At 11th Hour, Georgia Passes “Women as Livestock” Bill

After an emotional 14-hour workday that included fist-fights between lobbyists and a walk-out by women Democrats, the Georgia House passed a Senate-approved bill Thursday night that criminalizes abortion after 20 weeks.

The bill, which does not contain rape or incest exemptions, is expected to receive a signature from Republican Gov. Nathan Deal.

Commonly referred to as the “fetal pain bill” by Georgian Republicans and as the “women as livestock bill” by everyone else, HB 954 garnered national attention this month when state Rep. Terry England (R-Auburn) compared pregnant women carrying stillborn fetuses to the cows and pigs on his farm. According to Rep. England and his warped thought process, if farmers have to “deliver calves, dead or alive,” then a woman carrying a dead fetus, or one not expected to survive, should have to carry it to term.

The bill as first proposed outlawed all abortions after 20 weeks under all circumstances. After negotiations with the Senate, the House passed a revised HB 954 that makes an exemption for “medically futile” pregnancies or those in which the woman’s life or health is threatened.

If this makes its seem like Rep. England and the rest of the representatives looked beyond their cows and pigs and recognized women as capable, full-thinking human beings, think again: HB 954 excludes a woman’s “emotional or mental condition,” which means women suffering from mental illness would be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. It also ignores pregnant women who are suicidal and driven to inflict harm on themselves because of their unwanted pregnancy.

In order for a pregnancy to be considered “medically futile,” the fetus must be diagnosed with an irreversible chromosomal or congenital anomaly that is “incompatible with sustaining life after birth.” The Georgia “fetal pain” bill  also stipulates that the abortion must be performed in such a way that the fetus emerges alive. If doctors perform the abortion differently, they face felony charges and up to 10 years in prison. Given all this, the so-called compromise suddenly does not look like much of a bargain.

For anti-choice lawmakers, it is an item of faith that fetuses feel pain at 20 weeks. But scientists disagree. Reviews of all existing medical evidence have found that fetuses have not developed the neurological structures to feel pain until at least 25 weeks, and likely not until 28 weeks, in the third trimester.

Although Roe v. Wade set the precedent for abortion to be legal up to 24 weeks, state legislatures continue to ram through restrictive anti-choice laws. Georgia will join six other states with fetal pain restrictions—Nebraska, Indiana, Idaho, Kansas, Oklahoma and Alabama. North Carolina prohibits abortion after 20 weeks.

Arizona is now poised to join the roster, as the Senate passed a 20-week abortion restriction Tuesday. The bill, which awaits final approval from the House, also requires women seeking abortions to look at a state-run website littered with anti-choice propaganda.

And in the Northeast, arguably the country’s most pro-choice region, the New Hampshire House voted Thursday to ban abortion after 20 weeks. The bill now moves to the Senate to join four other anti-abortion bills passed by the House this month.

Although GOP’s war on women continues to deal blow after blow, this week held two small victories: The Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down mandated ultrasounds while the Idaho House dropped the ultrasound bill all together.

Photo from Public Domain Image.

Comments

  1. They do know all these things. They just don’t care because they resent the power women now have in this world. They are legally prevented from physically abusing women these days in order to subdue them, so in it’s stead they will remove all our rights and thus re-instate their flailing manhood.

    • Jojo Shakespeare says:

      Exactly. But explain why so many women are brainwashed into this type of mentality?

      Are they resentful of the women that do attain any kind of stature or power?

      It boggles my mind.

      • It’s called hegemony.

      • Al Miller says:

        Perhaps Rep. Terry England needs to be reminded about the farm practices for male animals.

      • “Are they resentful of the women that do attain any kind of stature or power?”

        This is NOT directed at you, commenter. :) <3 But I just hate this whole line of thinking, of women "attaining stature or power." In our natural state, we have power. Stature is only made-up by humans. Instead of saying, "We can do what men do!" the feminist movement, in my opinion, need(ed) to say, "What we are doing is incredibly important and we will be treated accordingly!" I know that came later, and at least part of the feminist movement has said that. That's where my thinking lies now. "Women's work" should never have been stripped of power.

      • This is the most hideous article I have read in my life. As a person that is personally Pro-life, this is just sick. No woman should never be denied the right to have her choices denied her. A woman is a human being made by God and never should be equated to livestock. Women who voted for the leaders who has dealt them this cruel fate and will continue to vote for this degradation are pathetic women unworthy of sympathy or pity. The are a disgrace to all women everywhere. Redeem our self and get the sociopaths out of office. Stand up and be counted.

        • 1: I’m a man.
          2: 1 Timothy 2:11-15.
          3: By 1 and 2, you have absolutely no right as a Christian woman to speak to me, to vote, or to have an opinion against me or any man. You *are* livestock. Your purpose is to breed and to raise more Christians, ideally men but acceptably womb-bearing units.

          If you’re happy with that, then live it. If you’re not, I can show you to the exit.

          • Yael Tiferet says:

            That’s just rude.

            1. She mentioned God, she never said she was a Christian.
            2. Even if she is a Christian there are plenty of decent Christians out there who disagree with you about this.
            3. You are derailing the post and the thread to promote your own cause (atheism). Stop it.

          • Elizabeth says:

            I am not an animal and I refuse to be considered one. I have a connective tissue disorder that can cause life-threatening complications during delivery. Because of my condition, I can understand the MEDICAL NECESSICITY of abortion, even if it’s not a choice that I’d personally make. HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT IT IS ACCEPTABLE FOR ME AND OTHERS TO KEEP OUR MOUTHS SHUT AND BEAR CHILDREN(AND I QUOTE “PREFERABLLY MEN”) BECAUSE IT’S OUR “CHRISTIAN DUTY” TO DO SO, REGARDLESS OF HEALTH OR WELL-BEING. Monsters like you are the reason why I’m proud to be excommunicated!

    • hell yeah, dont hate….

    • Laughing Hysterically says:

      Haha, flailing manhood? Really? I hope that’s just a spelling error.

  2. christina says:

    THEY ARE SICK BASTARDS, THEY SHOULD HAVE THEIR RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY. ALL WOMEN, DON’T HAVE SEX WITH ANY MAN, TAKE THEIR PORN AWAY, VIAGRA, THEIR EGOS WILL BE CRUSHED!

    • I agree with this post, strident as it may be. I think that women should be in a lot more positions of political power and should dispense with all the ‘ladylike’ fairness. Women should pass pro-woman legislation that expands women’s rights in every facet of life and other laws that restrict men’s freedoms. Yes, I said it. I particularly agree with taking away the porn and the Viagra. And there should be absolutely no male politicians with any power to restrict women’s access to ANYTHING. It is time to move on and get serious, because this has obviously turned into a war. It is time to fight.

      • While the bill is absolutely disgusting adopting a misandrist attitude is wrong also. Not all Men support the bill so why penalise their freedoms because of a few rotten eggs?

