Who do they have running the show in New Mexico?? Henry the VIII? This mindset might even go towards the Dark Ages and impose torture hanging from a cage. I need to stop writing on this idiotic BS to not get suspended........

Hey now steel - don't you know that we have a major problem with rapists forcing their victims to have abortions? It has been all over the news (at least in the minds of the Republican party).

Geez - the lunatic fringe keeps getting bigger and bigger. What is in the water that they are drinking?

Recent polls have shown that the vast majority of Americans want abortion to stay legal. And the GOP wonder why they are losing votes.

Right to Life? More like PRO-CONTROL.

Remember, everytimes a woman give birth, she has a chance of dying herself. If a woman die during child birth because someone's else want her to carry unwanted child, can I charge them with accessories to murder?

Let's not mention this bill basically a big reminder that those woman actually got RAPE and a shining slap on their face everyday. I guess they have no problem with rapist to "destroy evident" by killing the child.

Pro-life? More like PRO-CONTROL. The same mindset that they are using in India regarding women.

I guess the intent behind the bill is to reduce court dockets. This will do that in that a rape victim may be less likely to report the rape with fear of imprisonment or fines unless she forces herself to carry the child to term and abandon it upon it's birth.

I guess in some of the hardcore christian republican base, there are those that believe that if the woman didn't get pregnant then there's no proof of a rape thus, destroying a fertilised egg being the only form of evidence would be in effect be aiding and abetting the rapist by destroying the only form of evidence these hardcore christians believe exists.

Don't be feared: What a mess of nonsense you write. If you're looking for a moron, check the mirror.

It doesn't say anything about the mother being in the wrong for aborting her child.

Gee, you really are dense.

We already have laws that prevent rapists from terrorizing their victims. Use them. The mother isn't in the wrong for aborting a rapists bastard child. It's her right period.

Be cautious with that "moron" label. It states that the way it is written, that would be a potential effect. So, either she wrote it camouflaged, or she is incompetent at writing legislation. Now she says she will redraft.... now that the reality has been brought to light and called for what it is.

@Dont be feared into believing what someone else wants you to believe

What prevent the rapist from "destroy the evident" by killing the child? I guess you don't have problem with it.

How often do you see a rapist come back to cover his track? Wouldn't killing the victim be much easier?

The bill is exactly just that, it was later try to avoid the flames, but the intent still there. You apparently failed to read the article or the bill for its intended purposes.

Excuse me, "Right-to-Lifers" (AKA: "anti-choicers") ,I thought your argument was that a fertilized egg was "a child." Now you want to define that fertilized egg as "evidence." Why don't you just cut the BS, and define that fertilized egg as your "fodder for political advantage" and "a means to an end."

Any angle they can think of to make any and all abortions illegal, eh?

...Well, that can cut both ways.

If they demand personhood rights on the fetus, I wonder if the religious right-wing are willing to declare to the government or to their insurance companies the existence of a developing fetus in the mother's body, and pay double the taxes or double-billing for "two-in-one," policies, for both the mother and the unborn in her womb?

And are they willing to pay double the entrance fee to get through the door of any business that charges per person? Or double the cost of the airfare, train, bus fare, or increased cost for the hotel room for an 'unseen other person"? (Or three or more, if there's unborn twins or triplets).

Or will they cheat and not say anything, to pay less to get cheaper admission into places where it's, "Age 21 and older"? And what will be the legal penalty if they're caught? Contributing to the delinquency of a minor?

Dont be feared into believing what someone else wants you to believe

Actually it would be considered a felony.

Critics pounced on House Bill 206, introduced Wednesday by Republican state Rep. Cathrynn N. Brown, of Carlsbad, saying victims of sexual assault could be charged with a felony if they sought an abortion after rape or incest. But Brown said Thursday that the legislation was aimed at attackers, not victims.

don't be whatever! a rapist who wait after raping to see if his victim is pregnant in order to take her for abortion will be the most foolish rapist/criminal in the world.

Well the bill itself is written in a way so that it's not just assumed that a woman is always the victim in those situations, which is true. Women have been convicted of rape, albeit very very rare. But from the article you can see it's OBVIOUS the person who wrote it up understands how it can be misconstrued (above comments, case in point). That is why the want to now go back and reword it. Obviously it was written with good intentions, even if the whole idea is pretty wacko.

I am rather concerned that all that keeps happening is that the victims are getting victimized. Why arent the people in the seats of those who are against abortions, discussing maiming the penis of men that rape and/or commit incest? I am concerned that they are focusing on the woman and not the males committing these crimes. This concerns me primarily because I am wondering if any of them are committing these crimes? Makes you wonder what are on the minds of the males and now even the female GOP leadership

VOTE THEM ALL OUT IN 2014 - VOTE THEM ALL OUT IN 2014 - VOTE THEM ALL OUT IN 2014

The person that wrote it understands how it can be misconstrued and intentionally worded it that way so that it could also be interpretted that way by a federal judge should she find enough activists like herself to get her hatred against women's rights to abortion limited to the very weakest of women that have already been victimized. She should be voted out of office at the earliest date possible.

Well written Robert, but the GOP is so blind they don't even know the hot poker is going up their own @ss.....

Ya...see that's a bunch of BS, which is what MSN wanted to propagate. Even those that are pro-life understand the need for abortion in certain circumstances (eg. rape/incest). If that was their intention, it wouldn't get very far from either side. So ya, maybe this lady really is a moron too. I doubt she got to where she is though doing dumb stuff like this.

Dont, Brown made a veiled attempt at legislating an anti-abortion bill under the auspices of 'destroying evidence' from a rape, plain and simple. Any other 'explanation' or adding to the legislation to make it sound or seem different, still smells of B.S. no matter how it's wrapped.

Under this activists bill, a friend, counselor, doctor, family member or husband of a rape victim could be prosecuted for voicing their opinion in support of abortion to the victim or voicing support to her if she has already made the choice.

I'm not saying it's a good idea, far from it...Just saying it wasn't meant for the purpose everyone is drawing a conclusion to. And I think most of you know it, you just want to have another reason to hate someone who believes differently than you.

stemming from the logic about some of my fellow repliers on here, theres some strange logic in the GOP

if a fetus is a human then that means the mother (any mother) must state that there are two persons and they must purchase everything for 2

if the fetus is a human, then when a pregnant woman is mistreated by her husband/partner, etc... then they are endangering a child and should go to jail

if the fetus is a human, a child who lays on its mothers stomach or people touching the child is endangering the child or with gop logic, they are abusing the child

if the fetus is a human, then the doctor pulling out the baby in such a manhandling way is endangering a child, abusing that child, and even commiting unrequested surgery on a child by cutting the umbilical

if the fetus is a human, then if the woman carrying a child is being driven by another person, that person must ask if its okay for the child to go along else that can be considered kidnapping

if the fetus is a human then the woman must ride in a child seat because if she is protecting the other human who is under 10, it is ILLEGAL to ride with a baby in your lap or belly!

sounds foolish, because it is... but this is the logic being presented to people! i think there needs to be more thought about the premises before they try to slash and gash Roe v. Wade

@Dont be feared into believing what someone else wants you to believe wrote:

Y"a...see that's a bunch of BS, which is what MSN wanted to propagate"

How many months is it going to take you to figure out that Newsvine is NBC News? Over and over and over again you display your inability to even figure out where you are (maybe it doesn't even matter to you where you are, so long as you can get in your anti-media rants.)

Dont, you sound like Gingrich, after he was recorded saying something LIVE, then saying that wasn't what he said, and you're lying if you said he said it....I read the Bill, and if YOU did, you would have seen the penalty for ANYONE destroying evidence, which would INCLUDE THE VICTIM of the rape having an abortion, being a FELONY.

@Don't be feared-

I read the bill, and unfortunately there is no exception for women victims who procure (def: obtain) an abortion, and those who are possible rapists. As the bill reads a victim of rape who aborts the product of that rape can be guilty of tampering with evidence.

It's poorly worded for the writer's supposed intention, which I don't buy in the slightest as the aborted fetus itself can be tested for maternity and paternity.

flintlock -

First no one is pro-abortion.

Second I'm interested to hear why you are anti abortion followed by why you are pro exceptions for rape and incest.

And the GOP cannot undestand why their party is imploding.....Clue....it has been hikacked by the American Taiban.

What's the problem? Have the abortion and give the glob of cells to the Prosecutor. They would then have their evidence.

myopinion1 - I'd be interested in any documentation you have for these charges....or are they truly just your opinion.

New Mexico Rep. Cathrynn Brown on Wednesday introduced House Bill 206, which would criminalize "procuring or facilitating an abortion," or "compelling or coercing" someone else to get an abortion after rape or incest, as destroying evidence.

The only place I see this even remotely pertaining to a rapist is via the word "or", and even then it does not explicitly state the rapist.

@millknee wrote:

"Robert in Oregon....you must have missed the MSNbc logo. Apparently after months and months you still don't get the connection between MSN and NBC. Of course, you don't get a lot of things, apparently."

I didn't miss the MSNBC logo, there is no MSNBC logo. This article is authored by NBC News and credited to NBC News. If you see an MSNBC logo, then the perception issue is yours, not mine. Look again, Einstein.

If you are going to make an inane accusatory comment, at least base it on some substance. All you have to do is look at the top of the webpage to see that you are just digging a dry hole. But maybe making a fool of yourself was your goal?

I guess if you folks venture very far from FoxNews channel, everything gets very confusing and looks alike, huh? Well, Try to pay attention. Six months now, and counting:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-16/msnbc-website-renamed-nbcnews-com-after-microsoft-split.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-57472937-501465/msnbc.com-renamed-as-microsoft-and-nbc-split-what-now/

Planned Parenthood does so much good and NO federal money is ever used for abortion but you knew that right? So low income women who need maogams shoulld just go away because YOU do not like PP. Your taxes are not invovled so not your concern. You can choose to not suppoert them but please at least use facts.

So if this bill was to pass, who would take care of all those 'evidence' babies? Would they be forced on the mother to raise? Would they be forced to wear evidence tags and if so how long? Would they have to report themselves as evidence?

Sarcasm aside, what the hell is she thinking? Forcing a woman to go through a pregnancy caused by a traumatic experience, most women are not going to want to raise that child and I could foresee a lot of child abuse and neglect if adoption is also considered tampering with evidence.

I don't think this stupid idiot thought things through.

Can someone please explain to me how the GOP keeps getting away with this sort of thing ?

Regardless of the purpose or intent of this bill...or any other anti-abortion legislation, the last time I checked abortion was legal in the United States. Does Roe v. Wade mean anything to anyone ?

I understand how a state can disapprove and try to pass laws banning abortion, but it IS legal on a Federal level...therefore trumping any laws the states pass. How come the federal government has not stepped in ?

Im just confused about this subject. Nobody has a right to dictate what one chooses to do to their own body. PERIOD.

And for all you pro-life people....Im sorry, but anything can happen until a child is born...and UNTIL its born its not a person. Where are all the bleeding heart pro-lifers when it comes to all the children sitting in orphanages...or the sick children that nobody wants ? Its so easy for you to be pro-life as long as you dont have to be responsible for the child. If your house is filled with adopted or foster children, you are my Heroes. If not, you have no right to judge. Its just like gay marriage...unless you plan on climbing into bed with a gay couple, its none of your business.

So, the zealotic right are at it again, constantly trying to find a loophole to shove their religion down our throats. Quite frelling frankly, I wonder why these people aren't seen as doing just that, and going against the constitutional rights of Americans. Hell, even the person that won in Roe vs Wade wants to do away with the rights of women, she says "Oh, I never MEANT for it to be used in a way I don't like. No one else but ME should be allowed to have abortions as I see fit!".

Gods, I am so sick of this bullcrap. The news seems to be filled with one thing after the other of the Republican party desperately trying to turn us into a theocracy. Let's ask the Middle East how that theocracy thing is going...

Zathrose wrote:

"... the hypocritical progressives..."

If you are going to persist in using "progressives" as a diminution and pejorative insult, you should first try to get your narrow mind around the fact that the antonym of "progressive" is "regressive." (AKA: backward). Own it!

If the shoe fits ...

This bill doesn't make sense. The victim gets a rape kit and the morning after pill. They don't need a baby to catch the rapist.

#1.14 rradiko - If they demand personhood rights on the fetus, I wonder if the religious right-wing are willing to declare to the government or to their insurance companies the existence of a developing fetus in the mother's body, and pay double the taxes or double-billing for "two-in-one," policies, for both the mother and the unborn in her womb? And are they willing to pay double the entrance fee to get through the door of any business that charges per person? Or double the cost of the airfare, train, bus fare....

Very good point. That's one I had not considered. I'd like to get input from the Personhood bunch, but it's impossible to engage in any kind of meaningful dialogue with them because they don't like to deal with uncomfortable questions, other than to say "you're wrong" to any argument, which is really helpful.

Theo -

Unfortunately, there are many and too spread out. You can usually only find out about them through legal sources and occassionally the local area paper. Sometimes youtube. You can bet if this was a priest, minister or boy scout - you'd hear about it every day for a few weeks. However, as I said, Planned Parenthood is "untouchable" in the media.

"The case, Denise Fairbanks v. Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., was filed by Denise Fairbanks in the Hamilton County Ohio Court of Common Pleas on May 7, 2007 and it named Planned Parenthood, Southwest Ohio Region, in failing to report the abuse committed by her father."

"In Ohio, a girl, 14, was impregnated by her twenty-two year old soccer coach, a man that she and her parents trusted. The coach knew that he needed to get this “problem” taken care of as quietly as possible since the pregnancy was proof of his statutory rape – repeated statutory rape, in fact, that began almost a year earlier. He turned to Planned Parenthood. Judge Jody Luebbers ruled that the doctor for PP of Southwest Ohio breached her legal duty by not having an “informed consent” meeting with Jane Roe 24 hours in advance of her abortion". Damages awarded to her parents last year.

"Three abortion centers in Louisiana, according to state documents, have failed to properly report instance of statutory rape"

Also, if you want something really disgusting - google Kermit Gosnell of PA - he ran an abortion practice. Killed a 14 year old during an abortion, sent many others to hospital. charged with murder - also murdered babies born alive with scissors to the neck. His offices were unhygienic from photos. His practice was "hands off" to the PA board of health admitted in court documents - because abortion is more important than anything as annoying as women's health. brought before a grand jury I think a little over a year ago.

When a woman dies in Ireland, it makes news here because Ireland uses "triage" and will only abort the baby if the mother will die and the baby is not viable. When women here die or are harmed during abortion, no one cares. And who says the media isn't biased.

