web analytics
Your Independent Alternative!

Abortion Bill Filed in Legislature

An expansive measure to make most abortions illegal in Florida has been filed for the 2010 Legislative session, challenging federal protections in place for more than 40 years.

Both anti-abortion advocates and abortion rights supporters agree the 53-page proposal is an attempt to directly challenge the 40-year-old Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortions in the United States in 1973.

“The Legislature finds that there have been 50 million abortions in the United States since the Roe decision,” the bill reads. “ The Legislature further finds that every life lost to abortion was sacred and of the highest value.”

Sponsored by Rep. Charles Van Zant, R-Palatka, HB 1097 would criminalize most abortions now allowed under state and federal law, increase penalties for physicians who perform such services and require pregnant women to receive more information on adoption. The bill was filed Wednesday, the same day that right to life groups made the trek to Tallahassee to meet lawmakers and rally support.

Except in cases where a woman’s life is considered in danger, doctors who perform abortions would face first degree felonies punishable by up to life in prison and civil fines. Van Zant’s measure makes clear its intent to invalidate Roe V. Wade and drastically reduce the number of abortions allowed.

“The Legislature finds that in the years following the Roe opinion, the standard of decency of the people of Florida has evolved such a degree that at this time they demand the right to exercise their political rights as guaranteed under the United States Constitution and under the Constitution of the state of Florida to enact legislation prohibiting unnecessary abortion in Florida,” the bill states.

Among the bill’s major provisions:

- Makes induced abortions illegal and punishable by up to life in prison

- Allows doctors and hospital to refuse to provide abortion services.

- Continues judicial bypass that allows minors to seek a judge’s order instead of telling a parent or guardian.

- Prohibits abortions resulting from pregnancies involving rape or incest.

- Requires a second physician to sign-off on the procedure when a doctor believes an abortion was medically necessary to save the life of the mother.

- Requires women to receive information on adoption as an abortion alternative

-----------------------------------------------------

Stephanie Kunkel, lobbyist for Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, said the coalition is aware of the bill. So far, no Senate companion bill has been filed, but Kunkel said the organization is preparing to oppose the measure.

“I think people are going to see the bill for what it is,” Kunkel told News Service of Florida. “This is nothing but an attempt to directly challenge Roe V. Wade.”

The question now is how much time and effort lawmakers want to spend on such a divisive issue during an election year unless there is significant support in both chambers. House Speaker Larry Cretul, R-Ocala, told the News Service on Thursday he was aware of the bill and would allow it to be heard if Van Zant can rally enough support.

“He is a very passionate guy and he believes that needs to have some public discussion,” Cretul said of Van Zant. "I told him, 'Work your bill, and we'll see what happens.'"

111 Responses »

  1. Not surprising that Planned Parenthood, the nation's top profiteer of abortions would oppose this. Also not shocking is the fact that is abortion is challenged, Planned Parenthood would no longer be able to reduce the black population through abortions. Check out the film: Maafa21 Black Genocide in 21st Century America and see just how this is being done today. http://www.maafa21.com

    • Ignorant. Stupid. Inflammatory. No wonder you posted anonymously. Just a sad tirad from someone who's simply unhappy with their hand in life and needs something to be angry about.

      • While I'm adamantly pro-life. The argument is constantly made that a womans body is her own. If that is case- and if that's grounds enough to terminate another life: then we should carry equal responsibility to the birth father of said child.

        I propose that men not be FORCED to carry responsibility for any child unless that birth father agrees with the birth-mother to birth said child.

        If a woman tells a man that she's pregnant, and he's the father. That man should now have the option of supporting that childs birth, and subsequently; responsibility for that child; or declare that he wants her to abort that child. If she chooses to have said child anyway. The birth father shares no priviledge to claim, see, participate in, or financial responsibility for that child.

        If a womans rights include canclling the right of a child- a man should have equal rights to remove himself from that childs life- and any financial responsibility. That's fair, is it not?

      • @JDavis
        "I propose that men not be FORCED to carry responsibility for any child unless that birth father agrees with the birth-mother to birth said child. . . .If a womans rights include canclling the right of a child- a man should have equal rights to remove himself from that childs life- and any financial responsibility. That’s fair, is it not?"

        Perhaps this comment is being said with a slight tongue in cheek but I agree with your proposal and I think it is totally fair. I have often felt that just as women have the right to say "no I don't want to be a have a child", men should have that same right as well and not be forced to bear any responsibility. Everyone deserves a say as to whether they want to be a parent or not.

    • Did P.P. force black women at gunpoint to get an abortion? Is P.P. suddenly kidnapping black pregnant women and forcing abortions on them? Come on, give me a break. The fact is that not every black woman wants to go through with a pregnancy. I don't see why she should have to give birth and take on the hardships that would come with taking care of a child if she is not ready. Black women did not swear an oath or sign a contract saying they must or would pop out babies left and right just to counter this black genocide conspiracy.

