Pro-aborts have decided on their main talking points against recent states’ requirements for ultrasounds to be shown to women before abortions. And it’s a doozy.
Pro-aborts are arguing that ultrasounds are invasive.
One Democrat running for a state seat even went so far as to call the state required ultrasound “rape by instrumentation.”
The media has picked up on this attack as they’ve clearly been ordered to. I’ve seen the term “invasive” used to describe the ultrasounds dozens of times in the past few days.
Ocala.com:Rep. Betty Reed, a Democrat from Hillsborough County, said the ultrasound exam is an invasive procedure that should not be imposed on women.
AFP writes in a news headline:
Oklahoma lawmakers overrode their governor’s veto Tuesday to enact tough abortion laws that force women to undergo invasive ultrasounds and allow doctors to withhold test results showing fetal defects.
Do these people not realize how abortions are done? Suction tubes, forceps, curettes (sharp knives.) And it’s the ultrasound that’s invasive?
You know, I’m starting to think that pro-aborts will pretty much say or do anything to keep women in the dark.
May 3, 2010 at 4:03 am
"…I'm starting to think that pro-aborts will pretty much say or do anything to keep women in the dark."
Say it ain't so!
May 3, 2010 at 4:17 am
Rep. Reed needs to do her homework. Are ultrasounds invasive? Not. Revealing? Definitely.
As oColly.com noted, ultrasounds are already commonly performed at abortion clinics — but only as a "pregnancy sizing" tool that helps the abortionist determine what type of abortion procedure to use.
By requiring the abortionist to offer to show that same live ultrasound to the mom, and to describe the baby's state of development, the law ensures that moms have the opp to make an informed choice for the life or death of their child.
Perhaps the abortionists object to the law because it cuts into their business.
May 3, 2010 at 7:54 am
Even aside from the ridiculous claims about an ultrasound being invasive (not to mention the denial of babies' humanity), once again it seems like pro-choicers are willing to ignore safe medical practices– so now doctors shouldn't even take a look before they perform surgery? This is and has been about the money.
May 3, 2010 at 7:55 am
(Of course, there is nothing "safe" about this procedure at all, for the mother or the baby, but it's hardly surprising that they make such excuses in light of all the other medical standards that they ignore with carte blanche from elected officials.)
May 3, 2010 at 9:02 am
Ultrasounds invasisve. As somone who had an ultrasound to determine if a lump I had was a cyst or cancer I can say they are anything but invasive. In fact it saved me from having to have an invasive biopsy.
The pro-aborts know that an ultrasound results in about 90% of those having them deciding against an abortion. & that is what it is all about. They don't want the truth out. They don't want women to make an informed choice. they want women to think there is NO choice, just abortion.
May 3, 2010 at 1:43 pm
I pray that some day, the law states if a doc wants to perform an abortion, he/she has to do it via guided ultrasound so as to not puncture a woman's uterus and to ensure complete removal of all "products of conception" to ensure no infection. That would decrease the number of doctors performing abortion (I'd hope).
I'm post-abortive and I wish they would have had US's available. I honestly believe had I gotten to see an ultrasound, see the baby, see the heartbeat… that would have given me the courage to tell my parents, my brother and sister, my boyfriend and the few friends that were pressuring me to abort, to screw off. For me, sometimes seeing something helps to give me the conviction I need to be solidified in my belief.
But yeah, the pro-aborts are just trying to keep the women in the dark. Proving once again that they truly don't give a rat's arse about womens health. I don't think they'll be happy about womens health until they themselves are made into males or made asexual because they don't care about the uniqueness of women in the first place.
Makes me wonder how the usage of the words "invasive" make those women that have been raped feel because they really know what it's like to have their femininity and body invaded. And then the obvious understanding that the baby's space and life are being invaded and destroyed through the abortion procedure.
May 3, 2010 at 3:27 pm
They know this invasive angle is bogus but if it can survive the mettle of the law then they'll use it to stop ultrasounds. Isn't the privacy angle the one used to support Roe v Wade i.e. "The Court rested these conclusions on a constitutional right to privacy emanating from the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, also known as substantive due process." So, the challenge is to break the privacy defense vis-a-vis the right to life of the fetus. If that doesn't work, then the pro-lifers can offer the ultrasound for free and hope that the mothers will come voluntarily.
May 3, 2010 at 3:52 pm
This language is pretty bogus, but I can see where they would say it is an invasive procedure as any ultrasounds that happen before the 20 week mark (from my experience with my wife) are generally done as vaginal ultrasounds, which do require the technician to insert the US wand into the patient. So, yes, in a sense there is invasion here. That being said, the patient doesn't ever need to sign a consent to perform the "procedure" and there are virtually no side effects or risks. The problem with using the word "invasive" is that it reduces the meaning and signifcance of the word (as is their wont to do). Now when we use the words "invasive procedure" they can say, "Well, so is an ultrasound."
May 3, 2010 at 4:15 pm
Wayne said most of what I was just going to say. The other reason there was such a big outcry is that there isn't an exception for rape victims.
Let's represent their position fairly.
May 3, 2010 at 6:51 pm
Wayne and Al,
Let me help you fellows out a bit. I have a wee bit of experience with ultrasounds (I'm a mom of 8) so I know some about them.
Wayne is correct that vaginal ultrasounds are used in doctors' offices prior to 20 weeks to perform in depth anatomy scans. However, most ultrasounds I (and all the moms I know) have received are abdominal and just check on the baby's health and well being. It's just a bit of goo and a wand on the belly. Warm up the goo and no one can complain really. This is the same type of scan our local abortion clinic uses to date pregnancies. While it is not as in-depth or detailed as a trans-vaginal scan, it shows enough detail to be able to see a beating heart, a face, a thumb being sucked, kicking feet, and a hopping, happy baby. There are reasons pro-"choice" people don't want those images seen, but they have nothing to do with the invasive property of the procedure. Heck, I'll bet we can find enough pro-lifers to buy goo warmers for the local clinics and then there's nothing left for anyone to complain about.
May 3, 2010 at 7:11 pm
While I agree, with the pro-aborts are using the whole untra sound proceedure to hide the truth, again.
We need to know there are two (2) different utra sound proceedures
one which takes place outside the body
– Not invasive – and used most often for most things
There is another proceedure
which requires the insertion of a probe
it is Very invasive
May 3, 2010 at 9:27 pm
How can someone who is about to allow objects to be inserted into her womb to kill the child within and remove the child's remains have a problem with first performing a vaginal ultrasound on the grounds that it's "invasive?"
May 4, 2010 at 1:56 pm
Very true jtliuzza.
May 4, 2010 at 2:27 pm
@ "aka Mom" SIGN ME UP FOR A GOO WARMER;)
@ everyone else
So in this sense would a stethoscope be considered invasive too? It's a tool used to distinguish a heartbeat, that must mean its invasive? Hmmm…
May 4, 2010 at 3:40 pm
Good point jtliuzza. Even a transvaginal ultrasound (the kind people are talking about used earlier in pregnancy) isn't all that bad… good grief, we women are kinda used to the invasion thing when it comes to the lady-doctor, anyway, right? As someone who's worked with many pregnant rape victims, I find the comparison between an ultrasound and a rape to be utterly tasteless, insensitive, and beyond inappropriate.
I'll pitch in for the goo warmers, aka mom!!
May 4, 2010 at 11:28 pm
Black is white. War is peace, freedom is slavery! We have never been at war with Eastasia; we have always been at war with Eurasia!
-1984, George Orwell.