As I said, too many across the country and people care more about abortion than they do women's health or the welfare and safety of girls.

Robert Clarkson, I'm a bit confused. You say that abortion is murder, yet you are ok with an exception in cases of rape and incest. So are those fetuses not human? Is the fetus that is the result of a rape not alive? In my opinion, I respect the pro-life stance but I can never understand making an exception. It's either murder or it's not.

As far as this law being meant as a deterrent to the rapist, it doesn't make any sense at all. You mean to tell me that someone rapes a woman and she is impregnated and that person decides that, although they would like to get rid of the evidence, they won't force her to have an abortion because it's illegal? That's totally ridiculous to even try to suggest it's to deter the rapist.

Some people are pro life, some are pro choice. I am pro abortion. I saw where someone stated earlier that no one is pro abortion. I just wanted to say he is wrong. Kids suck.

So who ever voted for obama well you have blood and death on your hands

Now that there is the very same kind of thinking that came from the right winger that made this bill. I mean, not just because Mr. Obama had nothing to do with Roe vs Wade nor the fact that abortions have been legal for forty years.

So if this bill was to pass, who would take care of all those 'evidence' babies? Would they be forced on the mother to raise? Would they be forced to wear evidence tags and if so how long? Would they have to report themselves as evidence?

That law would come after a couple others were passed in which, like the talibanians believe, so do some of the tealibanians that the rape victim should be forced to marry her rapist to make everything right in front of their lord/god.

She should be the first to see how she will make others feel. She alone is the best 'Test Subject' we have at the moment!

Reeducation camps for the faithful. Confiscate church property to pay for them. Atheism, the one true way.

"One day after proposing a bill that would classify having an abortion after rape or incest as "tampering with evidence," a Republican legislator in New Mexico said Thursday she is clarifying the intent of the legislation.

This hurts the victim. Why not just take a DNA sample??? The victim should not be told to carry full term. What is going on there???

Statistics show that 5%-6% of abortions are the result of rape, incest or to save the life of mother. Most of that percentage is "life of mother". The other 94% are elective, in other words, for convenience. Just sayin'.

Republicans are so intelligent apparently__wasn'tit a republican anti-abortionist that said basically that a woman thatwas raped could shut down the reproductive process so it was her fault she got pregnant from the rapist.. The Anti-abortionist is so intelligent in the science field aren't they.

More evidence that it doesn't require any brains to get elected, it just takes a brainless electorate. This state legislator is trying to get a law passed that forces a woman who is a victim of rape to have the rapist's child rather than choose to abort the unwanted child. She would prefer to victimize the unfortunate woman twice rather than allow her to get rid of the fetus. How incredibly senseless and callous is that? And, yet somehow, she got elected. How incredibly stupid and brainless the people are who elected her!

Flintlock,

No one is, as you put it, "Pro-abortion". It's not like us ladies are sitting around on a Friday night saying, "We should really drink some wine coolers and get some abortions, this weekend".

We're pro-choice. There's a big difference there.

Pro Choice is NOT Pro death! That is ridiculous! Pro Choice is, it's none of your business what someone else does with their body!! It's not your concern, it's not your responsibility! It's not your decision! Your morals have nothing to do with someone else's! Mind your own damn business!! This law is barbaric! Period! Criminalizing abortion to maintain evidence is SICK!!! SICK!! SICK!!! Anyone who feels differently, how would you feel if someone wrote a law saying you can't have a medical procedure, because we don't think it's right? Or, you can't get that faulty operation fixed because it's evidence in a mal practice suit? Seriously, ridiculous!

myopinion1 - Thanks for your response. I have a few questions.

"The case, Denise Fairbanks v. Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., was filed by Denise Fairbanks in the Hamilton County Ohio Court of Common Pleas on May 7, 2007 and it named Planned Parenthood, Southwest Ohio Region, in failing to report the abuse committed by her father."

Anyone can file a case - what was the ruling?

"In Ohio, a girl, 14, was impregnated by her twenty-two year old soccer coach, a man that she and her parents trusted. The coach knew that he needed to get this “problem” taken care of as quietly as possible since the pregnancy was proof of his statutory rape – repeated statutory rape, in fact, that began almost a year earlier. He turned to Planned Parenthood. Judge Jody Luebbers ruled that the doctor for PP of Southwest Ohio breached her legal duty by not having an “informed consent” meeting with Jane Roe 24 hours in advance of her abortion". Damages awarded to her parents last year.

If this is acccurate and if in fact PP knew this was a case of statuatory rape then I agree they were in the wrong. However from what you've provided here their mistake was in not meeting a state law requiring a 24 hour wait, not because they knew the case involved statutory rape. Did they know?

"Three abortion centers in Louisiana, according to state documents, have failed to properly report instance of statutory rape"

You provide no information that PP was involved here.

Also, if you want something really disgusting - google Kermit Gosnell of PA - he ran an abortion practice. Killed a 14 year old during an abortion, sent many others to hospital. charged with murder - also murdered babies born alive with scissors to the neck. His offices were unhygienic from photos. His practice was "hands off" to the PA board of health admitted in court documents - because abortion is more important than anything as annoying as women's health. brought before a grand jury I think a little over a year ago.

That is disgusting but once again no tie to PP provided.

Yes there are bad actors of all sorts out there for all sorts of activities and when they are discovered they should be prosecuted. That said you've hardly made your case against Planned Parenthood specifically, or even against abortion providers in general since there are thousands of abortions annually in this country done legally and safely. It would appear only a tiny, tiny percentage of them are done improperly.

BTW doctors make mistakes that kill patients every day.

This definitely goes in the WTF file. Just when you think republicans cannot possibly get any more foolish, kabooooom, there it is.

I wonder how it feels to know that your whole personality is based on judging people and telling them what they should not do. or do they even know?

I would rather be a diaper on a horse then be a republican, alot less crap involved.

VICTIMIZING VICTIMS.....I'm sorry, but I do have to point something out to you. It's not a f&%#%^G squirrel growing in there. It is...in fact....100% HUMAN. Trying to say that it is anything less than human shows exactly how ignorant you are. I think you should maybe go back to junior high and take that health class again.

Kristy,

Exactly when does HUMANITY begin? Something being alive does not mean that something is human. Your post is NOTHING but opinion, as the credible, scientific community can't prove when exactly we become human. Logically, it may seem that your post is the truth to YOU, but your logic doesn't constitute the evidence needed to infringe on other's privacy rights.

That's why you have a CHOICE. I agree with you. I don't think I could ever have an abortion, but I'm also not arrogant enough to think that my BELIEF or ARGUMENT or OPINION should be forced on other's without some SCIENCE to back it up.

And here's a hint, when or if that evidence comes, it won't be something YOU thought up. It will be generated from peer reviewed studies, tests and the scientific method. Until then, if it bothers you, don't have one. But don't think you can force others to your way of THINKING, as it is merely that, thinking.

I have evidence of when life begins its called my exsperance of pregnancy. At four weeks of pregnancy I saw a body (head torso arms legs), a heartbeat, and a ton of movement. That was my second pregnancy. My first I saw all the same mentioned above plus thumb sucking, hick ups, all sorts of cool things. You animals only care about yourselfs. I AM prolife, PRO GOD, and guess what I AM A WOMAN. I am not delusional by any means, nor am I stupid, nor am I a troll. I have had enough with this choice stuff. Who's choice is it? Yours or the innocent life you take pleasure in killing? Doctors have proof that the "fetus" as you call it feels pain by 20 weeks and in many many cases way before. You I hope you murders can sleep knowing that you not only kill the baby but also hurt, maim and kill a woman in some abortions. There is no humane, safe, rare way to kill a child, baby, infant.

This is evidence that Republicans are evil. Satan himself could not do more to terrorize America's young women. Republicans are inherently unAmerican. They want to go back to Crown law and have royalty, where the landed gentry decide what us lesser humans casn do.

Vote the American Taliban out of every office in the land. They want to tell you how to live, how to spend our money and how to die.

Republicans are scum and their anti-woman stance is proof, time and again, that they serve the devil.

In Georgia, State Rep. Bobby Franklin wants to criminalize not just abortions—but miscarriages as well. His 10-page bill would make any “prenatal murder” a felony punishable by death or life in prison—and that includes miscarriages, in the event the woman cannot prove that there was "no human involvement whatsoever in the causation" of her miscarriage,Hell, some of these warped minded republicans have actually tried to pass bills calling for a death penalty for any woman that even so much as miscarries a baby and cannot prove she had nothing to do with the miscarriage.

Really, it is time to cleanse the government of these idiots with their warped bills and fantasies of controlling women. They are simply out of their warped minds.

People that even remotely try to pass on this kind of legislation should be institutionalized for their's and everyone else's protection.

I was looking for someone making a comment like you did, Clayton, #1.56. Apparently, Ms. Brown must have gone to the same extreme right wing science class as the POS that made the statement about a woman's body shutting down the reproductive system during a rape. Perhaps the original intent of the bill was to "prove" that the woman really wanted to have sex and then had second thoughts, otherwise, her body would not have let her get pregnant, thus letting the man go free. Geez!

No, a fetus is what happens when to people love each other, or bang each other, and new life is produced.

Or a scientist takes a woman's unfertile eggs and puts them in a tube and inserts dna they took out of that same woman's blood and uses it to fertilize the egg into a living clone of that woman. But oh yeah, that doesn't fall within their god's plan and is instead playing god and we all know that is evil.

Joan-1991647 (1.55)

Site your reference and quit making up stories. OH--then again--if you're quoting fux news then that explains it all.............get some REAL education. You need it.

@Sarah,

I was going to leave it alone, but I think this last post tops most of the stupid things you've said lately.

Exactly when does HUMANITY begin? Something being alive does not mean that something is human.

Out of curiosity, have human beings started incubating another species? Let's see, if a duck gets pregnant, it's probably conceived a duck. If a snake gets pregnant, a little slitherer will probably be born. if a human being conceives offspring it's probably?...You guessed it: Human! Oh wait, you said alive? Now, you're just off topic.

Your post is NOTHING but opinion, as the credible, scientific community can't prove when exactly we become human.

The former part of your assertion is hypocritical, considering you rarely sprout little else but your opinion. Here's an expert qoute:

Dr. Albert Liley, the renowned physiologist known as the "Father of Fetology" has stated, "Biologically, at no stage of development can we subscribe to the view that the unborn child is a mere appendage of the mother. Genetically, the mother and baby are separate individuals from conception."

The baby is autonomous of the mother and has been demonstrated successfully since the introduction of test tube babies. The ovum or the egg is fertilized with the sperm inside a laboratory facility. The zygote, a fertilized egg, begins to divide and grow looking like a bag of marbles even though it may be countries away from the mother.

So, while there may not be enough evidence in the world to pull a liberal mind from doing laps in that river in Egypt, we have good indication of when life begins.

Logically, it may seem that your post is the truth to YOU, but your logic doesn't constitute the evidence needed to infringe on other's privacy rights.

Speaking of evidence, where can you site a specific constitutional reference to the so-called right to privacy?

I don't think I could ever have an abortion,

So you've never had an abortion?

but I'm also not arrogant enough to think that my BELIEF or ARGUMENT or OPINION should be forced on other's without some SCIENCE to back it up.

Really, I was starting to think you were arrogant period, I'm not seeing any science. As you've never had an abortion your opinion seems to be all you can offer.

And here's a hint, when or if that evidence comes, it won't be something YOU thought up. It will be generated from peer reviewed studies, tests and the scientific method. Until then, if it bothers you, don't have one. But don't think you can force others to your way of THINKING, as it is merely that, thinking.

What peer-revived study, test, or Scientific method validates so called reproductive rights when a fetus isn't even a part of a woman's reproductive system and abortion is the opposite of reproduction? Btw, being pro-choice is a philosophical argument.

Projection...Rationalization...Regression....Denial...Call a shrink before it's too late.

Please be aware that in many states, including New Mexico, woman have no rights. They are merely walking wombs to serve as proof of someone else's religion or as evidence in court. Equal rights in America applies to males and fetuses only. Please... any sane parent... if you have daughters do not live in New Mexico.

@mike

Or a scientist takes a woman's unfertile eggs and puts them in a tube and inserts dna they took out of that same woman's blood and uses it to fertilize the egg into a living clone of that woman.

The law has to do with rape, but I'm curious. Given that IV Fertilization can cost thousands of dollars, why would a woman go through the process just to get an abortion? We haven't even started on the consent needed to get the eggs in the first place.

@Mountainlady,

Equal rights in America applies to males and fetuses only.

What's in the air you're breathing?

ItIsWhat!t!s

@mike

Or a scientist takes a woman's unfertile eggs and puts them in a tube and inserts dna they took out of that same woman's blood and uses it to fertilize the egg into a living clone of that woman.

The law has to do with rape, but I'm curious. Given that IV Fertilization can cost thousands of dollars, why would a woman go through the process just to get an abortion? We haven't even started on the consent needed to get the eggs in the first place.

I guess you did not read the quote I responded to?

No, a fetus is what happens when to people love each other, or bang each other, and new life is produced.

My point being that it does not take love or so called banging to produce a fetus. It does not even have to take a male counterpart to create a fetus. As far as this article goes, the woman believes rape victims should be put in prison for procuring an abortion and anyone that helped her make that decision should also be imprisoned. She back tracked when the ill intentioned bill was publicized to say that she was only talking about a rapist terrorizing or in any other way trying to talk or force a woman into getting an abortion. She meant it exactly as it was perceived to have meant before her backtracking.

Ronald Reagan once said, "You know, it's funny to me that every time that I hear about pro-choice arguments that the person that has been saying them has already been born." I am not sure that was the exact quote but it was something along those lines. Also, I saw on one story that said that all humans are born as female. Were one to be smart and exploit that law, then men could become smart and say, "Hey, women, guess what, we're women, too! We helped to make you and you helped to make us, so since you are saying that it's your choice, well, guess what, it's our choice and since we're also women, we're choosing to not allow you to hurt our babies!" However, there would be a fatal flaw that would be instantly capitalized upon by the LGBTTIQ communities, so that might be a serious downside to use that kind of tactic against Planned Parenthood and similar groups.

yes this is America . . . IN GOD WE TRUST . . . oh no not any more because a bunch of self serving murdering animals think it is ok to take anothers innocent life. The only thing holding God's wrath back right now in a few God fearing believers who pray for your souls. May God have mercy on you hypocrites and whore mongers.

Yeah but what about the innocent, already alive person, who's a rape or incest victim? You don't really care about them, do you?