  3. Maybury Parade says:

    I don’t see the big deal. If you can’t figure out that you don’t want to be pregnant then you should be consistently taking your pill… and because life isn’t perfect and you end up pregnant after diligent care, you should probably be able to figure out in the roughly 12 weeks you know you’re pregnant that you don’t want to remain enslaved and go through a life-altering event called pregnancy and birth. It’s not disgusting to limit abortions to 20 weeks…. it’s disgusting the reasoning, but really? You think you need 12 weeks to decide you don’t want to be pregnant and have a child you’re not ready for? Really?

    • katie bobick says:

      I agree. I felt all 4 of my babies moving around by 20 weeks…kicking and swirling ..howld you kill that? Good for them for standing up for what is right in this totally wrong world….(Now watch my get blasted for my opinion in 3,2,1…..) Hahahaha….Funny thing is that it doesn’t change what’s right and worth standing up for!

      • katie bobick says:

        * should read how could

      • Amanda R says:

        I don’t want to blast your opinion because I can definitely understand feeling movement at that time. But what if the baby stopped kicking after 22 weeks? What if it turns out she’s going to be brain dead? She won’t ever respond to anything you say or do. She won’t be able to move, speak or feed herself, living through tubes for her entire life. Spend all of her time in this “totally wrong world” in a bed. Staring at nothing. Her 4 brothers and sisters running and playing all around, and though she can see them, she’ll never be able to join in. Then after 6 years of pain, she dies.

        Personally, I don’t know whether, knowing ahead of time, I’d choose to abort that child. I’m sure even a life like that could be beautiful (you could read to her, and always have music and flowers nearby). But I wouldn’t blame a single person who did make that decision. I think that what makes this a sad world is the people who decide that they know what’s best for other people, and who then force their opinions on them. Regular people shouldn’t be allowed to do that; and neither should our government.

        • Beelzebubblebutt says:

          This is a beautiful response.

        • I was pregnant years ago with a full term baby girl. She died in utero right before I was to deliver. No known reason. I was induced because the doctor told me if we waited for nature to ‘take its course’, it might be another two weeks and the baby could make me sick or unable to have another baby. I was induced in hospital, had a beautiful little girl..dead. For some inbred redneck to say I should have risked my life to let this baby come out in pieces two weeks later shows their stupidity. It’s time politicians like these were tossed out of office on their stupid asses!!

          • I completely agree. The issue with this is not the abortion after 20 weeks, I can understand why it should be illegal then. But to carry a dead fetus full term because COWS do? Are they for real?

        • ” I think that what makes this a sad world is the people who decide that they know what’s best for other people, and who then force their opinions on them.”

          Agreed.

      • You’re right, and what needs to be protected is a woman’s right to life, not a fetus’. You are working with the baseless assumption that all human lives have worth, without giving evidence thereto.

        Also, lots of things move that I kill, like bacteria, flies, and brown recluses…

    • Are you kidding? The big deal is that this law was passed. The big deal is that once this law was passed, it opened the door for other laws with even more restrictions to be passed. Open up your eyes. This is how we will lose most of the rights that american women and for that matter men have fought hard for. Some women even paid with death to earn us those rights.

    • I’ve never had to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy, so I don’t know if 12 or 20 weeks is enough time to decide to have one or not. Have you? Can you provide some insight into how long you think it takes for a woman to decide if she wants to keep or terminate a pregnancy? Is this a kind of linear decision where women decide to keep/terminate and stick with it, or do they vacillate over a period of time? If there is vacillation, how long does that normally take? Your knowledge would be much appreciated.

      • “…into how long you think it takes for a woman to decide…” exactly the issue – radical extremists in gov’t dictating women’s decisions for and about themselves. Nobody has such rights over another.

        Hillary is exactly right. Regardless of religious stripes, radical extremists insist on controlling women as the means of controlling society. Nothing new, just thoroughly irritating that this is all the better the human race can do at we embark on the 21st Century.

      • It can take time to notice a pregnancy. That’s why I test every month just to be 100% sure. It took my mother a month after her first missed period to confirm she was pregnant with me, that meant that she was most likely 8 weeks along.

        Assuming you find out at 8 weeks, you then have 4-12 weeks to find the money (and abortions aren’t exactly cheap)because many insurance companies don’t provide coverage for abortion. Once you have the funds and a doctor willing to do the procedure, many states have all sorts of hoops to jump through such as ultrasounds, counseling about how your ‘baby’ is a living thing, making you look at pictures of it, then many states require a 24 hour wait period before the actual abortion can be done, so you need two days of whatever you did to get to the first appointment. None of this includes the time to decide that you want an abortion in the first place.

      • There are many women who do not know they are pregnant for much longer than that. There are cases of women not knowing they are pregnant until they go into labor! This is especially likely if the women is overweight. The fact is, sometimes you don’t know. And also, circumstances change. Maybey your boyfriend or husband runs out on you after the 22 month, and you don’t want to deal with raising the child on your own. Maybey you didn’t know until the 21st week. Maybe you just lost your job and can’t affford a child at the moment.

        ALL CASES ARE DIFFERENT. Therefore, you can never take away the right to choose, because you do not have any idea what the person is going through, and the situations that make her want to abort the child.

    • Life is more complicated than that. Some women don’t have regular periods, and could go a couple of months without realizing anything had changed. Some women might be carrying a very wanted fetus, but the fetus is horribly disfigured and perishing in the womb. Some women may get pregnant, and then their partner might beat the tar out of them, and maybe they have second thoughts about bringing a child into a situation like that. Some women may be on medication that causes birth defects, and then find themselves pregnant from a broken condom, or other failed birth control. Abortion is legal in this country. Women should not have to prove ANYTHING when they seek an abortion, other than the fact that they are indeed pregnant. It’s none of your business how people end up in the circumstances they do. You can’t view the legality and access to abortion as a This or That issue. It involves nuance. Again, abortion is still legal in this country.

    • Jennifer says:

      I can’t help but notice your solution to pregnancy is the pill and not condoms. A medication that overrides the bodies menstrual cycle and is known to cause blood clots and mood disorders in many women. There’s a massive recall of birth control pills ever few months because they don’t work or are killing women and yet there is no social movement to promote condoms.

      It takes most women 6 weeks to even suspect they’re pregnant. They might wait 8-10 weeks thinking they just skipped a period due to stress. Or maybe they’re on the pill or some other hormonal birth control. They may simply think their period is tapering off (as happens to many women on hormonal birth control) and have no reason to suspect they’re pregnant. So now you’re at 10 weeks before they realize they’re pregnant and a few days – a week to get into an obgyn for a test. Now, based on your timeline of 12 weeks, you have perhaps 3 days to decide for yourself or talk with your partner and decide if you can raise a child. I say three days because in a lot of states you have to book an ultra sound and then wait 24-48 hours before you can have the procedure.

      This bill forces women who find out they have a dying infant to deliver it alive and then watch it die or simply wait for it to die inside them. To spend the days or weeks after they find out the baby *can’t* live waiting for the heartbeat to stop. That *is* disgusting.

      • And the bizarre thing here is the insistence it’s about fetal pain. Even if the fetus does feel pain (clearly debatable), what about the woman’s pain caused by the pregnancy and delivery? I guess it’s just tough cookies for them. And I’ve heard terrible stories about non-viable fetuses and the physical pain for the woman carrying them. I would love it if I (an adult woman) was considered so valuable to society that men passed bills protecting me from pain and defending my autonomy, but I’m not holding my breath.