    • why is it that the most fervent ideologues - you know, the ones who want to force their believes and lifestyle down everyone's throats - always post anonymously? COWARDS. Just like those chickenhawks from the SHRUB administration. RANK COWARDS, EVERY ONE OF THEM. And you to, Mr. Anonymous.

    • This is not a race issue...it is an economic one. The sad truth is that women who are living in poverty and without a spouse are much more likely to seek an abortion. The reason that more black women are having abortions is that there are statistically more single black women living in poverty. If we honestly want to reduce abortion rates among black women, we must first address the underlying causes for the increased rates of unwanted pregnancies. We need to provide more and better information to pre-teen girls and boys about conception, sexually transmitted diseases, contraception and prevention of sexually transmitted disease. Obviously, the abstinence only approach is not working. (This is well supported by objective data). Knowledge is power, and the more we empower people with information, the more likely they are to make better choices leading to a significant decrease in unwanted pregnancies and a decrease in number of abortions. Along with this, we need to increase the availability of contraceptives to people living in poverty. In all instances where these two things have been done, abortion rates have gone down. If you are for decreasing abortions in the black population of this country, you should be for these two things...education and availability of contraceptives. We have a solution to the "abortion problem" within our grasp. Do we have have the will to make it happen?

      • >This is not a race issue…it is an economic one

        Just as the health Care take over is not a race issue; but an economic one. Bad economics, these health care bills proposed by the Democrats.

  2. This bill is a great step in the right direction. This bill is an outgrowth of our core values that all living human beings have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These great values can only be realized by the people of our nation recognizing and protecting these rights via the government. This bill brings us back to our roots that we can build on our foundation of a rights based society where all, regardless of age or location, are legally protected from violence. Abortion is just that, violence on the unborn. Whereas this bill will be in accord with our values. This bill will be the opposite of abortion. This bill will be the protection of the unborn. In that way it will be the upholding of the value of the right to live we all want to have recognized.

    • If you don't have ovaries, then you're not allowed a say in the matter.

      • Your statement would make sense if ovaries impregnate themselves, but science tells us that isn't so. A fetus is made up of ovaries and sperm, so yes a man has a right to determine what happens to his sperm.

        I have ovaries and I agree with Chris. Not only do I have ovaries, I am a black woman, and I know that PP was started to reduce the number of blacks, so death to the racist organization.

        When will we see an end to the barbaric ideology that killing children empowers women?

        Disgusting!!!

      • @Sandra,

        You are correct. Men do have a right to determine what happens with their sperm. That's why there are these devices called condoms. If he decides to insert his sperm in a woman, well, everything after that is up to her as it is her body we're dealing with at that point.

        If you think Planned Parenthood is out there forcing black women to have abortions then you shouldn't be commenting here, you should be ruining, full steam ahead, to a psychiatrist. No one here is likely qualified to help.

        The 'barbaric ideology' you speak of is non-existent, nice ploy attempting to perpetuate a myth of that proportion but no dice.

        One only needs to look at history to see the consequences of abortion being illegal. Clearly it wasn't your best subject.

    • This bill is the will of the religious right, not the masses. Those who truly hold their morals in high esteem, do not try to force their beliefs on other people.

    • "This bill is an outgrowth of our core values that all living human beings have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

      You'd deny a pregnant woman these values but give them to what may not even be a fully developed and viable human.

      We do not force people to turn their bodies over to others no matter what the age, relationship, or location, even if that person's life depends on it. Parents aren't even required to do that for their post born kids. I don't see why a woman should suddenly loose this autonomy over her own body that others are allowed to keep.

    • Indeed, the law already recognizes the unborn as human life. Unless I'm mistaken, one can be charged with manslaughter for causing the death of an unborn child in the process of creating a crime.

  3. What about cases where the child is guaranteed to either die immediately or have a short painful life spent in the hospital before dying?

    Who is correct in this kind of situation? The people who want to stroke their own self-righteous egos by making sure every child has a "right to life" or the parents who think they're doing the best thing for their child by protecting them from that fate?

  4. Fuck this shit! FUCK TO HELL.

    Men in three piece suits do not get to decide where/what/when/how a woman decides to give birth, IF SHE EVEN WANTS TO. This is horse shit, and I hope it gets blasted out of the water.

    • Just by your tirade you expose yourself as a violent and aggressive person. No one will ever take your opinion seriously if you speak in ignorance.

      • @Alexander: Keep your rosaries off my ovaries. I agree with Siona. Unless you have the ability to get pregnant yourself, you do not have the right to tell a woman whether or not she should be forced to keep an unwanted pregnancy.
        Also, your comment proves that you're a self righteous misogynist.