@ It is what is: Rove vs. Wade which is in the constitution guarantees a woman rights to privacy and also so does amendment 9 which is our civil rights. Another thing it is none of your damn business or anybody's else since you are not paying for the abortion. It is not your body and it is not your life so why do you feel you have the right to force or to intervene in someone elses life that has absolutely nothing to do with you. As I said before when women who have them start knocking on your door and asking you for money to personally fund their abortion- by all means have a @!$%#ing say so. Act a damn fool. But until that happens- MYOB. Stay the hell out of other people's personal lives. What a woman does with her own body is her business and nobody's elses.

Robert in Oreon: The same goes for you. And besides you are a man so it really doesn't concern you what a woman does. Hell you aint carrying the baby so shut that @!$%# up. And another thing if the girl is coming out of pocket and paying for her own abotion- it really isn't any of your damn business. She has every right to decide whether she wants to carry the baby or not. Her decision is not affecting you unless you are the father. So like I said before if men do as they please with their bodies then women should have the exact same right.

Both of you can kick rocks and go to hell for. What a woman does with her own damn body in her own life is her business and not yours. Besides why in the hell are you two so concerned about women do with their own bodies anyway that arent related to you and you didnt impregnate? I do not understand why so many people in this country cannot mind their own damn business and tend to their own dirty laundry. Nobdoy is asking to fund anything and they still want to have a say so in somebody else's life. I wonder how you two feel if it was your rights being infringed upon. Would things change then?

I cannot stand men who belive they have a right to force a woman to carry a baby even when the baby doesnt bleong to them. I cannot stand men who think they have a right to control women and strip them of all thier rights. This is exactly why I cannot stand republicans at all. And I notice that most of the men that feel this way about women are white and conservative. Its like these men are obssesed with control. They want to control everything and everbody. And you cannot ever get these @!$%#s to mind their own damn business. They always posting bull@!$%# about murder and their beliefs and are always trying to force their beliefs down women throats. I cannot stand these kinds of men. They get own my last damn nerve.

YOU ALL ARE NOT GOD. YOU WILL NEVER BE HIM. YOU ALL HAVE NO RIGHT TO TRY AND CONTROL EVERY SINGLE PERSON AND EVERY SINGLE THING. EVEN THE LORD RESPECTED US ENOUGH TO GIVE US FREEWILL AND NO MAN HAS THE RIGHT TO INFRINGE UPON THAT RIGHT. THATS WHY WE HAVE THE CONSTITUTION. WE HAVE RIGHTS. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM. IT IS A GOD-GIVEN RIGHT. UNDERSTAND THIS; THE LORD GAVE IT TO EVERY HUMAN BEING AND EVRY HUMAN BEING HAS THE RIGHT TO EXERCISE THEIR FREEWILL. SO PLEASE QUIT TRYING TO BE HIM.

I meant they get on my last damn nerve.

While I am absolutely pro-CHOICE, I do see their point. Many times a rape kit is of no use because the evidence has been washed away. In cases that result in pregnancy, this would help.

However, I think the bill should be a law mandating the facility that performs the abortion to keep a DNA sample, should there be a need for such evidence.This DNA evidence would prove both guilt or innocence, whichever the case may be.

Seems win-win to me.

ohio

and UNTIL its born its not a person

This is the problem I have with abortion laws.

That baby IS a person and you KNOW it. Everyone knows it, but they pretend otherwise so they don't have to deal with the reality of killing a helpless baby.

I think they should have to deal with that reality because although I support the right to abortion, I do not support it being used casually as birth control. And more than anything else, I am ADAMANTLY against third-trimester abortions and the horrible sick inhumanity of how the child is killed—as if it were nothing but a piece of tissue who can't feel pain and agony.

First abortions should be legal until after the first trimester—at which time they should require a court order. A second abortion should always require a court order. A third request for abortion should require mandatory sterilization unless the woman filed charges for rape or incest within 30 days of conception. No one should be allowed to murder children on demand.

And any doctor using techniques that are unnecessarily brutal to the baby should be sent to prison for child abuse.

Abortion should be legal, but it should not be casual, because yes, that so-called "fetus" is a BABY. And BOTH of the parents should have to pay to support it until it reaches the age of 18. They can either work for the state to make child support payments, get a job, or work for the state in prison if they are too irresponsible and lazy to get a regular job.

But in a statement sent Thursday to NBC News, Brown said the bill was not intended to criminalize rape victims, but rather a rapist who might force the victim to have an abortion.

BULL@H!T

This bill will NEVER FLY, folks.

It's a thinly veiled attempt to punish the rape victim, and anyone who can't see this has the IQ of a brick.

And I'm saying this as someone who has NO DOG in the abortion fight (I'm a guy).

AGAIN - no worries. THIS BILL WILL NEVER PASS.

This is exactly how the the Republicans are relegating themselves to the dustbin of history.

If they would keep their religion to themselves and not try to inflict it on others, they would do a lot better. I doubt if they can restrain themselves.

Patter,

Since prolife types like to use the bible as justification for their human at ejaculation stance. It is interesting to note that in those times, a baby did not even receive a name until it had survived the first year, it was not considered a person until then.

interested observer

Hey now steel - don't you know that we have a major problem with rapists forcing their victims to have abortions? It has been all over the news (at least in the minds of the Republican party).

Geez - the lunatic fringe keeps getting bigger and bigger. What is in the water that they are drinking?

While I don’t agree with the bill because it will end up twisted and used against the victim, a victim of incest probably would be forced to abort the resulting child. After all, their rapist is still close by and in control and has much to lose should the child be born.

Why don't we just hand over the aborted fetus? DNA evidence will still be there. An abortion does not kill DNA.

Anyone who supports this kind of legislation is only part of the problem that still terrorizes the victims while giving every "right" and "control" to the perp! The way I see it, those who are pro-life regardless if it involved rape or incest...you are no better than the perp!! All you do is condone the acts of rapists and incestors.

So, lets get this straight. A woman gets raped and no child was conceived the rapest can be convicted of rape. But if the woman gets pregnant and aborts the fetus he can't be convicted of rape or can be set free? Tell me how this works? Does NO ONE have ANY common sense?

#1.14 Amanda Snyder - above plus thumb sucking, hick ups, all sorts of cool things. You animals only care about yourselfs. I AM prolife, PRO GOD, and guess what I AM A WOMAN. I am not delusional by any means, nor am I stupid, nor am I a troll. I have had enough with this choice stuff. Who's choice is it? Yours or the innocent life you take pleasure in killing? Doctors have proof that the "fetus" as you call it feels pain by 20 weeks...

"hick ups"? "yourselfs"? "who's"? I suggest you stay in school, sweetheart, and not procreate anymore. You need an education.

Fetus is a medical term, and not just used by posters here. Get used to it. The fetus is NOT a baby until it is born. It makes no more sense to call a fetus a baby than it does to call it an octogenarian. It is neither. It is a Fetus.

This country is truly going nuts. Shame on you lawmakers everywhere! No wonder the world is laughing about us being major stupid.

to pro-life people - you have the right to keep your unborn fetus. Just give pro-choice people the right to a abort the unborn fetus. I feel like I live in Saudi Arabia and not the US anymore.

BTW - if pro-life people want to go this route - I demand that they pay higher taxes for child related expenses. I also demand that they force businesses to hire women at the expense of men. If it's between women - the one with more children gets the job. I demand that businesses pay healthcare and childcare costs for those children. I demand that pro-life people register and then work/volunteer with underprivileged youth, foster children, volunteer in schools, provide educational funding for shortfalls, etc. I demand that those who are pro-choice shouldn't have to pay for the consequences of this pro-life policy. It's really arrogant to think that pro-life is anything but another movement to enslave women. (And btw - I come from a culture that is extremely discriminatory to women. daughter-in-law = slave to household kind of discriminatory. Women tend to be the greater offenders because they suffered this and still see no problem with perpetuating this cycle of discrimination. I see no difference between a pro-lifer and the losers who perpetuate this discriminatory culture.)

Are these 'evidence' babies going to be dropped off on Brown's doorstep to be raised?

Because I can guaran-damn-tee I would not be raising the bastard product of a rapist.

Is it just me or do liberals really have a reading comprehension disability?

"Its intent is solely to deter rape and cases of incest. The rapist — not the victim — would be charged with tampering of evidence. I am submitting a substitute draft to make the intent of the legislation abundantly clear," Brown said in the statement.

"It is not typical that a fetus would be used as evidence in a rape case," Sedillo said. Testimony by the victim, bodily damage and semen are generally used as evidence in cases of rape, she added.

Ok, so what if it is some time after the rape/incest has occurred and the other physical evidence is gone? The DNA of the rapist/incest is still present in the fetus. One must remember not all rapes are immediately reported. And I am sure there are cases in which an acquaintance/member of the family is the perpetrator, and has some influence on the victim, thus has the ability to coerce the victim to act.

I am sure these cases are rare, but evidently frequent enough for this legislator to be called upon to write a bill. It actually sounds like good legislation to me. One more tool to go after rapist with.

It sounds as if most of you here would deny the victim the ability to corroborate a rape/incest incidence with DNA evidence. Of course I don't have the whole story, such as what prompted this legislation, that was conveniently left out of this story. (I do not say article, as that implies some journalistic integrity)

And I would agree, this story, and the accompanying remarks (or I should resulting remarks) are exactly what MSNBC/NBCnews.com were trying to evoke or elicit with their yellow journalistic tactics.

@DFB #1.92

Oh, and let me clarify, and perhaps I am mistaken, but I do not see where the bill denies the victim of eventually getting an abortion.

It only pertains to getting/procuring an abortion for the purposes of destroying 'DNA' evidence.

#1.93 FarmBoy - I do not see where the bill denies the victim of eventually getting an abortion.

You know what's going to happen: they will drag out the case until it is waaaay too late for an abortion. In fact, the kid will be in high school.

Exactly when does HUMANITY begin?

uhhhh maybe when it has human DNA or rather a complete Human genome? You can argue rights and person-hood all you want but claiming a human fetus isn't human is just dumb.

Something being alive does not mean that something is human.

If that something has full human DNA it does.

scientific community can't prove when exactly we become human

You are clearly using the wrong word here because by definition human DNA makes a person HUMAN...

Why don't we just hand over the aborted fetus? DNA evidence will still be there. An abortion does not kill DNA.

yeah. Go get an abortion and ask to keep the body as a souvenir.

You know, all of this debate about what the bill does or does not criminalize could have been avoided by a competent legislator, if that was what she truly wanted to do.

"1. It shall be a crime for a person who has been accused of rape (or who has reason to believe that he may be accused of rape), or for anyone acting in concert with such a person, to solicit, procure, etc. an abortion for the alleged victim of rape for the purpose of destroying evidence.

"2. This section shall not apply to the alleged victim nor to other persons offering advice or medical services to the alleged victim, so long as such others are not the person who has been or believes he may be accused of the rape, or acting in concert with such a person."

See? It's simple enough.

Here's the bill as proposed and with the last sentence that was added after the uproar started:

Tampering with evidence shall include a person committing criminal sexual penetration or incest procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of the person's act of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime. In no circumstance shall the mother of the fetus be charged under this subsection.

The part in bold is what was belatedly added.

It is just perfectly clear to anyone reading it that, without the added sentence, this could be used to prosecute the victim. Even as changed, it doesn't protect the victim's mother, therapist, or doctor.

And before you tell me that those people don't have "intent to destroy evidence of the crime," you're wrong. There's a doctrine in the law -- and I presume it applies in New Mexico -- that you intend the natural consequences of your actions.

The fetus is NOT a baby until it is born. It makes no more sense to call a fetus a baby than it does to call it an octogenarian. It is neither. It is a Fetus.

Baby is not a medical term. You might be thinking of infant or new born. Baby is a common term referring to young offspring.

There is nothing wrong in calling an unborn child a baby. Fetus is a medical term that comes from Latin meaning “offspring”, “bringing forth”, “hatching of young”.

When is your baby due? Uhhh you mean my fetus?

What are you going to name your nonviable tissue mass? Uhhhh we are going to name our baby Elizabeth.

Debating when the embryo or fetus "becomes human" isn't necessary to justify keeping abortion safe and legal.

The underpinning of the pro-choice position doesn't require it. We want to keep abortion safe and legal because, while it's an undesirable choice in a perfect world, we don't live in a perfect world, and the alternative just happens to be worse. Your choices are either an unsafe and illegal abortion that could kill or maim both mother and fetus, or unwanted children and the myriad problems that come with them.

The fact is, there are very few people on the anti-choice side who truly believe in the right to life that they want to impose only in the abortion context. Just exactly when did the children of Hiroshima, or Dresden, or Pakistan, cease being "human"? We all believe that life is sacred and must be preserved except in the most exigent circumstances.

The same is true for "humans" in utero.

Enneagram1

#1.93 FarmBoy - I do not see where the bill denies the victim of eventually getting an abortion.

You know what's going to happen: they will drag out the case until it is waaaay too late for an abortion. In fact, the kid will be in high school.

#1.94

Why should it? In Kansas any girl under the age of 16 who gets an abortion is automatically reported to the state, so that statutory rape charges may be filed. I am not sure about all the ins and outs of the law, but at least the evidence, that is the medical records, are saved. I can imagine that it wouldn't be too difficult to save a "DNA" sample of the fetus for evidence.

The trick here is to discern which cases are being manipulated to destroy evidence. After all, if the victim is being coerced into having the abortion to hide a crime, how is the Doctor to know which are the legitimate cases and which are victims? Unless the victim speaks up? Or perhaps that is the overall scope of the law? The victim can later come forward (when she feels safe) and say she was molested/raped, and forced to have the abortion, (Of which there will be a record) and at least the perpetrator can be convicted of destroying evidence, if not the actual crime of rape.

I think you are reading too much into this. That some how the state will get involved prior to the abortion and hold it up in court. My take on it is that it is 'ex post facto'.

DumbFarmBoy: The RTL people are trying every avenue they can think of to end abortion in this country. Declaring that no abortion can take place because they need "evidence" is just one tack.

#1.98 Joe - Baby is not a medical term.

I didn't say 'baby' is a medical term, I said 'fetus' is a medical term.

Robert in Oregon... Do not argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. Funny, isn't it? Most of these so-called "right to lifers" are really just 'right to birthers' and couldn't care less what happens to a child once it's here. They don't seem to mind endorsing the death penalty either. I guess it's all in the timing, eh? They also don't appear to be bothered by endless, senseless wars that kill thousands of our young people and drain our coffers dry either. Why, oh, why can't the American people just mind their own business without sticking their noses up everyone's @ss?