        Also… yes… if I was carrying a fetus who would certainly die shortly after birth, I would definitely consider abortion so they could expire quickly in the only environment they’ve ever known, hopefully before they could feel pain. Because, you know, I’m actually compassionate.

        • Polly Hardy says:

          “Carrying a fetus who would certainly die shortly after birth”… brought the story of two of my best friends to mind. Joe and Carol had an RH blood difference beween them; devout Irish Catholics, devoted to the Church as lrish Catholics were in those days, they
          did not practice birth control. First two babies fine; the next five lived long enuf to be born. The shots came out experimentally,
          and that baby lived. They found they could not handle anymore of this and Carol had her tubes tied. Then she went to.confession was excommunicated. Not Joe! For the rest of their lives the sorrow at the loss of faith and way of life was always there
          And they were still paying the med bills until the day they died. And so it goes …
          .

    • Maurina says:

      The issue here is not for the situation that you outlined it is that they are insisting a woman carry a child to “full term” even if it is DEAD! In 2008 I was 32 weeks pregnant when my daughter died. Shortly after finding out, I was able to go to the hospital and have labor induced. Under this law that would NOT happen. I would be forced to carry my dead child until “full term” and any doctor that attempted to help me would be charged criminally and would serve 10 YEARS. Do you see THAT as a problem?

      • Christine says:

        I was in my 9th month when my child died. I carried my dead daughter for 12 days ( a decision made with my doctor). It is a horrible experience – and being asked “when are you due?” is awful. I am not cattle… women are not cattle.

        • I can commiserate Christine.. I carried a dead fetus at 7 months for over 2 weeks. It was ghastly, and dangerous as my doctor informed me, due to infections that commonly occur and can be life threatening. No one should have to go through it. The hospital was a Catholic one, and valued the non existent chance that the fetus MIGHT be alive more than the risk to my health and life.. I will never walk through those doors as a patient again.

      • Disturbed says:

        YES! This is the main problem. I also had a nearly full term still birth. My daughter’s death actually triggered my labor. This is not always the case. AND the longer a woman carries a dead fetus in her wonb, the more decay there will be. This can cause all sorts of issues for the mother. The color of your water when it breaks indicates certain conditions in the womb. Green is the color of death and my water was dark forest green. this menat that she had pased away at least 24 hours prior to birth. I had several subsequent miscariages because of the damage to my uterus from this! Did ANYONE actually look into the medical ramifications of this kind of insanity????? No law should ever be passed concerning anything medical without the proper research. IDIOTS!!!!

    • Maybury Parade, I assume that your periods are regular as clockwork and that you would immediately know you are pregnant, yes? I didn’t know i was pregnant until I was approximately 18 weeks gone. Two weeks is all I have to make a decision like that?
      Your arguement would leave women like me rushed into a decision that should never be rushed.
      And the insistance that it be brought down to 20 weeks isn’t to protect anyone, it is to gradually chip away at the limit. No doubt another bill will go through in a few years to bring it to 16 and so on before its just a joke.

    • You IDIOT! What about if you’ve been raped?! The shock, the denial?! Ever thought of that? No? How long it might take a victim to admit to themselves and their surroundings that they’ve been raped?! What if you end up diseased, or having complications, etc and it takes you a while to realize it? What if you’re underage and can’t easily access an abortion clinic? What if you’re like me, got your period at nine and get raped at ten or eleven years old, with no clue in the world what an abortion is or how any of this even works?! Is this really such a long amount of time to get out of the shock and emotional trauma, admit to yourself that something’s wrong and it wasn’t your fault, tell someone, get them to believe you, find a clinic, etc? Think a little less narrowly please, not everyone is as wonderfully lucky as you not to have these problems.

    • I’m afraid you are missing the point. Our reproductive organs our ours, no one should decide for us. Also if you, my dear, are carrying a still born (i.e. dead baby that your own body was unable to expel) would you like to die of sepsis because our leaders in DC and the like felt that much like the cow you needed to be carried to term? Also given the number of chromosomal defects that cannot ( because being viable for 1-5 years of incredibly painful existence after the birth is not really any kindness to the fetus) sustain long term viability. I feel you are being incredibly toxic to your fellow women by abiding these draconian rulings.

    • Vickie Pruitt says:

      What if you cant afford y

    • Amanda R says:

      The main situation spoken of in this article was that we need the right to abort if the baby DIES. If I were at 24 weeks, and somehow (possibly a birth defect that wasn’t discovered in time, or something just goes wrong) my baby dies: do I still have to carry that loss inside of me for months more? Until finally I have to push that baby, that I already know is dead, out of me as though it were alive. To see its face with eyes that will never open, and tiny hands that I can’t ever grasp. What if I wanted the chance to abort the dead fetus and try again, without first having to see the body of my poor, lost first attempt?
      As for the “not wanting a baby” side: Abortions are expensive as it is (also thanks to anti-choice/pro-life laws). So is the pill, actually. If a girl knows as soon as she finds out (say, after 8 weeks) and wants to abort, but can’t afford one before the deadline, then she should have a baby she doesn’t want? Just because she isn’t a part of the economic class at which many of these laws are aimed?

    • Sarah Dean says:

      You don’t see the big deal in being FORCED to carry a doomed fetus to term? You don’t see the big deal in the theorized ability for a fetus to feel pain having legal priority over the actual ability of a grown woman to feel pain? This sickens me

    • The argument I have heard most often in response to this is, usually the decision to terminate the pregnancy is made very early on, but it can take weeks or months for a woman to raise the money to have the procedure done. These are often the same women who can’t afford birth control due to the high cost. Since health insurance almost never covers abortions, these women, who are already stuck in the cycle of poverty and may already have children they are struggling to provide for, now have figure out where in their meager budgets they can scrimp even more in order to accumulate the hundreds or thousands of dollars in order to have a safe, legal, medical procedure. This is one of the other major issues with passing the mandatory ultra-sound bills- since it is not medically necessary, I bet health insurance companies are denying coverage for those as well.

      The sinister part of these laws is not just in denying women their natural rights to make decisions over their own bodies, free from the influence of the government, which is run mostly by men, but also in the additional financial burdens being heaped upon some of the hardest working, hardest hit women in the country, who are often the primary bread winners of their families and struggling to build a better life for them and their families. The right to plan and control when and if you have children is a financial issue as well as a human rights issue.

    • Al Miller says:

      This is not about making up your mind. Some problems in a wanted pregnancy are not known until after this time. Children develop without brains, or without spinal cords, terrible terrible things. The uneducated half wits who try to push this kind of legislation through don’t have the training or knowledge to make any of these decisions for anyone. Only a family and their physicians and specialists should be making any of these decisions.

    • Did you know that the pill is not perfect, and it’s still possible to get pregnant? And that there are many women who don’t know they’re pregnant for a long time? Do you consider that circumstances change, such as boyfriend or husband running out on you, or loosing your job, or a stressful situation? Every persons situation is different, and you can’t even judge until you are in that situation. My friends mother works as a nurse at a clinic, and she tells us about the countless times when an Anti-choice picketer has an unwanted pregnancy, and is put in the situatipon where, for the first time, they realize what other women go through when they make this choice. So they quietly show up at the very clinic they scream and protest outside of. Some even become avid Pro-Choicers. Every situation is different.