      • Last time I checked we didn't tell you that you couldn't do things to your body. How would you feel if you were married to a woman and she was raped, then on top of it were forced to live with the fact that YOUR wife is carrying the bastards baby? You would have a great deal of emotiona turmoil over that, then after the child was born you would be more apt to neglect the child because of that fact and YOUR wife would have a high chance of developing post partum depression as a result and would neglect the child as well. So while we are talking about being ignorant lets take all of that into consideration. Also have you ever been raped!??? I have and I will have to live with it for the rest of my life! And so will every man that I am ever with because it NEVER GOES AWAY! And a child resulting from violation of her rights but yet she can't have a choice in the outcome!! How ignorant are you?

  5. Making a woman who is having an abortion due to medical necessity seek a second opinion is cruel and unnecessary punishment. I had a relative in that situation. She wanted that baby but it was not to be. It took her years to get over losing it. It is apparent that the standard of decency has devolved in the Florida legislature to remove simple human kindness from the equation.

  6. THIS IS SICK! If this law passes, I will leave this state. I would never want to be in a state where someone is given a felony for helping and caring for women and respecting their choices!

    • "Beth says:
      February 19, 2010 at 6:01 pmTHIS IS SICK! If this law passes, I will leave this state. I would never want to be in a state where someone is given a felony for helping and caring for women "

      This issue isn't this simple. Yours is a selfish perspective, and indicates a shallowness on your part to understand a complex subject.

      • It's sad that you will probably never really understand how fantastically ironic your statement is, JDavis. Have you personally met every single woman who has ever sought an abortion, and perfectly understood her reasons for doing so? Didn't think so. Talk about complexity. Every woman's choice to have an abortion or to give birth, the keep the child who is born or put it up for adoption, is made for different reasons, taking into account many factors. It's not a decision that women make lightly.

      • HEY JDavis:

        I bet you are a guy. The issue IS THAT SIMPLE: If you don't want an abortion, don't get one. If you are physiologically incapable of getting pregnant, STFU. And if you got someone pregnant because YOU failed to use adequate birth control, you will be directed - by force of law, since you zealots like that so much - to place EIGHTEEN YEARS WORTH OF CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS into an escrow account BEFORE the child is born.

      • The issue IS this simple. You may personally think abortion is wrong, but how dare you impose your opinions on someone else. Having a child is the most personal of choices and should be entirely up to the potential mother and her doctor.

        If you don't want an abortion don't get one and tell your kids not to. As soon as you make it a LAW, you're expanding the role of the government and causing it to legislate morality.

        You conservatives say you want small government, but what you want is a government that just small enough to fit into the bedroom. The hypocrisy is disgusting.

      • I personally think slavery is wrong, but I guess I shouldn't impose my opinion on someone who wishes to own slaves, correct?
        I personally think stealing is wrong, but I guess I shouldn't impose my opinion on someone who wishes to steal correct?
        I personally think drinking and driving is wrong, but I guess I shouldn't impose my opinion on someone who wishes to drink and drive, correct?
        In fact by this logic, we shouldn't have laws prohibiting anything, we should leave it up to the moral conscience of any individual. If they deem it fit to kill another human being, who are we to tell them it is wrong?

        You said up to the mother and her doctor?

        If there's a mother, there's a father, certainly she didn't get pregnant by herself. Do fathers no longer have a say so in what happens to their children?

        If there's a mother, there's a child, should mothers decide when their children should die?

        You see not only is abortion immoral, it is also illogical. it is illogical that another individual gets to decide when another human being will die.

        Did he reply that he didn't meet every single woman who's ever sought an abortion?

        I've met plenty of women who sought an abortion, and they regret it. They also realise they were lied to bcus of greedy organizations or doctors who wanted money, money, money.

        It all boils down to money, and it's really sad that genocide is taking place and ppl think it is ok.

      • Maz, Here's an opinion for you (to use your verbiage). You may think abortion is right, but it's a cold-hearted SOB who would stick a scissors into the brain of a child 90% removed from it's birth parents vagina.

    • If the the bill passes I feel sorry for the woman who is pregant. I would hate to have to be carring a child for nine month just to have to give it away. Because it not fair to bring a child into the world if you can't take care it. And by that time the child will be left in a foster home. OR even yet in a home were she not been brought the way you want her to be brought up.
      Now say tat I was rape for sure I would want to have an aborton cause their would be noway in my life time that I would carry the child fr 9month and be happy for it.
      And they better not past the bill!

      • I agree with you Robin. How horrible to be raped and then forced to go through with giving birth. DO NOT PASS THIS BILL.

      • While rape and incest related abortion account for >.5% of abortions, it's the card abortionist pull when facing difficult arguments against a heinous practice. When in reality, abortionist resent making this a caveat in any abortion bill: the argument returns to "don't touch my body".