Nobody, I noticed, gives a damn about other's circumstances either. I say; 'walk a mile in those moccasins, you buncha' blue nosed, judgemental, self-righteous hypocrites. Does everything in your world have to be politicized? Obsessive and sick. Truly sick. BTW, last time I checked abortion is legal in this country so, if you don't like it, move elsewhere .

Robert D. Clarkson... On which planet, sir, do you reside? Apparently 7 Billion + people (and counting) isn't enough for you, even though we can barely feed the souls who are already here. Outta' sight, outta' mind, huh? Welcome... to the insane asylum of the universe.

Enneagram1

DumbFarmBoy: The RTL people are trying every avenue they can think of to end abortion in this country. Declaring that no abortion can take place because they need "evidence" is just one tack.

#1.98 Joe - Baby is not a medical term.

I didn't say 'baby' is a medical term, I said 'fetus' is a medical term.

#1.101

Hey, I am just a dumb kid who grew up on a farm, and they didn't teach me to read into something that ain't there. Just exactly where in the legislation does it say that an abortion is to be suspended, delayed, obstructed or otherwise denied, pending the outcome of an investigation?

Tampering with evidence shall include a person committing criminal sexual penetration or incest procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of the person's act of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime. In no circumstance shall the mother of the fetus be charged under this subsection.

The rest is just legal jargon, but that is the meat of of the law. All it says to me is it is crime to force someone you molested/raped to have an abortion to hide the original criminal act. period.

And just for the record, I am pro choice. A woman has the right to CHOOSE with whom and when she has sex. Other wise it is rape. And I am all for reproductive rights, and when you people recognize men's reproductive rights, I will recognize women's.

E.G.; a man and woman have sex, she gets pregnant. Option A: She can have an abortion. Option B: she can have the kid. And neither option demands that she ask the man what is his choice.

His choice was already made, and he gets to pay child support for 18 years, whether he wants to or not. (he can go to jail for not paying, and lose several other rights and privileges as well)

Also, a husband cannot stop his wife from killing his unborn kid, if he wants the child, and she doesn't.

No, all abortion is, is just another example of the "consequence free" society that spawns shootings like the one in Newtown.

DumbFarmBoy wrote:

"Is it just me or do liberals really have a reading comprehension disability?"

It's just you.

Enneagram1

I didn't say 'baby' is a medical term, I said 'fetus' is a medical term.

Here is what you said:

The fetus is NOT a baby until it is born.

The word baby is NOT a medical term and is not precise. Therefore there is nothing wrong with people referring to unborn children as babies.

#1.106 Joe - there is nothing wrong with people referring to unborn children as babies.

There is everything wrong with it. The unborn is neither a child nor a baby. Besides being incorrect terminology, it's an effort by the anti-choice people to 'bambi-ize' a glob of cells by calling it a 'baby' when it is merely a fetus. The human sequence is this: zygote, fetus, baby (or infant), child, adolescent, teenager, adult. You can't jump over one process because you feel like it.

#1.90 jh - ...pro-life policy. It's really arrogant to think that pro-life is anything but another movement to enslave women.

I agree. It seems to be a last-ditch attempt to control women after failed attempts to: keep women at home; keep women from voting, or smoking, or driving, or wearing pants, or earning a living. There is nothing left to keep women from doing except having abortions.

There is everything wrong with it.

Uhhh, no there is nothing wrong with it.

The unborn is neither a child nor a baby.

Ever hear the term.... "With Child?"

Besides being incorrect terminology, it's an effort by the anti-choice people to 'bambi-ize' a glob of cells by calling it a 'baby' when it is merely a fetus.

Glob of cells? I am sorry... who is guilty of trying to sway opinion by using terminology?

A fetus is not a GLOB of cells. In fact it is very well organized. I can see you calling a zygote or blastocyst a clump of cells but not a fetus. In fact a fetus at 30 weeks is mostly developed. The last 10 weeks are mainly for adding weight. All the internal organs are complete, eyes, ears, fingers and toes. A fetus is no more a glob of cells than you are.

The human sequence is this: zygote, fetus, baby (or infant), child, adolescent, teenager, adult. You can't jump over one process because you feel like it.

Once again you are to be purposely missing the point. It is in fact zygote, blastocyst, fetus(embryo), new born, infant, toddler. Baby is not a part of the picture because it is NOT a medical term.

Robert in Oregon

DumbFarmBoy wrote:

"Is it just me or do liberals really have a reading comprehension disability?"

It's just you.

#1.104

Robert, You prove my point. Thank You. What I posted, is what they call a "rhetorical" question. {rhetorical question: is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked in order to make a point and without the expectation of a reply.}

You'd think after Akin and Mourdock lost their Senate seats because of rape comments, the last thing a Republican would do would be to open their mouths again on the subject, but no.

Gratz Brown. You just gained us another seat in the House in 2014. Come on GOP, keep sticking your nose into women's rights. You'll end up handing it to us on a silver platter.

Chris,

Doesn't the unborn have rights? Ask yourself, what if you had been aborted?

flintlock, which 'rights' should the 'unborn' have that over-rides the mother's rights that haven't been covered under RoeVWade?

Flilntock; Well I suppose if I had been aborted, then I sure wouldnt know about it would I? Are you saying that the "unborn" child that was conceived in rape or incest should be forced to be born by the "victim" mother? You must be a man...... no woman that I know of would want to be forced to carry the child conceived by rape, well, most anyway. There are those who have, however a woman should have the choice especially in the case of rape or incest!

If any one of us had been aborted, flintlock... We wouldn't care. Without abortion(just to play devils advocate), this country would probably be filled with droves of "useless eaters" & "takers". Or will the right agree to public health care, education, food & housing for all? Do you really want what you want?

People in New Mexico need to buy their assault rifles and large capacity ammo clips and take a dance down in the state capital where Republicans should start to run, run, run conservatives!

Btw flintlock, since Brown advocates for the 'fetus' being evidence of a crime, does that mean the STATE gets to take care of the baby once born till the age of 18, AND the mother since she was the 'carrier' of said 'crime evidence?'

Sorry, but the mom was there first. She didn't get a choice when she was raped or molested and you sure as hell are not going to take away her choice not to carry the result of that crime. The only people who have any say in her body should be herself and her doctor. Not the Cons, or the Libs, or the courts. At least we libs are trying to keep everyone else out of her body.

GOP - incapable of empathy!

Sherri,

A woman should only have the right to abortion only in the case of rape and incest. Getting pregnant by merely having sex for enjoyment is voluntary.

Fantom Dog...nothing in the bill refers to the fetus as evidence. You and the other left heads here can't comprehend this and this is why the current Dem successes will be short lived. Dems= clueless.

Why would anyone have sex if not for enjoyment? Merely?

flintlock -I'm interested to hear why you are anti abortion followed by why you are pro exceptions for rape and incest.

Let me guess. If you have sex for fun and it results in pregnancy then you need to be punished by being forced to carry and bear an unwanted child, right?

BTW are you and the rest of the pro=lifers stepping up to adopt all those children?

No Theo they won't and when that child is born and needs help with food or medical care they vote to cut it. They are not pro-life they are pro-birth because after you are born you are not useful for politics. Being anti choice costs nothing feeding that child well hell they are on their own.

flintlock, I'm sorry you've never experienced sex for enjoyment but some of us have. Not all of us are of the opinion that sex is for procreation only.

Oh Flintock;

Sherri,

A woman should only have the right to abortion only in the case of rape and incest. Getting pregnant by merely having sex for enjoyment is voluntary.

Are you serious? Birth Control fails, if a woman CANNOT take care of a child after failed b/c, she should be forced to have that child because in your words "it was a pregnancy due to enjoyment".? HAHAHAHA, WHAT IF SHE DIDNT ENJOY IT, would that be ok then, say it was a bad encounter and not enjoyable? Please..... politcians, pro-lifers, men, etc., stay out of womens WOMBS ok? Let her decide what is best for her, her situation, her life, no one should FORCE a child to be born under any circumstances. Abortion is not done nilly willy, it is a CHOICE that is made out of whatever life the woman has and circumstance and no one aborts a WANTED child, so think about the millions of UNWANTED children that would be FORCED into this world, my god, dont we read enough every day of deplorable things being done to children born to people that clearly had no business EVER giving birth? So mulitply that by the the amount of abortions being done, not saying all would be abused, but think about the ones that were born, and now think of the ones being FORCED upon a woman that didnt want the child in the first place. There are just not enough resources as it is to care for the abused/neglected children that these women chose to have that shouldn't have. Oh, I can hear it now, well there is always adoption, so these women that DO not want these children will take such good care of themselves while being pregnant right, they will not do drugs, they will eat healthy, just so they can give this unwanted child (unwanted by them) to someone else right? Again, you must be a man, you have no clue.

news flash, the majority of women who have abortions are in college. So you got one more year to earn your degree, do you have the baby or not? this is the most common dilemma involving abortion.

Ask a republican , and they will probably tell you that it's all liberal poor black people having abortions. it just ain't so.

the irony is that so many of these right wing parents and grandparents who post here, simply do not know that ........... had an abortion. your daughter or grand daughter would never never tell you because they know how you are. the child of a liberal is much more likely to confide in a parent. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it. lol

millknee, what is it about 'tampering with evidence,' (meaning if rape victim gets an abortion she would be tried in a court of law for a felony) don't you understand, or are you that obtuse?

Pro-"choice" (pro-murder) advocates/women: Stay out of our wombs! It's our choice!

Grumpy Cat meme: No.

Birth Control fails

Not very often. Although it is claimed to have failed with monotonous regularity.

@flintlock-4771495

A woman should only have the right to abortion only in the case of rape and incest. Getting pregnant by merely having sex for enjoyment is voluntary.

Why the distinction? It is certainly not legal to kill an infant who is the product of rape or incest.

If a fetus is deserving of all the rights of personhood, as many pro-lifers insist, then how can they philosophically justify the exception for rape or incest?

I thought the same thing. Believe me, if some man commits and is charged with rape, the thought that he might be charged with "tampering with evidence" is not going to be any kind of deterrent.

The intent of this proposed law was to criminalize abortion in the circumstance of rape and the target is the victim. If this ever actually passes you can bet that next year some other circumstance of pregnancy will be criminalized.

Exactly, Theo. It's the mother they want to punish, almost as much as they want to get the doctors. I wonder how she feels about the rapist/father suing for parental rights down the road? They want these women to suffer the trauma of being victimized for the rest of their lives.

BULL@!$%#!!!!!!!!!

That bitch should be tared and feathered!!

That fertilized egg is NOT half of you, DB...and regarding the woman as its "housing" is incredibly insulting. As for Dr. Ron Paul...this great follower of Ayn Rand has apparently forgotten her memorable statement: "The enemy of abortion is no friend of freedom...or capitalism."

It is because no one cares after conception and nine months of labor. The only concern is the fertilized egg. Ok what about when the child is born? Where is the caring then?

DB Akron:

If a fully grown woman and a fertilized egg were both trapped in a fire, and you could only save one, which would you save? If you say the egg, you need to get your priorities straightened out.

Life begins when a fetus changes from a non-sentient parasite (in the literal sense) that is incapable of feeling or suffering into something that can survive outside the mother. Before that point it is not a person, it is not a baby, and the woman has the right to end her nightmare by getting rid of it. Or hell, she has the right to get rid of it just if she doesn't want kids. Why? Because it's not a person. It's a single-celled organism. And as far as I know, single-celled organisms aren't granted equal protection under the law.

actually, DB, birth control pills work by fooling the body into thinking that it is already pregnant, therefore no ovulation occurs. get your facts straight

@DB Akron

So, if the victim doesn't want the child as a big reminder of the rape, will you adopt the child? Will you funds the child to the age of 18?

What if the victim die during child birth, will you go to jail because you force the victim to give birth?

Not really harming anyone? How about the victim? You are telling me that if someone rape your daughter, she would happily carry the child and you would "Praise God for her to have child everyday"?

You are the biggest hypocrite ever.

Agreed, and if she wrote the bill so poorly that it has caused uproar from both sides of the debate, what the heck is she doing drafting ANY kind of legislation?

I wouldnt be surprised to see the GOP define an unfertilized egg as a potential, registered Republican and thus be eligible to vote at birth or fertilization. What ca craziness will they come up with next?

Steelfeathers - you need to get your facts straight. The only time anything resembles a single celled organism is when the egg and sperm are seperate. When they meet and fertilization occurs, the zygote becomes a multicelled organism and it continues to divide and grow at an incredible rate from then on. You must not have been paying attention in science class. Now you've been schooled!

Theo-3270314

I think I get it! I think I get it!! (Hand waving furiously in the air.)

Rep. Brown's convoluted "thinking" is that the rapist will return and abort the child himself, and we all know you can't practice medicine without a license!

What do I win? Cash would be cool, but a pony, now that would be hellacool!

my2centsworth-4076520: Oops, I'm sorry, a 2 celled organism then. My mistake. Gee, here I was thinking that a zygote wasn't a person, but man that 1 extra cell really makes a big difference. I think it might even have twice the amount of mass.

But it still can't do anything a 1 celled organism can't do, so that doesn't change my opinion one iota.

It still can't live without the mother and so it is not a human being. If you want to prove that it is, go to a local abortion clinic and have them remove the cells and implant them into you and you carry it for nine months. I don't care if you are male or female. If it can live without it's mother, it can live in you. If that works, you have your solution. All the prolifers can meet at the clinics and get those baby implants!

my2cents, cancer starts as a single cell, then divides and multiplies at an incredible rate, care to have legislation against trying to stop that at all costs? You probably still believe a school of higher learning is a building with a 2nd floor...

DB Akron - If a fertilized egg is a "new life in progress", so too then are sperm and ovum.

gcooper8 - look down the driveway, your pony is in the UPS truck!

@ DB, you mention DNA being the blueprints for life at conception. Explain to me how over 40% of healthy women miscarry prior to 12 weeks??? And that 40% could easily be more, simply due to the fact that a majority of those women miscarry even before they know they are pregnant. The reason these miscarriages occur and occur so frequently is because the fetus is not developing correctly. SO, your blueprint has a large enough error for mother nature to stop it from progressing any further. Should those women be held accountable for the loss of a life, even though she had absolutely nothing to do with it?????

Or, here's another one. What if a woman is told that if she carries full term, she and/or the baby will die??? Should she still be forced to carry this child, knowing that death will occur anyway, regardless of the DNA and blueprint have already been laid down??? And what if she finds this out early in 2nd trimester (14 weeks)after the chance of miscarriage has dramatically decreased????