    • If you’re taking the pill for birth control specifically, I have to wonder at your awareness of medical tech… There a many better ways.

    • If you’re just trying to make up your mind whether to have a kid, then that reasoning seems sound. However, many many many many women have abortions for reasons other than, “Oh, oops, I don’t want this.” Look it up.

    • Your argument is flawed for several reasons. One, not all women have equal access to reproductive health care or resources. It might take them a lot longer to be able to have access to these resources and be able to make an informed decision. Two, this will allow further legislation to make it more difficult to obtain abortions. You better believe it that they’ll cram more laws through that will make it difficult to obtain an abortion within the 20 week period. And after that, tough luck, you’re stuck, you’re livestock. And who’s to stop clinics with a pro-life bias to also delay the scheduling of abortion appointments?

      The politicians and pro-lifers are clawing things back, very slowly. They get away with it because of the apathy of people like you who believe that “Hey, this law isn’t THAT bad, I mean abortion’s not totally illegal” and then go about their merry day believing nothing is in jeopardy. We, as citizens, have to stay on top of this stuff!

    • Maybury Parade, it’s clear that you do not realize that most negative issues with any fetus do not become apparent until 20 weeks gestation. This law forces women to carry and bringing to term a child with major health issues that she and her family do not have the ability or resources to deal with.

  4. Women as livestock? The GOP can eat me.

  5. I don’t think a woman should be forced to carry a dead baby to term. Wouldn’t that cause medical problems. However, having an abortion is wrong and why would you wait so long? If you don’t want a child then don’t get pregnant or give you child up for adoption. There are plenty of people out there that want children and cannot get pregnant.

    • JustMyWords says:

      Then perhaps they can adopt one of the thousands of children already in the system looking for homes.

      I’d find the ‘Oh, but you can give your child away like an unwanted puppy to one of the many people clamoring for it’ argument a lot more persuasive if it was actually difficult to find a child to adopt.

      • Anon the Mouse says:

        Apparently you don’t know anyone trying to adopt. It is hard to adopt- that’s why so many Americans go abroad to adopt. Certainly there are children in the foster care system that are hard to place and race does play a factor, but many of these children in question suffer significant physical or psychological issues that most are unwilling to take on. Others remain in the foster care system in the hopes of an eventual family reunification, so are ultimately unavailable for adoption even though there are families that would love to let the child join theirs. A 2011 HHS study calculates that there are about 1 million American households actively looking to adopt (though, to be fair, only about 1/3 of those families are expected to ultimately adopt) and several million more estimated (according to a Princeton University study) to be considering or open to the option. There are an estimated 120,000 children in the foster system eligible for adoption, though- as mentioned- many either have questionable legal availability for adoption (parential reunification is still possible), belong to sibling units that do not want to be separated, or suffer from significant behaviorial or psychological issues. According to official reports to HHS, in 2008 (the most recent year we have complete data for), there were about 1.2 million abortions in the US.

        While not all of these “puppies” (as you so charmingly put it) would necessarily be immediately snapped up were they to be offered up for adoption, there is ample evidence that there is more than enough demand in the adoption market to handle additional supply.

        • oldfeminist says:

          If you want a perfect white infant yes it’s hard to find one for adoption. So what? Pregnant women aren’t LIVESTOCK that need to be forced to give birth to supply babies to people who want them.

        • hurryupandwait says:

          Several things. Instead of pressuring lawmakers, and lawmakers thinking they know best in medical decisions, to outlaw abortion (because let’s face it, that is the goal), why don’t people push them to look at what is entailed for adopting.
          Also, if someone wants a child that badly, any of the “problems” listed when they are looking to adopt, shouldn’t be an issue. Alot of those “issues” can also be present if they had their own biological child. Kids can be born with Downs, Cystic Fibrosis, limb malformation, and a myriad of other things that are not “perfect”, if they are not willing to adopt kids with those issues, it makes you think maybe it was a good thing they couldn’t have kids of their own, and if they down on anyone having an abortion for any reason, they are bloody hypocrites.

        • NeitherCattleNorChattel says:

          You just said it yourself: “many of these children in question suffer significant physical or psychological issues that most are unwilling to take on.” And you honestly think forcing women to give birth to unwanted or biologically impaired babies is going to somehow HELP the problem??

    • Adoption is an alternative to parenting, not pregnancy.
      Pregnancy is a lifechanging experience that causes extreme changes to the body, some that never completely go back to normal. Also, look up how many kids there are waiting to be adopted.

    • Kaywinnet says:

      My infertility is NOT a reason for a woman to suffer through a painful, unwanted pregnancy, sorry. I find it hard to believe the low adoption rates in the US are due to lack of children, I’m pretty sure the 20 to 30 grand the process costs probably has a hell of a lot more to do with it.

      Besides, we’re here talking about DEAD fetuses. This isn’t a child that’s growing to grow up and be adopted, it’s going to rot in the mother’s uterus and possibly kill her. Grow up and learn to empathize.

    • “Don’t get pregnant.”

      Wow, real helpful advice there. I’m sure women who are raped, or whose contraception fails through no fault of their own, will live much better now that you’ve shared your words of wisdom.

      Don’t get pregnant. Sheesh. The ignorance is staggering.

  6. to force a woman to carry a pregnancy against her will is slavery. pure and simple.

    • +1

    • Stephen Foster says:

      This is to second samthor’s statement.

      1. At what point is a person’s body not their own? If there is such a point, does it apply to all of us or just to some of us?
      2. What percentage of us never make any mistake, or realize that we just cannot do something?

      The result of such legislation really is to define women as “not fully human”. I’m sure all voting for it would claim such was not their intent. Sorry, guys, but results count for more than intent.

      • Anon the Mouse says:

        1) Well, for one, when someone is drafted, their body is not theirs. Just one example, but we have many examples of circumstances where society places its interests above individual rights.

        2) Everyone makes mistakes. How one chooses to deal with the consequences of one’s error is what distinguishes us, however.

        On the other hand, pro-life politicians should be willing to put their money where their mouth is. If abortion is truly a central concern of theirs, they should support expanded sex education (shown to decrease the accidental pregnancy rate), raise minimum wage and improve healthcare and welfare benefits (as financial burdens are the #1 cause of abortion), provide subsidized child-care for working women (since this is about the child and not trying to limit women unnecessarily), and raise taxes to pay for it (since most pro-life politicians also express concern for the budget.)

        Ending abortion in the country is a worthy goal. Even pro-choice people don’t **WANT** abortions if it can be helped. It’s a matter of overcoming ideology on both sides to reach a mutually agreeable compromise. Too bad compromise is a dirty word in our modern politics.