        I can tell you that Josef Mengele also justfied his experiments in the name of greater good. Both the abortionist and Mengele were crass, narcissistic individuals.

        You'd have to be to stick a scissors into a baby's brain. Cruel is the word that comes to mind.

  7. First they should pass a groundbreaking law allowing retroactive abortions of the religious-right monsters, who make the Taliban seem like Sesame Street characters.

    • >First they should pass a groundbreaking law allowing retroactive abortions of the religious-right monsters, who make the Taliban seem like Sesame Street characters.

      Reply
      peg says:
      March 2, 2010 at 12:21 amWe can dream.

      Now we know you two are bigots.

  8. How many children has this man adopted?

    Shouldn't he be more concerned about the 9 million children who don't have healthcare who are already born?

    Typical Republican bullshit. Pro-Life until you breathe your first breath. Then you're a burden that their "hard earned money" shouldn't have to support.

    • Truer words have not been spoken.

      It amazes me the hypocrisy that runs rampant in the pro-liar movement. Many could care less about 'post-born' children; kids that need help and/or a home right now. Once they're born and up walking and talking many of these pro-liars turn the other way.

      I guess their thinking is much like that of a guy named Charles that commented on another sight regarding this abortion debate. His statement went along the lines of 'I think abortion should be illegal but no I don't want to take care of the massive influx of unwanted children that would result . . . . that's your problem.'

    • WTF stats the true fact of pro abortion zealots. """"BURDEN"""" A child is not a burden, the parent in retrospect is the burden. They live a careless and destructive life (unproductive for themselves and society) then when a beautiful child is conceived through an act of God's loving grace "They" as in both parents for selfish reasons, have the beautiful child ripped from it's protective womb and have it tossed in some trash basket, for the midnight janitor to take care of. The child will never have the chance to experience the freedoms of living on earth because it's mother was afraid it wouldn't have health care? (Killing the child is worse than not having healthcare....come on people!) Why not make it a law for you to kill your one year old child if it didn't have health care? I can't believe in this day and age we are discussing something chaotic and uncivilized as the freedom to kill another human being.

      • Alexander, if you want to sound reasonable, you may want to avoid making absurd accusations (midnight janitor? comon, let's be serious) if you want people to take you seriously.

        How about this:
        I am of the opinion that a fetus is not yet a person and doesn't get the same rights as someone who has been born. You are of the opinion that life begins at conception. We have opposed opinions.
        Now, give me one reason why you should be able to use laws to force your opinion on me.

      • First of all, your blanket statements are rude and offensive. Not all women who have abortions, or consider having abortions, are "careless and destructive" as you say. My mother was a positive woman who contributed to society as a responsible adult who had a job, earned her own money, and paid her own bills. If she had not had an abortion before meeting my father, I would not exist today because he is one of MANY Americans who does not want to raise someone else's children.
        Also, not all babies are conceived in what the victim might consider an "act of God's loving grace". Rape and incest are acts of violence, and nothing less.
        Additionally, we are not suggesting making a law requiring abortions. How is opposing a law banning abortion even REMOTELY similar to a law requiring the death of children without health care? This is a ridiculous sentiment.

  9. He is a very passionate guy and he believes that needs to have some public discussion,

    Good.
    Stay out of it. Men, especially this man, should not be making decisions that limit the rights of women.
    Stay out of it. You have more important business to attend to.

  10. I'm sick of the government and religious fanatics for the constant discrimination of womans rights, Roe vs. Wade was proved that we have the right to choose, why keep challenging what we know saves life, so many have lost there life attempting to self abort, It is barbaric to say the least. I am applaud that this bill even exists, and all woman should also be. To keep treating womanhood as second class is in its self a crime and should be punishable. I agree with Siona Webster's comment above, leave it alone. Focus on the bigger issues facing FLORIDIANS, unemployment, housing etc. Have compassion for those issues, lobby and pass bills of substance, Roe vs. Wade isn't broken so stop trying to fix it.

    • How many have lost their life performing self abortions?

      "" Focus on the bigger issues facing FLORIDIANS, unemployment, housing etc. Have compassion for those issues, lobby and pass bills of substance""

      The killing of a fellow human being is not a substance issue? Seems to me you want to dismiss that these aborted babies shouldn't have the same rights you enjoy today. They will never be able to vote for laws effecting unemployment and housing issues (The irony). They will never experience birthdays, holidays, family get togethers, their first date/prom etc. All because two people did not act responsibly and sustain they are allowed to kill a child. I don't know about you but that sounds barbaric to me? Killing a baby is not substance..where do you people get this crap at.

      • "Seems to me you want to dismiss that these aborted babies shouldn’t have the same rights you enjoy today."