Steel feathers

First part, Silly response.

Comparing a fetus to a parasite is hiddeous. A parasite almost always kills the host. A fetus is about continuing human life.

Cassandra

Clearly you have never been around anything but selfish men and selfish women.

Without the male part, there is no chance of a child. In the days of old, bearing children was consider an honor.

Today, it seems to be considered like a disease or an illness by many.

Theo-3270314

Hot damn! It's a beautiful white Welsh Mountain Pony!!

I shall name him Theo after you!

Mainly because "3270314" is a lousy name for a pony. I mean, "Giddap, 3270314!" just has no panache.

Bulldozer

SOME birth control does this, not all.

http://www.americanpregnancy.org/preventingpregnancy/birthcontrolpills.html

Again Dr Paul was telling a truth that most don't want to see. One is best to know which one they are taking.

The newer forms are targeting ovulation. This too is a problem, because recent trends are that women in the 30's having fertility issues is on the rise. More study is under way, but, the common thread was taking oral contraceptives as early as 14 and then getting off them in their 30's.

My wife was put back on oral contraceptives after having the children to help with here adendamyosis. That was big time failure making her periods even worse. All I can say is hormonal manipulation is not a very good thing in the end and it's risks and problems are being minimized far too much.

Cuong DNguyen

Although my wife and I have not yet adopted, we have taken in people's kids for periods of time. We have considered adopting, but felt our start in life on our own family was too late to bring on more after we felt it best not have any more children beause of health concerns.

My one brother was a foster parent, We took care of a friend adopted child for 3 months, and have taken in other distressed minors when they opportunintes have presented themselves.

The reason there are so many adoptions in the US of children from other countries, is our procedure is lengthy, the cost is high, and there is a shortage of available children in the preferred adoption age range. Something about an abortion rate that has births in the United States below the 2% range annually.

There are actually few unwanted children, but too many who don't want what is given to them.

Witty one

not a human being

DNA disagrees. What makes you a human being is DNA, not time of life.

So, DB, your scientific study was your wife's reaction to birth control pills? I have no doubt some women don't tolerate them well but you can't base the conclusions on one example any more than I can say that since my husband has a bad reaction to shellfish it must generally be bad for everyone.

You know what else has DNA, DB Akron? Mushrooms. All sorts of fungi. Should we be giving shiitaki and portabella mushrooms more rights?

Get ready fellow Democrats and Progressives. PAY ATTENTION to the latest Republican moves in the Presidential Election Swing States....they want to make sure that the even though there could be a large majority in the popular vote a Republican would be elected based on Gerrymandering of districts and the Electoral College. To all of you conservatives who beat your chests about the constitution and the bill of rights......how fundamental is the right to vote? We are watching!

Stymie

40% fail because of a host of problems that occur

-health of the mother - actually had a nephew die because mom was seriously sick, and in a rare occurance the child contracted the illness. He ended up being born pre-mature, and with underdeveloped lungs and a virus, died in 30 days.

-age of the mother father or both. DNA degrades in both women and men as we age.

-trama to the mother in accidents, sickness, emotions

-weak genetic traits that get passed from generation or even skip generations

-medicines taken while pregnant can cause issues.

There are far too many causes to name or explain. What it means that without birth control, we still have high odds of not being born. Wouldn't it be better if what causes a failure had nothing to do with us?

This whole thing smells of ignorance! Here is a thought how many people out there know someone or know someone who knows someone who has been raped? What do you think their reaction would be to this? When needing evidence for a rape case the fetal tissue can be tested. Genetic matches can be determined by three months or less so there is no need for a full term pregnancy for evidence purposes. Whether the intent was to keep the raper from causing the victim from having an abortion or having any rights is not clear here. A rapist should have no rights. I sincerely hope there was a poor press misprint here. Why would anyone expect any woman to take a fetus to full term after such a violent violation? Who would take care of that child of misfortune? Certainly not the state! Foster care taken care of by tax payers? The system who has a history of poor placements with bad results. What an irresponsible proposed law! Who really wins in this situation, or rather who stands to gain some contorted idealism of political gain?

if this was about evidence, the bill would simply require the doctor to do a biopsy of the fetus and preserve it as evidence. republicans fail again.

DB, your late nephew's mother (you didn't say if she was your sister or sil, not that it matters) would be brought up on charges if some Republicans had their way. She would be guilty of killing the fetus because she made him get sick before he was strong enough to handle it.

By the way, I remember that both in H.S. Biology and Health classes, the forming zygot has the same shape as all other forming mammals, so until it actually takes on human form, it could be anything.

Speaking of cancers, Fantomdog and others that think like you...

"What makes you a human being is DNA, not time of life."

That's great, I need some money. I'm taking my cat to the bank so he can get a loan.

Or is that a prelude to you declaring your goat human so you can legally marry.

But then again I just realized I've been a cannibal for quite a long time.

I could go on all day but I do have to go commit genocide on that wasp nest in the shed.

DB-

A). A fetus does not become a fetus until after 12 weeks gestation. An EMBRYO is a parasite. literally. I know that sounds disgusting but it is the truth. And yes it can kill the host, the mother. An embryo and even a fetus can kill the mother. Most definately.

B). Child birth is the closest thing to dying a woman can experience. And carrying an unwanted child, especially as a teen or a result of rape is definately not something that is fun.

C). some one on here said they saw a head, torso, heartbeat, arms, legs on their embryo (fetus they called it) at 4 wks. SAY WHAT!?! I'm calling you out. You're a liar. Go look up the stages of the embryo and fetus please.

D). DNA is a start of the definition of life. Just like an engine. Does an engine make it a car? No. DNA doesn't mean squat.

But then again I just realized I've been a cannibal for quite a long time

Jo....bahahahahahaha ;)

Dont balme the GOP for this one, there are a lot of conservatives that look at this as being stupid. And Gerrymandering is not something only the GOP, both sides have done it for years.

Simply unbelievable. I hope that the GOP is imploding. These people have gone off the rails. What has this country come to?

Dan M: The topic is abortion. Try to keep upi.

Tim, it's not just gerrymandering--they lie and cheat, too. and Dan, really. calm down. take your lithium

No doubt the GOP is imploding, but we Democrats ought to learn a lesson. Today Feinstein, about the farthest Left we have, decides to put our sweeping anti-gun legislation that is absolutely assinine. Why do we leave "reasonable" gun legislation to the far Left of our party? Any blue dogs who support that will be out of job replaced by Tea Baggers and even Demmocrats in close states or districts will pay a price.

Why do we do this when there is so much important to be working on? Put out, guarranteed to lose legislation so you can do what? Cripple moderate Democrats who support it? We can be just as dumb as they are!

Far more important is good immigration reform, gay rights, protecting Social Security, Medicare and other programs of the people. But no, we go after a no win, stupid and meaningless Liberal "prize" that will just cost us seats down the road.

Republicans are giving us a chance to regain the House in 2014 and we're blowing it. The GOP can be pretty stupid, but so can we, going after something that will make zero difference and just makes moderate people think we're nuts. We both can learn some lessons about not letting the extremists in our parties ruin it for everyone.

The goofy gun bill Feinstein announced today, just minutes ago, caused Democrats to cave on the filibuster rule. The reason? To save a Democratic majority in the Senate. Reid know he can now blame Republicans for blocking gun legislation and Democrats won't have to put their heads on the chopping block. We had a chance, but if we can't control our nut cases we will follow the same fate of Republicans. We could do so much good if we kept our heads on straight.

Really both parties need to let the moderate middle rule and tell our extremists to STFU.

Hey, Dan, pay attention, you and your buddies are off topic, try to keep up. Nice try, though, blame this on the President.

1NewDay:

*applause* well said! as a moderate liberal gun owner I would like nothing more than sensible gun legislation and the extremists on both sides need to cut the crap

@1 New Day: You are right. I agree with you one hundred percent. Because I sure do not want the republicans in control in 2014. I do not want a repeat of 2010. I cant wait for them @!$%#s to be voted out and replaced with Dems. Liberal dems. Not conservatives dems. We do have those also.

Now back to the topic at hand this woman knew exactly what the hell she was doing and she only reconsidered rewording the bill after it blew up in her face. She is just trying to criminalixe women for having abortions. This is all this bill is bout. She knows it and so does everybody else. However it will never pass. And if it does The Supreme Court will overturn it because state law cannot supercede federal law. But we all know this bill is not going to pass. However she is an @!$%# for even writing up a bill like this.

Just like that damn Paul Ryan and senator Todd Akin drawing up that ridicolous ass bill. It never passed and it never will. They filibustered the @!$%# out that bill. Im glad. These @!$%#s needed to be voted out of office. I say people like these @!$%#s should be raped and let them see how it feels. And for the woman that wrote up this bill, I hope she does get raped and I hope it results in a pregnancy. I wonder how she would feel then. The same goes for that bimbo Sara Palin. Somebody should rape her insensitive and inconsiderate ass and get her pregnant too. I wonder would they still have the same viewpoint of rape victims not having the right to have abortions then.

Being a victim of rape generally I wouldnt wish it own any woman, but these damn women being this damn insensitive and inconsiderate, deserve to be raped. They have sincerely pissed me off with their inconsiderate comments regarding women and rape. Since they feel this way hell I feel they should experienced first hand and then speak. I hate people who have never been through the situation themesleves think they have right to speak on said subject matter and think that victims should just get over it and deal with it. I cannot stand people who feel this way and since they feel this way, this in turn makes we wish somebody would rape their asses and impregnate them. Just so they can see how the @!$%# feels.

Pedestrian

Women used to be the real advocates of life and self-sacrifice to give life a chance. Today, we promote self as more important than anything else.

My wife is one of those women who don't think abortion is right in any case. She makes me look like a flaming liberal!

And a s woman I really dont give a flying @!$%# how your wife feels about abortion. It is nonoe of her damn business what a woman decides to do with her body. Hell that is that womans decision. It is not yours neither is it your wife. Hell in both of you all can go crael back in that cage from the dark ages for all I care.

Like I've stated many times before: A woman deserves the right to choose. And id your wife has never been raped before, I suggest she shut the hell up. That is a very traumatic experience. And I do not appreciate a woman who has never been through that opening up her damn mouth. She needs to get somewhere and shut the hell up and mind her own business. And learn some damn compassion.

Corrections: As a woman I dont give a flying @!$%# how your wife feels about abortion. Its not her life and it is not her body. So she can shut that @!$%# up too. Both of you all can cram your feelings and your opinions up you asses. Yall both need to go crawl back up under that rock from the dark ages. If your wife has never been raped before, I suggest she shut the hell up. Hell thats is another womans decision. Its not your wife's decision nor is it your decision. It is also none of your damn business.

Sorry, DB, but your poetic rendition of The Noble Woman of Days Past falls short in the face of reality. Women have ALWAYS looked for effective ways of terminating unwanted pregnancies. If your wife were faced with "terminate this pregnancy or you and the fetus both die" I'm sure that she would step right up to the old self-preservation plate and take a swing. It's so nice and easy to stand on the sidelines and judge OTHER people for the decisions that they make, isn't it. ;)

with "thinking" like that Saudi Arabia would be a better location....

So this bill will make it a crime to participate in an abortion after incest. We knew the American Taliban was intent on instilling their version of Sharia law in America, but who would have thought they would encourage inbreeding ?

Please do not lump all CPS workers. I know one who has a 1% pay raise in 2006. has had her case loads expanded and she now has had to take 10 unpaid days a year. I call that a pay cut. The stress she goes through because of all this caused a heart attack . She is now back to work but quit blaming those that are overworked and under paid blame those that could care less about abused children that they overload the workers and take away heir wages. Please people put the damn blame where it belongs.

Okay, Sharon J, I will place the blame where it belongs. It belongs mostly on the Republicans that cut the funding to CPS causing them to let go of workers thereby forcing a case overload on the ones that remain.

The only thing that stops bad legislation on abortion is a fetus with a gun...

It wouldn't work, Reasonable....everyone knows that only Democrats get abortions and only Democrat women are oppressed. Only Republicans have guns.

Democrat, Republican, Liberal or Conservative. It shouldn't matter. A woman's reproductive options should be the sole decision of the woman. But my point is seeing a bunch of women packing heat during a demonstration against those who would subject them to 'their' way of thinking would send a powerful message! :)

Mike; "We already have laws that prevent rapists from terrorizing their victims. Use them" And there are what, 4200 gun laws? Demwits uphold only the laws that matter to them, and only them. A bill came up that meant to prevent a fetus from a doctors help after a botched abortion. Obama voted yes. So the infant was to be left alone to die. This is the person the Democrats voted for.

Barry's girls have armed guards at school, do your's?

@Greyghost_— Yes Obama girls has armed guards to protect them from the gun-idiot fools like you. Your girls or kids don't need armed guards to be protected from Obama.

You show how stupid you really are by not thinking the president and his family doesn't need protected didn't hear you squawking when the republicans had armed guards protecting them Most in government has and needs body guards. One time I almost bumped into the mayor of Baltimore by accident and he even had a body guard . How ignorant can you , be did you graduate from the third grade. You are even dumber than the gal that wrote this rape abortion bill and that is pretty dumb.

Greyghost, by making a fuss over Obama's daughters having guards to protect them, you show your ignorance. Bush's daughters had secret service protecting them. Even during the campaigning period, the GOP frontrunners were offered secret service protection. Stay on topic or go back under the rock you came out of.

Sadly, quite often. Not all cases of rape happen in a dark alley with a stranger.

Michelle, You got that exactly right. This is simply unfreakin believable.

Cathrynn Brown is a state representative in New Mexico. Speaker Boehner has nothing to do with her, as she falls under the New Mexico State Government and not the House of Representatives of the Legislative branch of the federal government.

Uh....no Smart. This is all part and parcel of the GOP national body working to inflict their anti-woman agenda on a state by state basis. You don`t usually read about it on the national news website but you can find the stories if you dig deeper at the state level. And sadly there are many women out there that do not like other women and are more than happy to hurt them as well. (Think of all the women that do nothing when some man is abusing their children...... or even the ones that abuse the children themselves.....just the other day some gal got many, many decades in prison for having supported her husband in depriving their son of water thus killing him.)

Correct, Kelcy - much like they are trying to do with splitting Electoral College votes in MI, PA, WI and other states. If they succeed, they can lose the popular vote by a bunch and still win the White House in 2016. And these are the people who keep harping on the rule of law and waving the Constitution.