        • Christina says:

          It’s often said that if pro-life people really cared they would support government programs to help poor people. The problem is that often they disagree about whether or not those programs would be effective. At one point when I was growing up my mom lost everything and went to the government to get help. They basically told her that she would have to stop going to school and loose her job before they would help in any way. Oh, and if she was that destitute then she must be a bad mom and the kids would need to be taken into foster care. Programs like these do little to help those in poverty and I can appreciate a politician not wanting to support such destructive programs. If you care yourself about poor people, get involved in your local community, help someone directly. Don’t get the government to do your work for you, for it will only cause more harm than good.

  7. The idea that children do not feel pain until 25 or even 28 weeks is simply not based in reality. Our daughter’s little girl was born at 23 weeks – just one day after 22 weeks actually. She had to be given extra pain medication to make her comfortable as she had some bleeding in her brain and had a headache. Makes me wonder why they would bother if she was “too young” to feel pain.

    23 weeks’ gestation. She sure seems to be a human being, but that could just be a trick of the light.

    • Was there any signs that she was in pain, like crying or what not? I am a perinatal nurse, and I can tell you that this early the pain meds are more for the families peace of mind then the babies pain. Im not saying that babies born early don’t feel pain, but we just don’t have a good idea of how much or what they are really feeling.

    • But birth itself is the huge stimulant to the brain – the nerve connections, cognition, ability to feel pain are TOTALLY different once an infant is breathing oxygen. The fetus within the uterus is wholly anaethsetised.

    • Yael Tiferet says:

      Many pain medications stop the processes that cause pain, like inflammation. These processes are stressful whether or not you can feel the pain. They can be harmful to a living being whether or not they can feel pain–they can raise blood pressure and heart rate and all sorts of things. Therefore, after a baby has been born, of course you will give them pain medication if there is inflammation or a bleed present–but this is to stop the stress on the body. We don’t know what sensations a child that young can feel, but we do know that body stress is harmful to a delicate premature neonate. (I myself have experienced post-surgical lack of pain sensation–after an invasive surgery I felt so little pain that they took me off self-administered morphine and administered it on a schedule, because I wouldn’t remember to take it until they told me my blood pressure had shot off the roof again.)

      Pain is nothing more than nerve activation, but the reason it needs to be treated even in people who don’t have an obvious cause of pain is that it is a stressor.

      There’s no need to treat a fetus without brain function (or one that is dead) for pain. Where is it going to process this information? And if the fetus is going to die anyway, treating inflammation makes no sense if the fetus does not suffer.

  8. DubstotheKizzo says:

    The fact that our civil rights are being disturbed in the manner they are, is unacceptable. These issues should have died with Roe v. Wade. I believe that everyone should have the right to live their life the way they want as long as it’s not damaging or negatively affecting another person. For you Pro-lifers out there…the fact that you are anti-abortion shouldn’t translate to you being anti-choice. If you are anti-abortion, don’t get an abortion. Someone else’s abortion won’t affect your life and is not your business. All of that being said… as someone who has had to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy, I can safely say that I found out within 6 weeks that I was pregnant and had an abortion two weeks later. I know it’s not the same with everyone, especially those with irregular periods, or even with those who might find the decision more difficult. I’m not pro-life, but I’m pro-MY life, and my life was saved by that procedure. Do with that what you will.

    • Christina says:

      But abortion does effect another life — the organism in the mother’s womb is a separate human life. When a woman “terminates a pregnancy” that separate human life is killed. This isn’t religion, it’s biology. It’s human and it’s alive and abortion kills it. Being pro-life is being about pro-human-life, about being pro-ANOTHERS-life.

      Also, you may not want it yet, but there is healing available after having an abortion.

      • In the original comment, DubstotheKizzo clearly describes her abortion as having had a positive effect on her life. It is not for you to decide whether or not she could benefit from any “healing.” I find it incredibly presumptuous of you to assume that she would be interested in the idea at all, now or later.

      • This kind of mindset would work great with veganism.
        Wait, you aren’t vegan??????????????/????!

      • i belive the point was keep your hands out of others uterus, i for one will probly never be faced with this decision, however that does not give me the right to say what someone can do with their body

    • Yaro Yambile says:

      If you are anti-murder, don’t murder. Someone else’s murder won’t affect your life and is not your business.

      • I’m reluctant to say anything, and I really don’t want to argue.
        The statement above, however, is frightening to me.
        It sounds like a statement that could have been made during the Nazi regime.
        If you don’t want to murder Jews, then don’t do so. Murdered Jews are none of your business and it shouldn’t effect your life.

  9. elleprimeau says:

    As I’ve been reading through the comments, I had the thought, what about the women who lose the fetus, which must now remain within their womb until they can deliver at “full term” and since they cannot go to a physician to have an abortion, decide to literally cut the child from their body? I truly believe we’ll all be reading cases such as this scenario…

    This bill that has passed, and I’m sure there will be others, is disgusting.

    • Christina says:

      I do believe the implication that women should carry a dead child to term was a suggestion during the drafting process. If the fetus is dead then it would fall under the exemption of a “medically futile” pregnancy.

      • Lawstudent says:

        Not necessarily – common sense would say yes but as a law student I know the law is not common sense otherwise there would not be a need for lawyers. Medically futile means that “the unborn child has an irremediable congenital or chromosomal anomaly that is incompatible with sustaining life after birth.” A case will have to be brought to determine if dead fetus falls under this. It does give a specific exemption for possible death or a “high risk substantial and irreversable impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman” and specifically excludes of emotional or mental conditions even when she threatens her own life.
        http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/en-US/display/20112012/HB/954 – this is the link to the bill in question.
        Also the original intention of this bill was that there would be no exception even death of the fetus. Intentions of a law making body is often used to help interpret the laws in question.

  10. what about equal rights for unborn women! and referring to LJ’s comment about the little niece in the NICU…who in their right mind would think that a baby would not feel pain? A tiny little fetus, of course, does not look like a full-term baby, as a full-term baby does not look like a 5 year old…the five year old does not look like a teen and the teen does not look like a senior citizen…the DNA is the same…and time! The baby at the moment of conception has everything in it’s genes to go through the whole process of birth to death…including, if a female, all the eggs in the ovaries of future generations…

  11. When Rep. Terry England (R-Auburn) compared pregnant women carrying stillborn fetuses to the cows and pigs on his farm, then he shouldn’t object to not being allowed to have a tumor removed if he should ever be so unfortunate to have one, because certainly he doesn’t operate to remove them from his animals.

    • And how old is Rep Terry England, anyway? Surely older than the age at which cows and pigs are taken from his farm to the slaughter house. Someone should probably get him over there ASAP. Wouldn’t want there to be such a clear disparity between humans and farm animals.

      • I wouldn’t bet on that really. If you slaughter you do it while young enough for people to enjoy eating. If you raise them for other reasons you let them live their lives until not productive anymore. i.e. a chicken you raise to eat is one you butcher young. A chicken that lays your eggs lives until it quits laying and dies on its own, because it’s nasty to eat at that point.

        • Nah, you just cook an older chicken differently, though no you wouldn’t eat one that had died of natural causes. But just because a chicken isn’t young doesn’t automatically make it bad to eat.

          That said, I’d have to be starving to eat Terry England, I just can’t believe he’d taste very nice.