        They SHOULDN'T have the same rights. When a fetus some how manages to not hijack someone's body for it's own use then we can talk about giving it equal rights.

      • Well let's continue on with that list . . . . They [the aborted fetuses] will never experience pain, heartache, fear, poverty, lack of food, abuse, war, attacks, disease, beatings, fighting, discrimination, crippling disasters, misguided hatred, watching their family members die one by one, and the all so wondrous indignity of wasting away and dying while laying in their own filth at a nice ripe old age. . . . they will never experience this all because two people decided to act responsibly and not bring a child into this kind of environment. I don't know about you but that sounds reasonable to me.

      • @ Niv

        yup the child hijacked the woman's body alright, it forced its way in there didn't it?

        Do you mind letting us know how a fetus forces its way into the woman's body?

        I bet you don't even know that for there to be a hijack, something must have already been in existence to force itself into somethin else, no?

        In order for the child to force his/herself into the woman's womb to hijack it, the child must have existed outside the woman's womb, and then entered to invade.
        Is this how it happens?

        why does common sense escape ppl?

      • "- Prohibits abortions resulting from pregnancies involving rape or incest."

        That was because of two people not acting responsibly? I'm going to risk my life because someone did a barbaric act to me?

      • "The killing of a fellow human being is not a substance issue? "

        No. Banning civil liberties is not an issue of substance. A fetus is not a self sustaining human being. It cannot even breathe or ingest nutrients without the help of the woman carrying it inside of her body. Do you know how many babies are conceived and spontaneously aborted ("miscarried" for those uninformed among us) without even being confirmed pregnancies? When a fetus can eat and breathe without being connected to a woman by an umbilical chord, abortion is a bit drastic and uncalled for (without medical documentation of necessity), but until that point, it is the woman's choice and her choice alone.

    • @ Sandra

      Stop watching the action movies for a minute and pick up your dictionary. What you'll find is that one of the simplest definitions of hijacking is 'to seize control' or 'to commandeer'. . . feel free to look it up. There is no mention that for "a hijak something must have already been in existence to force itself into somethin else" Goodness, before you start speaking out of your butt hole at least have some understanding that a word may have meanings that go beyond what you've grasped from watching the T.V.

      Now how does hijacking apply to a pregnancy? Simple, when the fetus implants in the woman's uterus it essentially seizes control /commandeers it then additionally other parts of the woman's physiology are forced to respond to the ever increasing demands of the fetus as it grows.

  11. I am more concerned with how tight a woman keeps her bunghole then what she squeezes out of her hoo-ha. Unlike the hoo-ha which can be made tighter with exercise, once her bunghole is stretched out, it is forever loosed.

  12. All Florida will accomplish by this is a severe drop in population. Neighboring states which do provide abortions, however, will make bank as every unwillingly pregnant woman in Florida gets the hell out of that state.

    • If they can afford to leave the state. Yes. Otherwise, the right will have succeeded in causing even greater human misery. Good job Jesusfreaks!

    • actually the drop in population comes from abortions. You see when children aren't born, the population doesn't grow.

      How do we grow our population?

      There's a reason S. Korea is now going to start enforcing it's anti-abortion laws, they realise what Americans haven't realised yet, that when u kill ppl, the population deacrease, with a decrease in population, bad for the economy.

      especially when one has a social security scheme. you need young ppl to work so the old can survive, but when u kill off the young ppl, who will work for the old to survive?

      • So despite the fact that people are giving birth everyday and there is hardly a lack of children to be seen,let's overpopulate the US to support the old because you know, we live in a magical country that has an infinite amount of land and resources.

      • Minvo, your argument suggests that you don't think there is a difference between, say bald eagles and people. Are you really suggesting since we have "plenty of kids" running around that there is a fraction that we can waist?

      • @ JDavis

        "Minvo, your argument suggests that you don’t think there is a difference between, say bald eagles and people."

        Your comment suggests you think people are some how magically immune to the effects of overpopulation simply because they are human. Do you think that humans some how don't need to conserve resources . . . that continuous and unchecked growth in the human population is not going to eventually have a negative effect? You can look at countries right now that have experienced problems of over population and the negative consequences that resulted. Frankly, it is irresponsible to ignore the social, economic, and environmental problems that arise when there is an excess number of people around.

      • "Are you really suggesting since we have “plenty of kids” running around that there is a fraction that we can waist?"

        I'm suggesting that we are not suffering from a lack of children and this frothing at the mouth to force people to have children they don't want because "who will work for the old to survive?" is unwarranted and shows a deliberate ignorance or disregard of what can happen with an explosion in the population in an area that can only support x amount of people.

      • "Your comment suggests you think people are some how magically immune to the effects of overpopulation simply because they are human"

        So yours is not an issue of compassion on anyone- but more in the realm of genocide. Even Hitler justfied his attempt. You are in famous company.