Right Bruce, God forbid obama, and the Demwits pay attention to laws and the Constitution! None of this will really matter if the Marxist-in-charge signs any gun laws, or writes them himself.

" The rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

You forget the part that says a well regulated militia since when is the NRA a militia and it sure is anti-regulations. You and the gun manufacturers lobby (NRA) keeps yelling right to arms when do that right excede the right to live?

She ran unopposed last year...a mistake which I certainly hope is rectified in 2014.

Ran unopposed because of the gerrymandered districts. Both might had done it but the GOP took it to new heights of ridiculousness with districts that literally cut streets apart based on voting patterns.

Left heads seem to like the word, gerrymander. They like to overuse euphemisms. Left heads tend to believe only Republicans gerrymander, but the Dems do it as well. In 2001, with Democrats in control of Illinois redistricting, then-state Senator Barack Obama was able to reshape his district to his own specifications. And that included drawing in wealthy supporters from Chicago’s Gold Coast. In Hunt vs. Cromartie (1999), the Court found that a redrawn 12th in North Carolina was constitutional because it was legal partisan gerrymandering -- designed to create a safe Democratic seat. Enjoy your 15 minutes of fame, Democrats. The Republicans don't have to do anything...you'll eventually lose control on your own.

The question is who will they lose control to? By that time the suicidal GOP will be dead. Another in the line of parties in a history book that no longer exist.

Most of them are against this. This will fail and the person resp. should get a pink slip.

My thoughts exactly.

Better double check who's on the receiving end of your count down....you may be surprised. Of course, you are only parroting what you hear others say....when the band wagon gets too crowded, it may collapse. Many of the things said about disunity in the GOP used to be said about disunity in the DFL. The pendulum swings both ways. It will eventually swing back the other way. Enjoy the ride while it lasts.

We will much longer than you!

None of you will last in the end. You will all die for your stupidity and there is not a thing that you can or can not do to stop it from happening to the lot of you. People, you brought the nooses around your own necks and you are to blame for that yourselves.

And rapists coerce their victims into abortions when exactly? I thought they either a) tried to light them on fire or b) told them that no one would believe them.

More importantly, this proposed law has the ability to be grossly misused to continue a woman's suffering by refusing to allow her to rid herself of her tormentor's spawn.

The evidence of a rape is the condition of the victim immediately following; semen, blood, injuries caused by physical assault, etc. By the time a pregnancy is verified, the other, actually reliable, evidence is long gone.

This is a BS attempt to criminalize the victim and no amount of "what I really meant was...." is going to fix that. She got caught trying to turn rape victims into criminals and if she has any brains at all she will just pull this bill, try to pretend it never happened and hope voters forget before the next election. You can't fix stupid.

Matt, under other conditions I would believe that the bill was poorly written. After having to watch the GOP using all methods to stop any abortion, gerrymandering, messing with our electoral system in blue states, passing immigration bills to stop hispanics, passing voter suppression bills, for some reason I do not believe a thing of what they say. I am not just a cynic, I am downright suspicious of anything GOP.

Anita, I didn't think about it until I saw your comment, but you're exactly right. Pregnancy itself is not evidence of rape (it happens from consensual intercourse as well) and by the time the woman knows she's pregnant, all other evidence is long gone.

At first I just thought this bill was created from stupidity, but now I see that it's a conniving, cold-blooded attempt to further the GOP agenda of anti-choice.

The amendment that was proposed to be added to the law is 41 words long. The very first line is "Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion." And she proof-read it before submitting it.

She claims she "didn't catch the language" but there wasn't a lot to miss. Given the fact that this is far from being an isolated incident for the GOP, I cannot bring myself to believe that this was just an honest mistake.

And then this guy called Matt agrees with Brown!! What a crock and what an a@@hole! Yeh, she didn't mean to make the Rape victim the CRIMINAL...It was just what she was told to say, BY HER RIGHT TO LIFERS!!!

It figures people would get all bent out of shape for me wanting to give the benefit of the doubt to this politician... I like to believe that politicians are not *that* stupid. But then, the dog piling begins here in the comments.

I don't give a s-h-i-t what someone does in their private life so long as a) it doesn't interfere with what I do in my life and b) it doesn't involve harming another person.

Hey folks - Matt's a good guy. He always supports women's rights. He was simply taking another look at the bill, period. He's entitled to his thoughts just like the rest of us. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt any day.

STEELE FEATHERS...Do you really think all cases of rape happen in some dark alley by a stranger? Do you suppose there has been a few cases where a older man has been having sex with an under-age girl and gets her pregnant only to take her to the clinic to "get rid of the evidence"? I'd be willing to bet it happens more often than anyone would like to think. They are simply trying to prevent rapists...because that's what they are...from using an abortion as a way to clear themselves of any proof of what they did. If they in fact did push the victim into getting an abortion, they want to make them pay for that as well as paying for the rape. It's all pretty simple when you shut your mouth and open your eyes and ears to something other than your own running mouth.

Kristy - as a rape victim myself, who was terrified that I was pregnant, going through with a pregnancy would have killed me mentally, emotionally - I would not have been able to deal with it. Thankfully, I was not pregnant. I've still have had to deal with years of pain because of the event - it was rather horrific. However, the means to obtain evidence does not require a victim to be forced to carry the rapist's fetus, either. Clearly, given the background of the bill's sponsor, this is yet another attempt to push the boundaries concerning abortion issues. Under normal circumstances, I don't think I could personally ever have an abortion. But had I become pregnant from that rape, I couldn't have lived if forced to carry a rapist's child for any amount of time. No one who hasn't experienced such violence has the right to tell me I'm wrong - they have no clue what it's like to be tortured that way.

And you Kristie need to reread the article and the bill again and you will understand exactly why people are reacting the way they are reacting. Her intentions are very clear. Hell she wants to criminalize women who's been raped or are the victims of incest for having abortions. It is simple as that. Hell we are not stupid. She considered rewording it because it blew up in her face. This the truth. Go back and read.

Robin

I'm very sorry to hear what you went through. Unfortunately I as well was a victim of rape. Only I was 8 years old and it was a friend of the family that was babysitting me at the time. Thankfully, I was too young for pregnancy to come into play. I NEVER said a rape victim should EVER be forced to carry their attackers baby. Please tell me where I did? I was simply stating that, perhaps, the bill may actually be intended to deter a rapist from using abortions to clean up their mess. I sincerely hope things get better for you, only time can do that.

Sweetcancer...first of all, please spell my name right. It's KRISTY. And I have read the article, thank you. You have your opinion on what the bill entailed and I have mine. I would like to think that the intentions of this bill were not to have guards standing at the doors of all abortion clinic, stopping every female that walks through. "Excuse me m'am? Are you here because of a rape? I'm sorry...you'll have to come with me." If a woman is raped and decided to have an abortion, then that is between her and the doctor. It would never even have to be brought up unless she wanted it brought up.

Kristy - I'm sorry to hear about what happened to you, especially at such an early age. It's a crappy thing for us to share in common, although I was a young adult when my offense took place (and it was a big factor in my becoming well trained in defensive tactics).

You are right, you never mentioned the word "forced." But the fact is, a pregnancy is not required to prove a rape took place or who the rapist is. I have a criminal justice background (investigative work and case management), as well as medical knowledge due to working towards an RN and the types of cases I generally handled. We simply differ on our thoughts on this bill.

I wish you all the best.

@ Kristy: I took the fact that you were against abortin entirely to mean that even in the case of rape and incest you would not make an exception, I was wrong. I apologize. However, that woman did intend on criminalizing rape victims and incest victims for having abortions. That is the truth. She knew exactly what she was doing. Her intentions were not pure at all. And I do mean at all. She only considered rewording it when she came under fire from her party and the Democrats. She does want women to have abortions period becuase she is an insensitive bitch just like that damn Sara Palin. But if they were rape, like I was, I wonder how they feel then. That is what pissese me off. People who have never been raped before assuming they have the right to speak against something that affects other women traumatically. They make very idiotic and condemning statements, as if to say, " oh well, so what you was raped, you got pregnant and you need to deal with it." Get over it." Its no big deal. And that attitude really pisses me off.

It literally makes me wish some random would overpower their ass and brutually rape them and bust a nut inside them and as a result they get pregnant and have to carry the baby full term. I can guarantee you their mentality would change then.

Sweetcancer - I can understand your strong feelings on this subject, but please never wish rape on anyone, not even your worst enemy. I think the best we can do is hope others will learn greater compassion. If not, we can find support with many others. Kristy was a victim as well. I do agree that the bill was a clear attempt to undermine women's rights.

I didn't think I'd be able to speak out like this on my experience (I've had two actually - what are the damn odds?). It was an article on Congressman Akin's comments recently that really sent me through the roof, concerning "legitimate rape," a term that victims find highly offensive. Reading that article and some of the posts was like flipping a switch on. I wasn't expecting certain feelings to resurface, but they did. Perhaps I shouldn't avoid these types of articles or posting. Maybe this will be the final phase of a horrid experience. Maybe by reaching out, others will be able to release those demons of hurt as well. It's a start, at least.

Robin Serendipity. You are right. I should have never wished rape on anyone. It is a very traumatic experience that no woman should ever have to experience. Its just that I do not like insenitive people. But you are right. All we can do is pray for women like this and hope that they learn compassion.

Sweetcancer - I'm glad you responded to my post. Trust me, I can understand how frustrating it is when people say some of the things they do. I've posted things with strong wording as well. That's makes us humans with feelings. I don't pray, but I do hope for more human compassion in this world. Given your post name, I assume you've had some experience with cancer. I do wish you a happy, healthy life. :)

They don't need the fetus to prove the rape. It isn't about that but I have a feeling that you're not interested in what it's really about. You wouldn't get it anyway.

"They don't need the fetus to prove the rape."

That is exactly what I'm saying. So why is having an abortion "destroying evidence"?

Nothing in the proposed bill that forces a woman into going full term. The woman can choose to take it full term or have an abortion. That's what choice is about, isn't it? The clarification makes it clear that the woman can choose to have an abortion if she wants. It's the perpetrator of the incest or rape that cannot force an abortion in an attempt to cover it up. To be forced to have an abortion takes away the choice, does it not? DeeDeeDee, your use of the word "evidence" in place of fetus is so clever it gives me goosebumps. But when it comes to relevancy to the subject of the article, you are basically talking out of your ass.

On the money Roz. The right to lifers beliefs are all based in theology and they need to take it all back behind their church doors and concentrate on their membership. Will they all accept responsibility for the women who may die seeking back alley abortions. This was a rampant problem until this became law. I hope the Republican party crumbles in a heap. They have no progressive thinkers and they want life to go back to the 40s and 50s when racism was more rampant than today and women stayed home and did what their husbands told them. I'm sick to death of them.

Roughly 3 out of 4 pregnancies self-abort. This usually (not always) occurs before the woman even knows she was pregnant.

To the right-to-lifers: "God" is the biggest abortionist in the universe.

Roz - you said it all: religion has killed more people than abortion ever will. My roots are in Europe, which endured a 30-year war because of religion; entire communities were erradicated by weapons and bibles. That was only one war of many in the name of religion, but, albeit, the longest. Unfortunately, there seems to be not much of a difference today in our great country.

To all of you pro-lifers: If you do not want to have an abortion, then don't get one; but do NOT impose your believes on me. It's quite simple; it's called pro-choice. You have your choice and I have mine, and we all can be happy. Get it?

Don't know what happened to Mourdock but Aiken lost big-time to McCaskill.

i am trying to figure out if the fetus is evidence then sholldnt they put the female with the "evidence" in the lockup room? is it me or arent they supposed to take care of evidence like all evidence

To DonInPhnx,

Your logic about minor females is very convoluted and wrong-headed. It makes no sense that you want to only want to protect adult women from being forced to give birth to a baby that is the result of rape or incest, but you're O.K. with that happening to a teenaged girl? Minors are obviously even less equipped to raise an unwanted child than an adult would be, and of course would be equally if not more so traumatized by the whole process. The bottom line is, that no one should tell any girl or women what to do with the contents of her uterus. The only person with the moral right to decide whether or not to continue any pregnancy to term is the pregnant person herself.

based on what i read it didnt sound like DonInPhnx was saying to make the underaged girl carry the baby to term but that as a minor that she would be required to submit to the state the dna od the fetus before its aborted

he could have suggest every woman claiming incest or rape at the cost of the state have to submit the unborn fetus to the state as evidence and they take a sample after it is aborted and not before

No one is pro abortion. In the same way that no one is pro tonsilectemy, pro mastectomy, pro hysterectemy, pro appendectemy, etc., but if someone needs one of those procedures it should be available to them.

Hopefully we are all pro no unwanted pregnancy and when the anti-abortion folks gets on board with that, with supporting comprehensive sex education and free, readily available contraceptive tools and free voluntary sterilization, then I'll start taking them seriously.

(I know I misspelled a bunch of ectemies up there but I'm in a hurry this morning and spelling has never been my strong point.)

There is no death, because there is no life. Take that thing out of the womb and see if it lives? No? Then there is no life. Get it? You people are the same people who when that kid would be born would then call the woman a whore and useless because she has to go on welfare to support the kid. Sure in the womb you want to protect it, but once it's born, screw em. Idiot.

A collection of cells that vaguely resembles something between a blob and a tadpole is not a 'kid' and is DEFINITELY not more important than the mother's right to end her ordeal.

In 36 weeks the kid will be squalling and messing diapers unless somebody deliberately kills it.

Jonal11 and steelfeathers: who are you to determine when life starts? Are a collection of cells not the beginning of life?

I don't agree with this legislation but I will point out both of your ignorance to the matter of when life begins.

I don't agree with this bill either but I am sick of hearing all the euphamisms and talking points about these fetuses not being life. If it's not life, why do you find a need to "end it" - what are you aborting? If you didn't abort, what would the end result be? A life?

To say a fetus is not life seems to be a convenient way to rationalize that what you are doing is OK. How is it justified that a mothers choice to have an abortion is OK and lawful, but if a drunk driver caused the end to the fetuses life, that same woman by law has grounds for pressing charges for manslaughter, etc?

citizen3, and my2centsworth-4076520

If there is no viablility, there is no "life" per the medical establishment, and thereby, per the law, including the SCOTUS. This is a crime in some jurisdictions if someone other than the woman chooses to end the pregnancy, per the woman's inablility to carry the pregnancy to term, should she choose. I agree, however, that this seems to be a tricky peice of legaleze, but seems to be connected to the privacy issue upon which Row was decided. That choice is taken from her if a crime is committed against her ending the pregnancy.