  12. 10,000 women die each year because material medical information is withheld from mammogram reports regarding breast density and its impact on mammogram effectiveness. Please help us stop this practice which denies women the ability to make medical decisions with informed consent. This is a violation of federal statute, case law in all 50 states, and a violation of AMA ethical guidelines.

    Please help!

    http://www.petition2congress.com/6491/stop-fda-practice-withholding-material-medical-information-from-m/

    Thank you,

    Julie Marron
    President
    Institute for Health Quality and Ethics
    http://www.inhqe.com
    http://www.facebook.com/inhqe
    Twitter @inhqe

  13. kinda disappointed in everyone here. wish the conversation was more civil. both sides have points. but everyone’s screaming. things are bad for everyone. let’s try to work this out. have a debate. and then, still love each other after. because that’s what matters.

  14. I would have more sympathy with the pro-lifers IF they supported without caveats
    1. Comprehensive teaching of birth control methods.
    2. Low cost and readily available birth control – including the morning after pill.
    3. No questions or interference in the case of rape, incest, a mother’s life or a fetus that will not survive or has already died when the woman chooses to terminate.
    4. That instead of the pollyanna happy horseshit fariy tale that girls are encourage to believe – that *any* pregnancy is a risk and are given free or low cost prenatal care.
    5. That NO religious beliefs are allowed to hold any sway in a woman’s right to determine her own health.
    6. That no male has the deciding decision in a woman’s health care unless she is comatose and has made her wishes known.

  15. Okay so I didn’t get through all the comments, forgive me if this is repetitive. Did anyone follow the links about no fetus pain until 25 or 28 weeks? My son was born at 24 and rest assured the child felt pain. Even the doctors thought so or the first 2 (to 25 weeks gestational age) or 4 (to 28 weeks gestational age) surgeries would have been preformed without anesthetic. Or did leaving my body magically change things in his brain, like pain sensors? Pardon me but bull crap. My son lacked a lot by not being in the womb 40 weeks, and a lot of effort was put into getting him healthy. But who for a minute believes that a (now 10 year old) child is born without the ability to feel pain? And who for a minute believes that the miracle of an emergency c section made him able to feel pain for the first time?

    I don’t want to get into when it’s a person and a life and not a fetus, but for shit’s sake, you can’t tell me that they a fetus doesn’t feel pain before 28 weeks, but a special magic happens with getting born and now oh wow, he feels pain since he was born today. The way this leads a person to believe is that (without the special being born magic that is) my son couldn’t’ feel pain until he was a month old.

    • Actually yes, leaving your body DID change things. It’s breathing oxygen – whether wer’re talking premature birth or full-term – that makes the difference. A fetus in the womb is anaesthetised, it has nothing like the cognitive functions and pain responses it gets once that first breath is taken.

  16. When I was 19 I went to the university health services and told the doctor that my period (usually very irregular) was unusually late, even for me. He gave me a some pills, took a urine sample and told me to come back in a week if my period hadn’t started. I returned after my period hadn’t started and he said, “Well, you’re pregnant and the pills didn’t work, so let’s get you scheduled for an abortion.” I said, “Wait a minute. I haven’t decided if I want an abortion or not.” His face blanched paper white and he looked physically ill when he realized that I might want to keep the baby. I thought he was going to faint.

    His reaction was so extreme that I knew something terrible had happened, but I didn’t know what. I went home and called a friend who was a nurse and told her what had happened. She looked up the medication he had given me in her PDR and it said that the pills were a teratogen when given in the first trimester. In other words the doctor had either mistaken me for another patient or just assumed that as I was a 19-year-old college student, I didn’t want the pregnancy, and had given me medication that causes severe birth defects. In a stunningly unfair way, his mistake took away my choice. At 19, with no money, no support from the father or from my family, I might have been able to handle an out-of-wedlock baby, but not a baby with serious birth defects and expensive medical needs.

    I was lucky enough to realize what he’d done before the pregnancy was too far along, and did manage to arrange an abortion while still in the first trimester — but what if I’d found out weeks later? What if instead of medical malpractice at 8 weeks, I’d been exposed to a dangerous teratogen via an industrial accident or an accidental poisoning at 18 or 19 weeks? THIS is why women need to make these decisions for themselves. Each situation is unique. Each woman has her own limits as to what she can handle. Each woman should be in control of her own reproduction, her own body. Anything else is slavery.

  17. Alara Rogers says:

    What if you’re 20 weeks in, and you lose your health insurance, and you’re a woman with health issues so you know that your pregnancy will cost you $25,000 if you aren’t covered by insurance? And since you lost your health insurance, odds are it’s because you just lost your job. Does the government have the right to force you to go bankrupt trying to have a baby? They don’t offer you free health insurance if you lost your job, you know. You have to have been really poor *last* year… it’s based on your tax returns.

    A second trimester abortion is expensive, but not $25,000 worth of expensive.

    How about, you were just diagnosed with cancer, and if you wait five months for chemo, it will be irreversible, so carrying the pregnancy to term (and therefore not getting chemo) is a death sentence… but the irreversible cancer probably won’t kill you for 2 years, so medically, you *can* bring the pregnancy to term, it will just ensure that your illness will become terminal and you won’t live to see the kid get to kindergarten.

    How about, you are a single working mom, or a married mom with a disabled husband who needs care, and you have jsut been diagnosed with pre-eclampsia? The only treatment for pre-eclampsia (pregnancy-caused high blood pressure, which can turn into eclampsia, which is invariably fatal if untreated) is ending the pregnancy, and if you can’t do that, you have to go on bed rest. So a mother who has no backup in caring for her kids has to go on bed rest for five months so that her pregnancy won’t kill her? How, exactly, do her existing children not die during that time period?

    The government has no right to interfere in the medical decisions a woman must make to protect herself and her family. There are any number of conditions that will *not* cause the baby to die, but will kill or cause irreparable harm to the mother or will cause such financial devastation that she may end up homeless and without medical care, and what if she has other children? Many women who get abortions are already mothers.

    Pregnancy is enormously hard and dangerous work. We should honor those who choose to undertake it, but we should never force anyone to undertake it, and if someone’s life situation changes, we should not force people to continue it. Soldiers who are found to have a dangerous illness will be discharged from the military so they can get treatment; they aren’t forced to keep fighting. Why would we force pregnant women to keep fighting when we discharge soldiers?

    • “Pregnancy is enormously hard and dangerous work. We should honor those who choose to undertake it, but we should never force anyone to undertake it, and if someone’s life situation changes, we should not force people to continue it. Soldiers who are found to have a dangerous illness will be discharged from the military so they can get treatment; they aren’t forced to keep fighting. Why would we force pregnant women to keep fighting when we discharge soldiers?”

      *round of applause*

      What I’m shocked by is how inhumane these people are. Cows have to carry dead calves to term so women should have to carry dead foetuses to term?? WHAT?

      They’ll probably pass a law next saying it’s OK to have a woman put down if the dead foetus causes medical problems. I mean, that’s what they’d do with a cow, right?

      Ridiculous.