    • Even willingly pregnant women will leave. Count me as a former Floridian if this bill passes.
      I can be counted among the willingly (though unintended) pregnant Floridians until May.

  13. Americans have moved from accepting the clinically clean perception of this issue to accepting the fact that this is more than a subject of convenience, but a subject that literally decides the life and death of another human.

    I think the parallels between abortion rights and slavery are extremly close, Both deal with "what is legal" and "what is moral".

    • The heart of the issue here is the belief of what constitutes a "life." I don't believe a bunch of cells constitutes a human. Subjugating walking, speaking, intellegent human beings in no way parallels the difficult decision to end a pregnancy.

      • even when those cells have a heart beat and a functioning brain, which allows it to feel pain?
        how comfortable are you in stopping a heart beat? and watching a 'cell' try to move away from chemicals that burn its skin, bcus it can feel the pain?

    • Perhaps if you're looking at it like the fetus/baby/whatever is forcing the woman to surrender her body and health to it whether she want to or not, and considering the woman is the one suffering through the pregnancy and the fetus reaps the benefits . . . than sure I guess we could make a stretch that abortion rights and slavery are close . . . .

      • since when is pregnancy suffering?
        something so natural is now suffering?

      • When you're vomiting so badly you're weak from the lack of nutrition and in some cases have to be hospitalized as a result. . . I call that suffering. When you can barely walk because your back hurts, your legs hurt, your feet hurt . . . I call that suffering. When your skin is stretched so tight over your stomach that you swear it's going to tear . . . I call that suffering. When you develop diabetes, high blood pressure, thyroid trouble, edema, . . . heck hemorrhoids for that matter . . . . I call that suffering.

        Sure Sandra, these things are so wonderful I don't know how I could have seen pregnancy as anything but I day at Disney World.

      • "the woman is the one suffering through the pregnancy and the fetus reaps the benefits . . ." But you've already admitted that yours is an issue of supporting genocide. Now you're just trying to put a humane spin on your barbarism.

  14. Frankly, I'm sick of anti-relgious bigots trying to frame this issue from the perspective of "craming someones religion down their throats". The issue is complex enough as it is. Inputing their bigorty doesn't help the discussion; it just makes them look stupid.

    • Well if people are commenting in writing or shouting out loud "God says thou shall not kill," "The bible doesn't allow abortion," "Jesus loves the little children," "This country was founded on Christian values, and it won't stand for abortion," "You're going to burn in hell for what you do!" etc. etc. . . . . umm how exactly does one not see this as "cramming someones religion down their throats."?

      • Minvo,
        Perhaps I missed those posts. I certainly didnt read them here. One might try answering the concerns. Do you believe jesus loves the little children? All the children of the world?
        To address the issue, This is a moral conundrum. It's being won in the minds of Americans by discussing the humanity of the un-born. Just as slavery was over-come by focussing on the humanity of the slaves.

      • "Perhaps I missed those posts. I certainly didnt read them here."

        Actually I was referring to the posts in general that I've read regarding objections to abortion. But if you need an example of a religious bigot on this thread trying shove his/her religion down our throats just look a few posts up to Alexander.

        "One might try answering the concerns. . . To address the issue, This is a moral conundrum."

        See that's the thing, I don't consider abortion as particularly complex or as a moral conundrum. I've thought about "the issue" and I just don't agree with you.

    • says the guy who is trying to cram his religious beliefs down everyone elses' throat.

      WE AREN'T ANTI-RELIGIOUS - WE ARE ANTI-ZEALOT. And you are a zealot. And since you are from Florida, I will assume you are one of the zealots who can't read a ballot (or much else). Did your pastor help you write this?

    • JDavis, you keep saying this is a complex issue. Morally, I see your point. Abortion falls into a ethical gray area that makes having one a very difficult choice for a woman to make.

      The thing is, while the choice itself is complex, giving women the legal ability to make the choice is a no-brainer. Abortion is quite simply no one's business but the person having one -- it's as simple as that.

      • Maz, pls apply the same logic to slavery.
        or to anything else that is illegal, especially smoking marijuana or drinking to the point of being drunk.

        also apply it to suicide. why are we trying to stop suicide, it's the person's body, it's the person's choice, it's the person's life, let them decide what to do with themselves. does it make sense?

      • Maz, we can respectfully disagree

    • To Sandra:
      Any parallels to slavery in this issue would be the fact that the US Government and the men in suits are trying to take away rights given to women decades ago. It will start with our right to make decisions about our own reproductive health, I fear what might be next. Will they make me quit my job to take care of my house, my husband, and my children, as opposed to the agreement my husband an I have made where I bring home the bacon and he takes care of the household?
      Second: there is no law against drinking until the point of being drunk. There are laws against being drunk and disorderly in public, and drinking in public. No laws against being drunk period. That is a choice left up to the individual.
      Third: everyday, the medical and scientific community make leaps and bounds in marijuana research. Everyday more proof becomes evident that the ban on marijuana is not only an uncalled for waste of government money, but also extremely outdated and even detrimental. Do your research , and stop basing your political opinions on what other people tell you to believe.