I cannot fathom why you would try to make a woman who DID NOT CONSENT to the pregnancy continue it against her will! If she wants to continue the pregnancy, that is her choice, but she should not be made to continue the assualt she endured by this continual reminder, the physical trauma of pregnancy and birth, not to mention the costs of all of this, against her will! She is a living, breathing human being whose rights to life, liberty, and happiness far outweigh an unborn, non-viable, potential life (who she did not consent to conceive, as if that should need to be repeated)!

They are just stating the facts according to science. You can look at the begining of life anyway you want. They have the right to look at it anyway they want. The fact of the matter is that NO ONE has the RIGHT to tell another human being what they can and cant do with THEIR body period!

my2centsworth-4076520 and Olivia5509

I'm not debating that it's alive. Bacteria are alive too. But do we refuse to use bleach in order to spare those poor defenseless bacteria? Of course not.

The big ideological difference here is that you are focusing on a future possibility while I'm focusing on the current actuality. COULD that non-person life become a human in the future? Perhaps. If it doesn't self-abort, or if the woman doesn't miscarry. But is it a person at that point in time? No. Is it capable of thinking, feeling, suffering? No. So it's not a person, regardless of possible futures.

And since America is not a theocracy, you have no right to push your religious beliefs onto me, or attempt to pass them into law by overriding reason, logic, and compassion for the mother.

Well said Jed7!

@Jed7 and Dingo - I never said I think someone should be forced to continue a non consensual pregnancy agaisnt her will. My first words said that. I'm simply saying that splitting hairs about what is and isn't life is a poor excuse for rationalizing our thought processes and decisions.

You can look at anything you want in any way you want but be careful because that rationalization can be the basis for why we do what we do. If I can look at anything with a "clear" conscience, the act becomes more tolerable. Sooner than we think, the road we've traveled has led us somewhere maybe we didn't expect? Do you let the SCOTUS decide for you what you believe?

Steelfeathers - didn't realize I was pushing any kind of religion whatsoever. I'm simply throwing a topic out there for discussion. Why do you have to "profile" me into something of your own choosing? You obviously have a position on this - why can't you discuss it?

Here's another topic - Why do you think the "womens choice" advocates were so intent on changing their badge from pro abortion to pro choice?

Well Steel, I was going to go with cancer...not alive/viable so why would you kill it? But you I like your example better. In either case, we do not discuss when life begins. Most bacteria can live outside the body at the point you are taking antibiotics to kill it. Yet, these people don't want a woman to control her own medical care when those cells MAY become a baby. Some self abort(they must be republican fetuses--similar to self deport). Others die and need to be removed. But at the point that women have abortions, none can live outside a body.

my2centsworth-4076520

My mistake then. The pro-lifer's I encounter are usually bible-thumping Christians. Sorry to have lumped you in with them if you don't belong.

And I have been discussing my position. I've left numerous comments discussing my views, if you care to ctrl+f 'steel' to find them.

I have no idea why they changed the label, although pro-choice could serve to cover a lot of topics, so it's probably a more useful label.

The label was not changed, it was always "pro-choice" because that's exactly what it is. The right and ability to terminate a pregnancy is a choice, it's not being forced upon anyone who wants to carry a pregnancy to term. However, I personally think that we as a society would benefit if we all moved closer to being "pro-abortion" as a default choice for pregnancies that occur by accident and/or to very young or poor women who are the least equipped to raise a child, and most likely to become an abusive parent and/or be forced to apply for welfare and food stamps. Considering you have to pass a test to get a driver's license, it shouldn't be so easy to become a parent.

I find it interesting how our opinions seem to evolve based on the words we use. For example: If you live in the camp of pro-life then the opposite was (at one time) pro abortion. The pro life have not felt a need to change there badge - it pretty much says it all. The pro abortion camp felt a need to change their badge - pro death would never work, even pro abortion was still a little raw. Let's soften it to pro choice - that sounds so much better.

To take that a step further, if one is on one side of the fence as a pro life advocate, shouldn't you logically be pro abortion if on the other side of the fence? Pro choice seems to be right in the middle, on the fence. If one is pro life, they are not pro abortion. But if one is pro choice, they could be pro life but are most definitely pro abortion.

I also find it interesting as to why it seems fair to call a pro life advocate, an anti abortionist, rarely anti choice, but it is considered offensive to call a pro choice advocate, pro death or anti life. Is there a reason we so carefully craft how we wish to portray ourselves to us and ultimately to others?

And lalaw, I beg to differ - you must not be very old because it originally was indeed pro abortion and was changed to pro choice.

We're not even talking about the issue here - we're just talking semantics!

@ cents, That was weak!

It is obvious by the hundreds of entries here that you are in the minority. Keep your anti abortion moniker and we will talk.

The theory that life begins at fertilization is YOUR THEORY. When they start giving legal names and social security numbers to Ferilized eggs then come back and we'll talk...... till then, SHUT UP!!!!!!!

Here is your semantics: I am pro choice, not pro abortion or pro death or whatever you said. There might be pro abortion people out there, that's fine. But like I said, I'm pro choice simply because I want to have the CHOICE. I not saying I would have an abortion or I wouldn't, but I do want that choice! Its my body and its my choice as to what grows in it! If anyone ever tried to force me or an underage daughter of mine to go through an unwanted pregnancy...well, I really don't see any difference in them and the rapist! I cannot imagine an underage child being raped and then forced to deal with something they have no ability to understand happening to their body for nine months, just so other people can feel good about their morality! Unbelievable!

BS and YOU darn well know it. You can say what you want it is not pro abortion is is choice. between the women and her doctor. You want to use a derogotory label; because it suits YOU. Not because it is the truth.

Man! Words must really take on a different meaning when the veins are sticking out of your neck! Must have really hit a nerve. Did I ever make any claims on anything? Mere questions for discussion.

@ Bill - Yep I have my theory just as you. I guess I didn't realize that if it doesn't line up with yours, that one is supposed to "shut up". Oops - where have I heard that before?

@ Kooolaid - Your choice of words seems like a convenient cop out to me. I understand fully the intent behind your use of the wording of pro choice - and why you use it. But - like it or not you cannot be pro choice and not pro abortion as you state, because being pro choice is nothing more than the choice to abort or not to abort. I agree fully with the rest of your post about an underage daughter, etc. I don't know why you are ranting at me about this - as I said "we're not even talking about the issue, just the semantics (wording) we use.

@ SharonJ - I didn't come up with any derogatory label, that was decided years ago and still seems to be evolving.

It would be nice to check the high blood pressure at the door. You ever heard of food for thought or do you always bring a club to the ping pong table?

I most certainly can be pro choice, but not pro abortion. Let's just say I do not believe in abortion at all. Let's just say I wouldn't t have one no matter what, because of my religion or whatever. I would actually be anti-abortion for myself. But I would not try to FORCE anyone else to believe as I do. Even tho my religion might cause me to try to encourage someone I'm closely connected with to not do it. That would make me pro choice, because even tho I might think its wrong, I'm not going to force you to believe as I do. I believe you have a choice to do what you think is right for you. You know, free will and all. I think that is what the biggest difference is between pro choice people and anti abortion people. Not all pro choice people believe in abortion, but they don't believe its the government's decision to make!

@Koolkay - I had to reread your post to make sure I understood and I follow your logic to a point. Let's say you believe as you stated, then you would be anti abortion - understood. (Wouldn't that also make you pro life?) So if I understand what you mean in this instance, you are personally anti abortion but feel everyone else has the right to make their own decision on the matter and that also makes you pro choice? Thats where you lost me - pro choice to do what? Make up their own mind about what?

Obviously everyone has the right to make up their own mind on any issue. You seem to be confusing what you think others have the right to do (without forcing your opinion) and what each indivdual decides to do for themselves. It's difficult for me to understand how you can be in both camps. If I believe a certain way - thats A. Just as I, you have the right to believe the way you choose - if you believe differently than me - that's B. How do the two meet?

Not sure why its so confusing. I was giving you an example of a person who may think it wrong (or even a sin) to have an abortion, but would not want a law against abortion. I guess what I am trying to say is wanting to keep abortion legal does not necessarily make one pro abortion, but it does make one pro choice. For example, one may not believe in homosexuality, and may even think its morally wrong, a sin, and all of that. But that does not mean they would necessarily want gay marriage to be illegal. Again, it's each individual's choice how they live their life. One could think homosexuality is wrong and still think that the gay and lesbian community should have the same rights as everyone else.

Laughs at the pro-abortion..

Since pro-life means life for every pregnancy..
Wouldn't pro-abortion mean every pregnancy should be aborted..
Pro-choice means to women have their own choice..

Now I understand why a blogger wrote an article about men support rape of women when men try to force their choice on a woman about abortion.. I truly now understand what I read.. It's funny to me, men want a say in a pregnancy that isn't apart of them or anyone they know, because they believe women are property and only good for baby making..

Well said Olivia! I'm so sick and tired of hearing the excuse that you can't label "abortion" as "murder" because a)it's not a human, or b)it's can't live outside the mother, so it's not alive. A) Take a DNA sample from a fetus and one from an adult...they are the same. A time-line does not make you a human. B) A person on life-support would die if they were removed, does that mean that the moment they are relying on someone else to keep them alive that they are no longer considered a human? I simply don't like where those excuses could lead this world. What if one day your children are allowed to put their parents down when they become too old to care for themselves? Same concept, right? If you rely on someone else to keep you alive, you don't count, someone else gets to say whether or not you live or die. It's a scary road that could open some awful doors in the future. Human life is human life. I believe Hitler used some similiar excuses when he murdered countless numbers of humans not so long ago. People need to open their eyes. The number of abortions in this country could be cut drasticly if people would just use their brains and take precautions. No one is saying don't have sex...have it all you want...just take the necessary precautions if you don't want to be responsible for another human life. It's not rocket science.

Wow. Its funny you should say that, adult children make those decisions everyday - whether to take a loved one off the machine that is keeping them alive. And yes, technically they are alive, just like your bundle of cells that are being kept alive by the mother. Are these people guilty of murder also?? I surely hope you have your living will made up, or else one day someone could be making that decision for you and your wishes won't count. See that is the problem with your neat little perfect package ("No one is saying don't have sex...have it all you want...just take the necessary precautions if you don't want to be responsible for another human life. It's not rocket science." ) Everything is not always so black and white, like what if the mother-to-be was raped, which is really what this article is about. She did not just decide to have sex. What if the mother-to-be is a child herself, say a 13 yr old? You're going to force a child to have a child? Just so everything is right in your perfect world, you would actually force a child to become an adult before they are anywhere near ready? Isn't that like possibly ruining the life of 2 children, one who is actually here and one who has not even developed yet? That actually makes sense to you? I bet these are the same people who would not want that under-age mother to get any assitance from the gov't. They sure care a lot about a fetus, but once its a living baby in need of monetary aid, they want to condemn that baby to a life of poverty. Ugh.

Good thing it's not "rocket science" because you wouldn't understand it..

I have worked with a 9 year old and 10 year old that were raped by their own father and step father.. Each was forced to have children because their families didn't believe in abortion.. The kids had no choice in the matter, because their young minds couldn't wrap around what was happening..

Oh that's right neocons say incest wont get a woman pregnant. and pregnancy happens 2 weeks before conception.. or my favorite you can't get pregnant from legitimate rape.

Yeah it's not rocket science, @!$%# it's only science most of you speak about and have no understanding of.. But I am glad it's only an opinion that most of you spew vs. fact- even though most on here act like everything they say is gold and truth..

I am pro-choice.. It's not my body, if I don't want to have an abortion guess what, I wont have one. If any men commenting don't want to have an abortion, guess what, don't have one.. Simple isn't it.. I don't want a gun, i wont buy one, but you want to take my choice away, guess what, I will try to take your choice away too..

my2centsworth

the strangest thing is that those who claim to be pro life, are also pro death penalty (oxymoronic huh)

what i have found from the aforementioned group you appear to defend, is that they dont want to provide financial support to the child born into an unwanted situation

lalaw, you are right we do have to get a license to drive however

do you want people to get licenses to have a baby? who has to acquire the license?

suppose the woman/girl is impregnated by rape/incest, then what - should we have gone further and require people to get licenses to have sex?

i dont know what the answers are, but i can say that as a society we have become an interesting place where people use convenient logic(versus sound process logic) to get their ideologies across as in the example of the pro lifers

if you are pro life then you should be anti death

if you are pro life then you should be for social programs to care for those who chose to keep the cells through to birth

if you are pro life then you would understand others have the right to choose

@ Kristie First off your comment is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. Secondly no it is not the same concept. And another thing why in the hell do you give a damn, its not your body, its not your life, so there fore you do not have a say so in another woman s life. We are talikg about abortion in the case of rape and incest. Please stay on subject. A WOMAN SHOULD NOT BE FORCED TO CARRY A FULL TERM PREGNANCY AGAINST HER WILL RESULTING FROM RAPE. And hell even if she wasnt raped she should not be forced to carry a full term pregnacy against her will. What she decides to do affects HER NOT YOU. And like Koolkay said people make these decisions every day. Even though these are two completely different situations.

So you are saying that you belive a woman should carry the baby full term even if she was raped or it resulted from incest?! Because of your bull@!$%# moral beliefs. You do know that incest and rape are sins in Gods eyes as well. The bible does not support/premote this issues either. And another thing since you are so concerned with these fetuses or babies, you should adopt them and raise them. You sholud take care of them. And by the way this means that you definitely should support government programs that help women who cannot financally afford to take care of these children. Since yall just want to prevent all abortions then you all shoukd be the ones raising and taking care of these children.

Be my guest. I want you to volunteer to take care of all the unwanted kids Kristie. Please by all means go to every single woman who is pregnant that sincerely wants to have an abortion, and tell them that you will raise their babies, you will feed them, you will clothe them, and you will nuture them for them. So they dont have to have the abortion because you have got it covered. You are superwoman and you are here to save the day.

Please go do that. When you committ to all of that please get back to me and let me know how all of that worked out for you. This is going to be my suggestion for everyone who is pro-life. I can't wait to see their reaction then.

Steelfeathers: Your rationalization is asinine. If I were to use your viewpoint, some people believe that humans are a virus/cancer to earth, should they not be allowed to exterminate humans since that is their belief?

As I said before, you do not have the qualifications to discuss such a matter. Nor do I.

sweetcancer...you know why people give a damn?? Because to us it's MURDER, so if we think babies are being murdered, it very much concerns us. I love reading the typical, brainless liberal drivel used to justify abortions. You constantly go back to rape and incest victims. If that was all abortion were needed for, why shouldn't it be by prescription only? Why do we need abortion clinics on street corners? Why do they need to be available to all the public?

