first special session into chaos.

The Legislature's Republican majority has vowed to pass wide-ranging abortion restrictions quickly and easily this time, even as opponents mobilize for more protests. "The world has seen images of pro-abortion activists screaming, cheering," Republican Gov. Rick Perry said. "Going forward, we have to match their intensity but do it with grace and civility."

Hundreds of abortion-rights groups gathered on the Capitol's front steps hours before a rally was scheduled to begin, while horse-mounted state troopers and police from as far away as Houston watched. More than 100 state police, many carrying helmets and truncheons, staged inside the Capitol building and newly erected crowd control barriers funneled visitors away from the entrances to the House and Senate chambers.

Opponents of the proposed law restricting where, when and how a woman may obtain an abortion wore orange T-shirts and prepared for a rally with national women's rights leaders. Supporters wore blue and recited the Lord's Prayer outside the Senate.

Lawmakers finished their regular session on May 27, but Perry called them back immediately for 30 more days to approve, among other things, the tight new limits on abortion.

On the extra session's last day, however, Democratic Sen. Wendy Davis of Fort Worth was on her feet for more than 12 hours — speaking most of that time — as Democrats used a filibuster to help kill the sweeping abortion bill.

As the midnight deadline loomed, Republicans used parliamentary technicalities to silence her, but hundreds of protesters in the public gallery and surrounding Capitol corridors cheered so loudly that senators on the floor weren't able to hear, and the bill died as the clock ran out.

The scene was chaotic enough that Sen. Donna Campbell, a New Braunfels Republican, called for the gallery to be cleared. With lawmakers now heading back, she said, "I believe more presence by law enforcement will help keep disruptive behavior from thwarting the democratic process."

She said more families may turn up to express their views and "every Texan's voice deserves to be heard. Not just the noisiest and unruliest."

Lainie Duro sat on the Capitol floor at 8 a.m. Monday with a stack of feminist literature and sex education books.

"I'm always part of the unruly mob. We refuse to be ruled," she said. "Poor women, women of color, rural women. If they need abortion they will not be able to get an abortion. Health care in Texas is already difficult for people in poverty to access."

How much work lawmakers will accomplish Monday is unclear. They need a quorum to open the session. After that, all they can do is refer bills to committees. But lawmakers from both parties are likely to use the opening day to give speeches to their supporters.

Perry said he expects lawmakers to get their work done more quickly this time, making it harder for a filibuster to talk any proposed legislation to death.

"I want the Legislature to be getting work done that actually that they had, by and large, finished," he said.

House Speaker Joe Straus and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who oversees the Senate, haven't revealed plans to do anything differently in the second special session — but it's lost on no one that moving through the process faster, and ensuring both chambers carry out final votes long before the end of the session, will limit Democratic stall tactics and make any possible filibuster moot because too much time would be left.

The legislative process now starts over, with lawmakers filing bills, committees holding public hearings on each, then passing them to both full chambers to consider. That means reviving the proposals Davis and the protesters killed: banning abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, requiring that the procedure be performed at ambulatory surgical centers, and mandating that doctors who perform abortions obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles.

Supporters say such limits will safeguard women's health, but opponents argue the requirements are intended to stop abortions through over-regulation. Only five out of 42 clinics qualify as ambulatory surgical centers and they are located only in major metropolitan areas. Dewhurst has acknowledged that the ultimate goal is to shutter abortion clinics.

Davis, who donned pink tennis shoes for the marathon speech that made her an overnight political sensation nationwide, hasn't said if she would try something similar again. And, calling more special sessions has squashed Democratic stonewall tactics before.

In 2003, House Democrats fled to Oklahoma to keep the chamber from making quorum and passing new redistricting maps that benefited Republicans. When Perry called a first and then second special session, Senate Democrats headed to New Mexico. But the maps were approved during a third extra session that year.

Even so, Gilberto Hinojosa, chairman of the Texas Democratic Party, vowed: "As this last week has shown, we are ready to fight."

The legislative process now starts over, with lawmakers filing bills, committees holding public hearings on each, then passing them to both full chambers to consider. That means reviving the proposals Davis and the protesters killed: banning abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, requiring that the procedure be performed at ambulatory surgical centers, and mandating that doctors who perform abortions obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles.

Supporters say such limits will safeguard women's health, but opponents argue the requirements are intended to stop abortions through over-regulation. Only five out of 42 clinics qualify as ambulatory surgical centers and they are located only in major metropolitan areas. Dewhurst has acknowledged that the ultimate goal is to shutter abortion clinics.

That would make sense if the intentions of those measures were to actually improve women's health.

Requiring admission privileges is about placing the power to allow abortions with hospital administrators who may disagree with the procedure or who may purposely distance themselves from the procedure due to outside pressures. It unfairly singles out abortion providers despite abortion being a relatively safe, low-risk procedure. It adds no new safety benefit for women seeking abortion because women are not currently being turned away from admission because of abortion complications if their physician doesn't have admitting privileges, and any competent medical professional will have a procedure for a quick patient transfer should something go awry.

It's a backdoor way for anti-abortion politicians to circumvent the fact that abortion is a constitutionally protected right by imposing an unreasonable and unnecessary regulation on it knowing full well that it would effectively shut down the vast majority of abortion providers.

The bold part is hilarious to me. Just shows how full of crap "prochoice" liberals are. They claim they are for women's health then are outraged over measures to insure better care for women undergoing abortions. At the same time liberals there admitting that overregulating kills an industry.

So just to be clear, you believe overregulating an industry kills an industry? And overregulation is in fact designed to kill an industry, and not say protect the environment?

If you gave a ***about women's health in regards to abortion then you would be for legislation to put Butcher Shops like the one Hermit Gosnell was running out of business.

Talking about overregulation maybe and it's true motives?