      • Marcia, Would you agree that a mans' right to claim or not claim a child is as important as the womans right to have or not have a child? Thw Women in skirts are always trying to get a mans money. Pretty arrogant and self-centered, dont you think?
        Do your research and stop battering people with your political opinions.

      • Since its HER BODY and she in her first trimester If she want an abortion she should be able to have one! So yes he does not have the say to it. Unless the mother agrees to him taking the baby when its born the different. But yes the first six week the mother can do whatever she want to do?

      • Robin, AND you agree that the sperm donor (since we're using inoculous verbiage) should have the opportunity to support or remove himself from the life/responsibility of said fetus when informed that it exists, right? The man gets the same opportunity to be responsible, or wash his hands of the situation?

  15. I'm so excited about these initiatives, in every state they're in, not just in Florida. Someday soon--within my lifetime, I believe--we will live in a country where every life is respected and celebrated, regardless of size, or age, or location, or dependency, or anything else. The culture in the US is finally changing and I'm so glad I am here to see it happen.

    • Yeah, go ahead and hold your breath on that one....

    • It would be nice if every life was celebrated, wouldn't it? Why don't we start by celebrating the lives of women, and allowing them to make their own decisions over their bodies?

    • Wouldn't it be nice if instead we lived in a country where everyone's freedom was respected and celebrated? Where people could choose if they wanted to be mothers? Where doctors could save peoples lives without fear of persecution?

      Why are the conservatives suddenly advocating for MORE government interference in our private life while at the same time accusing the democrats of trying to enact a government takeover?

  16. This makes me sick!! To force pregnancy and childbirth onto a woman or YOUNG girl who has been raped--perhaps by even a blood relative--is just sick and twisted!!!!!!!! There is no morality, dignity, or humanity in doing something like that whatsoever!!!!!!! If a law like this were to ever be passed--which it NEVER will, I can guarantee you that, women would no longer be free in this country. We would be third class citizens behind men and fetuses, and the state would literally own our bodies. I have said it thousands of times before: If you do not have control over your own body as a human being, then YOU ARE NOT FREE!!!!!!

    • Amen.

      Yet I don't think pregnancy should be forced on a woman or young girl no matter what the situation. It's her body. It does not belong to anyone but herself so she can do whatever she wants with it.

    • Your statement rings alarmingly true to me. I can only hope that our country doesn't come to this.
      My body is my temple.

      • AND you agree that a man should have the option when informed that conception has occured, to either accept responsibility for the child or to remove himself from the situation permanently, right?

  17. The only country in the "civilized" world where something like this could happen is America (by including the US in the civilized world I am being rather generous with my definitions). All other modern countries have settled this issue and accepted the fact that abortions must be made available unconditionally.

    Nobody WANTS to abort a baby. There are simply circumstances that sometimes occur in some women's lives where an abortion is the best option. I could mention the countless reasons and statistics that back up the "pro-abortion" (aka "anti stupid-religious-zealot") position, but if you are a person who can't understand why abortions are necessary on your own...you aren't worth my (or anyone else's) time.

    Have fun regressing into a third world country America. I'm sure other countries will be willing to accept your rational-thinking citizens as politcal refugees eventually.

    • I can only hope that last sentence comes true sooner than later. It's already incredibly difficult to expatriate from America, backward thinking like this bill proposes only makes me think things will get harder before they get easier.
      Just one year after one of the greatest achievements America could hope for (electing a literally African-American president) there are now efforts to thwart a decades old resolution in human and civil liberties. I am ashamed of my government at times, but as the saying goes: one step forward, two steps back. Hopefully we can make it up to ourselves by not letting this bill (or any like it) pass and limiting women's rights in America all over again.

  18. when does the intentional taking of an innocent life become murder? if it is o.k. to kill a child inside of the womb why is it not o.k. to kill it after it is born?? after all many people loose jobs or face difficult situations that would be lessened if there was not a child to support.
    morality IS legislated ALL the time - stealing, murder, child abuse, fraud, endangering the lives of minors ...why is pre-born baby killing the only moral issue not allowed to be legislated???