You can pretend all you want that it's not a human life, but any person with any reasoning and logic can easily deduce that this is human life. Comparing fetuses to fungi and parasites makes absolutley no sense. You shouldn't have the right to terminate a pregnancy as you see fit, I don’t give a damn about what you do with your body, but when you “choose” to dismember a baby in the womb and throw it in a bucket, that’s a problem that is EVERYONE’s concern, not just yours. Get over yourselves, nobody cares what you people do in your daily lives, the only time it matters is when you’re ending another life. That’s like asking why you care about the Newtown tragedy, it doesn’t affect you or your body, so mind your business about what happened. You shouldn’t have an opinion on it.

So true!!! You know, the "conversation about abortion" in our country has evolved into something like George Orwell's book "1984" and the "doublespeak" thing... where the meaning of words or phrases are completely turned upside-down... the real "war on women" in this country is being waged by the abortion industry:

How slow do I have to type this for you Cuba? Defining a fetus as a child, a person with rights based on your religious beliefs does not make it so. Prior to the actual occurrence of birth, there is no set definition of the fetus being a person with rights. As all the children in Newtown had been born, they were people with rights and we have the obligation to care about these children as we are obligated as human beings to be concerned about the safety and well being of others. I understand this is a difficult concept for those who only care about the unborn and willingly throw those who have been born into the streets to go hungry or be victims of the elements, disease, crime or anything else they don't want to pay to help these kids avoid. Oh, and you don't want to educate them because why should your tax dollars go to pay for someone else's kids.

Pro-choice has always been the label given to those who feel it is a woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. Pro-abortion is the label provided for those who would force a woman to have an abortion whether she wants one or not (think China). Pro-life? I'm not really sure where that came from. Since it defines a group that has no concern for life after birth, it appears to be a euphemism to make people who want their religious beliefs to control the behavior of others feel better. Therefore, it would appear its roots are in Sharia law.

witty one? And your definition of when a fetus becomes a person also doesn't make it so. Liberals are so frikkin full o0f theirselves.

Alright you dumbasses...if you have read anything that I have been saying, then you would see that at no time have I EVER said that a rape victim should be forced to carry their attackers baby, now did I? You do realize that only 6% of all abortions are due to rape, incest, or to save the mother's life? It's the other 94% that use abortion as a method of birth control that is pissing me off. Simple precautions to prevent a pregnancy are all it would take. I do believe there are necessary evils in this world, and thankfully I have not had to make any such choice. But where a pregnancy can be prevented, it should. I have never said that a woman's choice should be taken away, EVER. Do not put words in my mouth, I don't like the @!$%#ing taste, thanks. And do not lump me in with any bible thumpers...I follow no religion. I define myself by what I feel is right and wrong and that is how I live. You all might want to make sure you are hearing someone clearly before you open your mouths next time.

@Kristy.. Tsk-Tsk Name calling- I guess we win because you had to retort to those lame tactics.. If you don't want to have an abortion DON'T have one, it not rocket science- is it..

My business is not your business.. Mind your own body, because, when i get bored I can tell you how to spend your money, how to wipe your ass, how to brush your teeth, how to style your hair.. I can be your greatest dictator of your body, just like you want to be of my body.. Doesn't work does it? I didn't think so.. I am sorry i want to have women's rights, I don't want to go back to the stone ages when men told us how to be women, they are the farthest removed from what we need or what we should do with our women's parts.

Oh yes...you win. Too bad you didn't listen to a word I said. But yes, you win dumbass.

@ Kristy From the responses I read it appeared to me that you were completely against abortion- and thats why I responded the way I responded. And the 94% of women who have abortions because they want to have nothing to do with you. You are not going to care for those children. You are not going to carry them and deliver them. You are not going to provide for them. You are not going to nurture them. So why is it any of your concern what these women do since they are the ones that are going to do these things that you are not going to do? And this is why you are not going to do them- "Because they are not your children." They do not belong to you." It is not your responsibility." And its not your place." And its none of your business." People like you always give this argument. And this is what I have to say to that- Since that is a fact and you feel that way then you should also recognize its none of your business and it is not your place to to tell a woman- what to do, or what she can and cannot do with her own body in her own life. That is her decision since it only affects her. It is her business, not yours. And what she decides to do does not concern you.

@Cuban: IT IS NONE YOUR BUSINESS WHAT ANY WOMAN DECIDES TO DO IN HER OWN PRIVATE LIFE WITH HER OWN PRIVATE BODY. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO CARRY THE BABY, NOR DELIVER IT, NOR PROVIDE FOR IT, NOR CARE FOR IT. Since you are not going to do any of these things, then it is none of your damn business. What I or another woman decides to do with our bodies does not affect you or anybody else. That is a fact. WE, NOT YOU OR ANY OTHER HUMAN BEING, HAVE TO PAY THE PRICE FOR OUR DECISIONS. Since this the case Imma say it again: It is NONE of YOUR DAMN BUSINESS NOR ANYBODY ELSE'S BUSINESS WHAT WOMEN/ PEOPLE DO WITH THEIR OWN BODIES. IT DOES NOT AFFECT YOU OR ANYBODY ELSE WHEN A WOMAN HAS AN ABORTION. She is the one that has to pay for it financially, mentally, and emotionally. YOU DO NOT. SO SHUT THAT NONESENSE UP. She has to carry it and deliver it, and provide for it, and You DO NOT.

How does what women do or a what a woman does with their/her own body(ies) concern or affect everybody else since they are not going to be the ones carrying, delievering, raising, feeding, clothing, sheltering, and nurturing the baby(ies)? Explain that @!$%# to me. You do not have to come out of pocket at all for anything, for her to have nor for her to have the abortion. Therefore it does not conern nor affect anybody else. So like I said: IT DOES NOT AFFECT EVERYBODY AND IT DOES NOT CONCERN EVERYBODY ELSE. IT IS NONE YOURS OR ANYBODY'S ELSE DAMN BUSINESS, CUBAN.

Mind your own damn business. Tend to your own damn home. Stay out of mine and every other womans business. Get your own. Hell leave everyone elses alone.

@ Cuban: I never compared a embryo or fetus to a cancer or a virus. I simply said that a woman has a right to decide and it is none of your business. Thats how I feel. And like Victimizing Victums said: If you are pro-life then you must support the government programs that are designed to help women out who cannot afford to financially care for their child/ children. If you do not support these programs, then however you are just against abortion because of your religious beliefs. But if thats the case then your religious beliefs should also prompt you to care for the poor and less fortunate. They should prompt you to have compassion on these women. They should prompt you to want to care for and assist these women, and not pass judgment. They should prompt you to care for your fellow man whether you agree with his lifestyle or not. They should prompt you to donate to the poor souls, who have made poor decisions and all of the ones who have not made these poor decisions but are in these same conditions and cannot help themselves and really need help. Yes, your religious beliefs should prompt you to do all these things.

But I know they will not because they are religious beliefs not spiritual beliefs. Spiritual beliefs will prompt an individual to do all of these things because the Holy Spirit will move them to do these things. However, religious beliefs- are just that. Religious and ritualistic. This is how the saduceeds and the phariseeds operated. Strictly out of religion. And you strike me as this kind of person. A person who operates out of their religious beliefs but not out of their spiritual beliefs. It is a huge difference between the two.

See the religious one condemns and judges and the spiritual one shows compassion, mercy and understanding. The spiritual one forgives and heals and wishes the one who harmed them the best. The religious one scorns them and wants them to reap what they sowed and wants to be around when it happens just to prove they were right and God punished them. So they can laugh and I'm say glad that happened to you. You deserved it. But spiritual people do not operate this way. They show love, mercy, and compassion even when it hurts, for this is what Christ did. He did not scorn his enemies, in fact while He was being crucified He asked the Heavenly Father to forgive them because they did not know what they were doing. For if they knew what they were doing they would have never crucified Him. So yes He had compassion on the pharisees and saduceeds even though they were His enemies and made His earthly life hard. Spiritual people operate the same way. We realize we all sin and we all fall short of the glory of the Lord. Therefore we have no room to condemn and judge anybody else. We also know what matters actually concern us and what matters do not concern us. We realize that everyone has freewill and the right to do as they please. Just like our Heavenly Father realized this fact and respected our decisions even if He didnt agree with them.

This is the difference between being spiritual and being religious.

Well my dear, as far as my opinion goes, all I care about is that people should be more socially responsible, for themselves and for everyone else. Don't misunderstand why I am upset with that many abortions, it's not because I think that they should be having these children..far from it. I think that there should be more attempting to prevent. I don't believe that I am off the mark too far in thinking that people should stop "doing whatever they want" without thinking or caring about the consequences. Pregnancy isn't the only thing that comes from not taking precautions. There is no such thing as sex without consequences. Last time I checked, herpes can't be aborted. As far as it being no one's business what one person does with their body, for the most part you are right. But let me ask you this. Say your husband or boyfriend has been cheating on you with someone who excercises her right to do whatever she wants with her body and doesn't give a crap as to being careful. She is HIV positive and neither of them know it. He brings it back to you. Now you are HIV positive. It's her body and your husbands body to do with what they want, but now you have been affected by someone else's poor decision making. You can't say that what someone else does with their body doesn't affect anyone else. The truth is that it does. Maybe not directly, but in some way or another, eventually it does. I'm not saying I want to control what everyone one does with their lives, because I know you are going to take it there, but I don't believe it's in the realm of crazy to start asking of and expecting people to be more careful and responsible about what they do in this world. In EVERY aspect. This has gotten completely off topic, but I just wanted to give you a little glimpse into why I feel the way I feel, because you had me pegged completely wrong. I just think that it's not asking that much of people to use their heads as they go along. Is abortion a good thing to me? No, because I do believe that life begins the moment that Human DNA is formed. I feel that it is COMPLETELY IGNORANT of anyone to say that a fetus is not alive or it is not human. That is not opinion, that is scientific fact. Whether or not that life has any rights is an opinion. Abortion is in some ways a necessary evil, but please, CALL IT WHAT IT IS. It is the ending of a human life, and it should NEVER be taken so casually. That being said, women should always have a choice. I would never tell someone that has been raped that they should be forced to carry that baby. Likewise to a victim of incest. And I doubt that a mother that is having to decide between the life of her unborn child and her own, needs anyone else voicing their opinions when she has to make that decision either. But I do feel that we are spitting in the face of our very own humanity by having as many casual abortions (unwanted pregnancies) happening that could have been very easily prevented just by taking simple precautions. Not only to prevent a pregnancy, but also to protect yourself. But that is just my opinion.

Kristy: In that situation you have a valid point. Heres the thing I am not for adultery and I have never supported any man/woman who have done this or continually does this because this act does affect someonle else. So again this comment was completely irrevelant. My comments were in strict support of a woman having the right to choose. She deserves the right to choose. Now when you become married your body does not belong to you it belongs to your husband the husband's body's belong to his wife. No I do not think any man nor woman has the right to put their spouse in danger by comitting adultery. It is completely unfair to their spouse. I do not feel that women and men who are married have the right to do as they please with their bodies. Their bodies belong to each other and they should be very considerate of each other. Like I said this point in my opinion is completely irrevelant and idiotic to this topic.

And for the other comment that I had made to you the first time, I apologize to you. I was wrong. Secondly the whole comment was just towards you. Only the first the paragraph where I wrote @Kristy. The second and third paragrapgh were for two other posters on here that had posted some very offensive comments. Their posts were too far up so I just decided to type the paragraph without directly addressing them. For this I do apologize. I should have went back up to their exact comments and got thier name but at the time it was just too much because entirely too many people had posted and I didn't feel like going back up through all of those comments.

I really wasn't trying pegg you at all. Again I apologize for coming at you they way that I have done. I was wrong. Its just I feel that women should be allowed to make decisions for themselves. And by the way I do agree that men and women should use condoms and birth control to prevent STDS and unwanted pregnancies. I never said I was against responsible behavior. However in the case the condoms and that the birt control pills fail which does happen alot, then women shold have another alternative. I do agree with the morning after pill because a woman should be allowed to take the pill immediately after having sex, to wash the sperm completely out of her to prevent pregnancy. This is what I'm saying.

Like I said, I believe in early term abortions- early meaning within the first four weeks- not late term abortions. If you are five months pregnant then you should go on and have the baby. However if you are just one month yeah go ahed and terminate. If you two you and you really dont want it and you know for sure then yeah have it. But after the third month, you should consider a full term pregnancy. However, it is a woman's right to choose. I dont believe in late term abortions but I do believe in a woman's right to choose. I do not think that choice should be taken away from her at all. This is all I have to say.

I meant to say the whole entire comment was not just towards or soley intended for you. Didnt get the chance to correct my typo.

And I also meant if you are in second month and you really dont want the baby then yeah go ahead and have the abortion. However after the fourth month of pregancy you should go on and follow through with the pregnancy. But again it is up to the individual woman and it should be up to the individual woman.

I realize that it was off-point, and the only reason I mentioned the adultery thing was just to try to make the point that what someone else does can affect someone else. Whether or not you support adultery doesn't mean it can't happen to you. I wish things like that didn't go on, either..but..in a perfect world, my dear..in a perfect world. But I really do appreciate the apology. I apologize as well for coming off so brash at times. It's too bad all sides can't find some common ground here.

Some right-wing members of the GOP just can't seem to handle it when they think their neighbor is doing something 'bad'. It's like those creepy neighbors who try to peek at you through the fence.

These southern bible toting pro-lifers are the biggest hypocrites when it comes to abortions for any reason. A woman's body is none of anyone else's business but her own. Religion has nothing to do with it therefore people need to stop imposing their beliefs on others. Nothing is a "gift from God" when it is done in vain. God himself does not nor would he condone such an act on a woman...rape or incest. If these people wanted to be more bible-technical, God does not give the unborn baby a soul until it is born. When a person dies,t he soul ascends to heaven or hell, based on their believes, if they have any.

Julie.....the woman is able to walk out of the abortion clinic, the dead baby is gone forever......it's not just up to her to decide whether her child lives or dies. You really believe you are bigger than it all don't you? How dare anyone challenge a woman who decides to kill her child in the womb!! You know nothing about the bible, proven by your ridiculous term "bible toting" pro-lifers. The soul is created at conception, babies have heartbeats as soon as 6-7 weeks gestation, yet some compare this to fungus and bacteria. Morons.

Cuban, Well Put

John, Don't worry....she won't ask!