  18. Comadrona says:

    To the idiots who think popping a pill regularly is all that is needed to avoid pregnancy, think again. Many women in this world do not have agency over their bodies – they do not choose when to have sex, let alone whether they will conceive or not. No contraception is 100% foolproof – as a midwife I have met hundreds of women in the antenatal clinic who fell pregnant on contraception. And to the men, who will NEVER have to make this ghastly choice, and whose bodies will NEVER be violated in the name of childbearing, stay out of our business! This kind of law-making and judgement actually preferences the rights of a clump of cells (at the beginning) over those of a full-grown human. This cannot be right and just! I am well aware that there is a sliding scale of when is the “right” time to abort, but the only person who should (freely) make the decision is the woman herself…end of story.

    • Yeah, there are much better methods than the pill for birth control, and more that are out there but have been kept out of the US because the US refuses to do research into their efficiency because companies here won’t make it and won’t fund studies without owning the patents. Things like RISUG should really be available already.

      The fact that it’s still not foolproof, the fact that women are raped, and the fact that many people are honestly misinformed due to social stigma over discussing sex… these are the problems involved, before anything else.

  19. I can’t believe that Mr. Terry England would ever get voted in to anything. The thought that another human being thinks of women as equal to farm animals is just disgusting. Telling women that they have to carry a dead or dying baby to term. People, these babies, whether they are a month or 9 months in vitro, are dead or are soon to be so. The only thing that could happen is that the mother, if not given the proper care, could die too and many more women will die due to this bill if it passes into law. What is wrong with people? And is this England the best man the Georgian’s could find in all of Georgia to legislate what they want. “Yea, you all women are just like my farm animals. If I should have to risk the cow dying due to the fact that she carried to term, well then so should you all.” What is this man’s IQ? It’s been a long time since high school and government class. But the Supreme Court, as I remember, already “discussed” this in Roe vs Wade. Abortion is not illegal. It is not illegal if the woman who is carrying the fetus should decide that having a child (and when she is deciding this, the fetus is not a child, meaning it’s neurological system is not ready to carry on life and therefore can feel no pain and will not live outside of the body and those of you who say well all fetuses can feel pain are not living in reality and have no business in a debate) or life for the woman is in jeapardy and the fetus is not viable, meaning if it does live at all outside of the uterus, it will not live for long and it’s existence will be full of pain if it can feel at all. Furthermore, I would much rather have doctors who know just a smidgeon more about anatomy than legislators discuss with me whether a baby is a baby and when the fetus becomes a baby. I do not believe that a government full of non-doctors should be discussing whether a woman should have to go through the emotional and physical pain of carrying a dead baby to term whether it be cows or women. It just sadness, sickens, disgust me that a man, no less a man who is leading other Americans, should equate women with farm animals. This cannot be the 21st century. How did America get so high on the totem pole with people like this leading us? Or is it that people like this leading us is why America is in the shape that it is in right now? I looked this issue up on my iPad because someone told me that a woman who was a month along went to the hospital and after tests came back, discovered that the fetus was dead. The woman could not have an abortion because that went against her religion. First of all, I didn’t even know that terminating a pregnancy due to the death of a fetus or baby was considered an abortion. (She is not miscarrying at this time.) Now I know that it is medically called an abortion but let’s be just a little smarter than your average dog. The baby, no matter if it stays to term or is miscarried at this moment, is dead. It is not just a little dead, and the only sufferer is going to be the woman knowing that she is carrying a dead baby inside of her. Aw, but that’s alright. She’ll just go out and graze in the pasture after all is said and done, and then when she’s of no use to anybody anymore, we can have her slaughtered. Oh, am I talking about a cow or a woman? This deep thinking exercise has me all confused. And to the 20 weeks versus 24 weeks, I will again say something about Roe versus Wade. The Supreme Court decided that a fetus could be aborted until 24 weeks. Again, the Supreme Court is not a bunch of doctors, but I would assume that they talked to a doctor or two. And while I am pro choice, we as a people need guidelines and I definitely would not, unless the mother’s life was in danger, agree with a woman going in and having an abortion after the baby’s neurological system and brain is functional. And again, I believe doctors rather than legislators, are better at telling us when such a time is. And I believe science can offer a whole lot more about anatomy than the Bible, but then again, that’s just me. I just got off from yahoo ask. A lot of 12 and 13 year olds write in and ask some ask simple, not stupid, questions. Questions that after you’ve been around for a couple 3 or 4 decades, you ought to be fairly certain of your answers. Then I come to this blog where adults are talking about cattle and women and pregnancy all in one story, and it really, truly scares me.

  20. Wow, I hope Rep. Terry England never gets laid again.

  21. My mom got pregnant with my sister when she was 35. I remember her telling me not to get my hopes up that I would get to be a big sister because they had to wait for several tests to come in. Because my mom was older, the chances for complications were much higher than when she had me. My dad had just lost his job a few weeks before that and there was no way that my family could afford the costs of taking care of a child with special needs, so they seriously considered aborting her. I remember these things taking so much time. Luckily she is healthy and almost 13 now, but I can only imagine the strain that would have been put on my family if she hadn’t been. Worse, I might have lost my mom if something had gone wrong. That terrifies me.

    Another point. Why are women forced to have the child when the man who got them pregnant isn’t forced to stay with her or take care of the child? Men get to run away while we are enslaved to decisions made by middle-aged, rich white men who are determined to put women back into the kitchen, uneducated and pregnant like in the olden days. I refuse to let them win.

  22. Putting aside the absolutely heinous nature of these misogynistic comments, forgetting that dehumanization of a group of people has almost always led to their persecution/subjugation, let me just ask this. When will people realize that banning abortions does NOT actually stop them from happening, and that all this will do is prevent SAFE abortions? I don’t claim to know whether or not abortions should be made in certain cases, mostly because IT’S NOT MY BODY. And though I am a man of faith, I do believe in the separation of church and state, and the simple fact of the matter is that this legislation will hurt many more people than it will save (as anyone with an ounce of common sense would realize).

    • Thank you so much. This makes me have so much faith in the good sense of people. You can never make a choice for someone else because you are simply NOT in their situation, and therefore do not understand what they are going through. When the US tried to outlaw abourtions, abortions didn’t stop happening, but women, driven to desperation, got unsafe abortions. Many died because of a law designed to impede choice.

  23. At about 20 weeks the fetus is viable to live outside of the womb. This known biological fact is why abortion in most European countries and the rest of Western cultures is outlawed after 20 weeks, the US being one of the few exceptions that allows late-term abortions. While the comparisons to animals and the degrading language used by these officials is unacceptable and ignorant, the facts lie in that abortion after 20 weeks is not just because it ends a human life that could be lived outside of the womb. The question for each person to ask from this then is when does human life begin? And furthermore, when do human dignity and rights begin?

    • That’s a very misleading statement, Mike. 21 weeks is considered the earliest a foetus could conceivably survive, and as well as being a huge outside chance, it also would probably be hugely disabled. You have to get to 24-25 weeks even to get a 50% survival rate. The chance of a baby at 20 weeks even surviving is basically none. Even with neonatal experts and intensive care, that limit of 24 weeks for a 50% chance of survival has stayed static for more than a decade, because no amount of medical care can make up for a child who is simply not developed enough to survive outside the womb. The most premature baby to survive that I can find any record of online is 21 weeks and 5 days.