  19. People who believe in this Bill are IGNORANT of the realities of pregnancy, life, and PTSD. NO WOMAN should have to suffer for 9 months and ruin her body to bring a child of rape into this world to be a constant reminder of the horrors she had to endure.
    People with this "all ife is scared" Bull S*!t have never worked in a NICU (like I do) and watched countless children with medical problems that could have been aborted suffer IMMENSE pain and trauma before their short and tiny lives were ended ANYWAY in a matter of months. they've never watched a baby with underdeveloped lungs suffocate to death after birth. If life was truly sacred, they would respect it enough to not want an innocent child to suffer.
    People who think they have a right to take away a womans choice make me sick, and I hope every one of you is lined up right now to adopt all of these unwanted children as an 'alternative' to having your own.

    • >People who believe in this Bill are IGNORANT

      Nikki, dont be so ignorant. The correct proposition is People who support this Bill are IGNORANT.

      You should make sure you aren't ignorant before you castigate others as such.
      Yeesh, what are we to do with these children!?

  20. Wouldn't it be nice if we lived in a nation where everyone, small and great had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

  21. The parallels between slavery and abortion are based on the premise that enslaving people and murdering people for convenience are both morally corrupt aspects of any society.

  22. Why is it OK for Big Government to be in the WOMBS of American women, but Republicans want Big Government off the BACKS of business? Republicans are supposed to be market-driven ("free markets!"), but the "market" for abortion services is illegal? And the women who choose that "market" -- because they know what's best for themselves, their families, their health, safety, sanity and livelihoods -- they're criminals? (And the providers of those services, too?) Also, Van Zant admits he's on a religious mission, but our Constitution dictates a separation of church and state. Strike 3, Van Zant. Stop criminalizing American women!

    • "Why is it OK for Big Government to be in the WOMBS of American women"

      The you agree that a man should not be saddled with child support payments for a child he doesn't want, right?

  23. PLEASE don't let the bill go through! Its not right for the Repulican or Demopcrate to always get there way.

  24. Just remember the if you do in your first trimester its not a crime to have an abortion. But of cause after the first trimester and your in your second trimester then yes its a somewhat a crime.

  25. For those who posture that a woman should not have to endure a pregnancy they don't want: do you agree that a man shouldn't have to pay for the support of a child they on't want?

    • I think that is irrelevant to the above article. However, since you seem hung up on the issue, the fact is once the sperm is released into the female body it becomes her PROPERTY...just like clothing, jewelry or anything else you might give a woman.
      If you don't want her to have your sperm...don't give it to her. OR have a discussion and come to an agreement, have it signed and notarized, on how an unplanned pregnancy will be handled (meaning, "we can have sex, but I won't be responsible for any children" NOT "you must have an abortion"...you know, cuz we silly females like to change our minds).

      Or are you just interested in boinking without thinking about the consequences?

  26. plenty ways of not getting pregnant nowadays, we got an instrument fitted into wifes womb, didnt get pregnant the 10 years ,it was in by choice when we wanted another child we got it removed and conceived right away, easy to plan why dont you lot ???

  27. Here are my responses to all the pro-birthers (because I don’t hear any of them raising their hands to financially support the entire population of unwanted children in this country..they just care that they’re born, what happens after that is an argument for how they DON’T want their tax dollars spent – supporting the mother and her child):
    "Life begins at conception."
    This is NOT a pro-life argument because you are simply exchanging the rights of a VIABLE life form for the rights of a NON-VIABLE life form; the fetus over the woman. Here's the definition of life: "a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have self-sustaining biological processes from those that do not." Want to guess where a fetus fits in? Right...it can't sustain itself, it cannot reproduce therefore it cannot be considered life, and THAT is what is covered under the Constitution. Freedom, liberty, justice and religion are covered there too. Can it choose religion? Can it choose to emancipate itself from the womb? Are you going to force a fetus to be Christian? Muslim? Catholic? Will you put it in prison it if takes the life of its mother? Stupid, illogical argument.

    The information below is cited from CDC data:

    FACT: 86.8% (1,100 out of 1,300) of all abortions are performed before medical professionals deem it as a ‘late term’ abortion (12 weeks or more). Partial birth abortions account for less than 1% of abortions (.17% OR 2 for every 1,300 abortions). Late term, let alone partial birth abortions, are the vast MINORITY of abortions performed in the United States.

    FACT: 48% of women stated they had a late term abortion because they had problems OBTAINING AN ABORTION. If you don't like late term and that is your main objection to abortions you should realize that A.) they are in the VAST minority (13.2% of all abortions) and B.) impeding a woman's right to choose INCREASES the number of late term abortions. I think it’s only fair to cite the top reason, or 78% of those obtaining a late term abortion, said they didn't realize they were pregnant or didn't realize how long they'd been pregnant. This points to an obvious need for better sex education...SEX education, not abstinence education.

Trackbacks

  1.   Aboring Logic  by Kicking Ass Ann Arbor
  2. Floridians try again
  3. Florida Bill Would Make Abortion Punishable By Life In Prison | Scanner