      20 weeks isn’t even close.

      Also, I can’t speak for anywhere else, but in the UK the cut off date is 24 weeks, not 20.

  24. Can I just point out to these complete morons:
    1 – physiologically, women have a completely different structure from cattle
    2 – genetically, also, women and cattle are so completely different that there’s no way they could ever be confused for one another
    3 – Actually, the time during which Abortions are usually allowed is a time when the fetus itself is largely undifferentiated in its cellular structure, therefore the idea that it’s capable of feeling pain at 20 weeks is ludicrous
    4 – By passing this bill, you are effectively denying a woman her basic right to life and freedom. America is meant to be the land of the free, as in for all of its citizens, not just the ones who are male and rich.
    5 – You are actually arguing that something which is not scientifically alive as it is not capable of surviving outside of the uterus and is still in the process of developing (and following a lot of the same patterns as a cancer, might I add) has more rights than a fully developed, thinking, breathing human being. Pro-life should not apply only to things that aren’t actually capable of survival outside of the womb, but also to those who can and are surviving outside of it. It should actually apply moreso to women than to the fetus, as the woman needs to be alive and well both physically and mentally for the fetus to survive.
    6 – as far as I am aware at least there is nothing in the bible, which I am guessing is the basis for this completely ridiculous law, that says a woman cannot have an abortion. “Thou Shalt not kill” doesn’t count in this instance as you fools evidently plan on killing thousands of women by forcing them to go to backstreet abortion clinics to have these unwanted children aborted.
    7 – following that point, women will have abortions whether you bigoted misogynist idiots want them to or not. They have done since the beginning of time. The question here is whether or not those abortions will be safe ones.
    8 – Women did not chain themselves to railings, get arrested, beaten, force-fed, win the vote, win the right to go to work and win the right to be treated as equal to men (which we are still struggling for because of people like these) to be told that we’re going to be treated as we were in the 1800s again.
    9 – You want a woman to carry a child to term because your cow does? Okay, well the day you grow a uterus and end up in the same situation as us you can tell us how we are to live and what we can and cannot do with our bodies. Until then you have absolutely no right to behave in so outrageous a manner as to tell me and my fellow uterus-bearing citizens, be we in America or not (and in my case I am glad I live elsewhere), that we are cattle. If, however, you insist on treating us as cattle, then I insist that you pay for all the prenatal treatments and vitamins and postnatal care of the child and its mother. You cannot say that women are just like the cattle on your farm and then say “But I’m not going to give you the same luxury as my cattle who are given healthcare and childcare before and after the calves are born,”
    10 – furthermore if women are nothing more than cattle then you are taking us effectively back to the era of the slave trade when people were sold off as commodities, like cattle, to various owners. Please remember that slavery was abolished over 200 years ago because – and here comes the clinching point of this entire list – people, I.E: human beings, I.E: any creature that comes under the species “homo sapiens,” which INCLUDES WOMEN, are NOT CATTLE.
    I hereby respectfully suggest that under the laws of your own country and its constitution you keep your religious and misogynistic beliefs well away from politics and revoke this law, with the added point that as you are breaching the human, civil and constitutional rights of half the population of your state, you could be taken to the human rights court for passing the law in the first place and the law will be revoked.
    Sincerely,
    A Briton who is sincerely tired of hearing the phrase “religious freedom” which would inevitably be used as an excuse for this blatant crime against women.

  25. are you frickin serious

  26. Let me clarify quick, I’m a guy.

    Now, why is this real? I wish to god this was a joke, but … seriously? And there are 6 or 7 states doing this already (at the time this was written) – W.T.F.?

    I read a few comments after the stupidity (aka the article). I don’t get how any lawmaker anywhere can honestly believe he (or god forbid, she) has the right to make this kind of decision. I know pro-life vs. pro-choice is a HUGE issue, but this? This is just stupid!

    I couldn’t read through all the comments (too frustrating), but I saw a few from what I assume are P.O.’d women. To those of you who think taking away my rights (men’s rights) will make this better or teach a lesson – piss off. That’s childish and counterproductive.

    I get that you’re pissed, and you have every right to be; this is total B.S. But what can we do to FIX this? Petitions? Law suits? What – tell me, please.

    I can’t help vote these people out of office (wrong state), but if there is something I can do, legally / within the rules of our society, count me in.

  27. It’s so incredibly insulting that these wealthy, white, Christian, middle aged men think they can tell me what I can and cannot do with my body.

    The Republican party does not like women, they do not like people of color, they do not like gays and lesbians. Remember ladies, we can vote this suckers out the next election. Remember every insulting dehumanizing thing they have ever said. We can make this country better for us, our sisters, our aunts, our mothers, our friends, our neighbors and our daughters.

  28. So you’re saying if I get raped, and get pregnant I can’t get an abortion and have to take care of a child I don’t want.

    I could also put the child in foster care but seeing what I’ve been through with foster care I would never make a child go through what I’ve been though.

  29. Any law can be undone. What most of you see in this HB 954 law is that you can’t get an abortion after 22 weeks, it also means that if you miscarriage a fetus you cannot get medical help unless you fit the exemptions, it means you carry a dead fetus to term. So get together women and take this law out now, don’t wait for the elections or you will loose other rights, such as the right to overturn this law. You can also get rid of this politician now, look up the laws in your state to find out how to get rid of the law and the man that put it there.

  30. I support abortion rights, but I think people should oppose products from animal (horses/sheep/goat) fetuses, such as leather/gloves/parchment/cosmetics/animal research/vaccines/etc. The reason is because almost always the mother is also slaughtered. As for the article, I don’t understand it because Humane Societies and animal rescue organizations do abortions on pregnant rescued animals (if it’s medically safe) to control the population. I am an animal lover, and I know lots of Vets perform late-term abortions on pet pigs, horses, cows, and such for health reasons, such as difficult pregnancies. Of course, the idea is to spay/neuter but sometimes it’s just too late and you have to do abortion. The article makes no sense at all because late-term abortions are legal in animals. Personally, I support humane disposal of fetuses, but that is not a restriction on women’s rights – it is a restriction on the medical community to “humanely dispose of fetuses.”

  31. I do not think women should have to carry a dead fetus full term. Carrying a rotting corps in the womb cannot be healthy. The sooner it is removed the better.

    • That’s the bit I’m really and truly baffled by – if the Bill is about foetal pain, then why on earth should a woman be forced to carry a dead foetus to term? I mean, there are problems just forcing women to carry babies that are not going to survive, but if the foetus is dead then there’s no argument, it cannot feel pain. Even if people sincerely believe that a foetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, it sure as heck can’t do so if it’s already dead. *headdesk*

      Clearly the legislature in that state is on crack. Or at least that’s the only excuse for voting something so ridiculous through.

  32. Right, so some idiot redneck who pits chickens against each other in fights for entertainment is willing to give up his chicken-fighting in exchange for abortion to be illegal, so abortion MUST be morally wrong. I’m so touched by his heartbreaking willingness to sacrifice for the cause.

Speak Your Mind

*