Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, February 9, 2012

Opponents criticize latest abortion bill in Kansas Legislature

February 9, 2012

Advertisement

— Last year, five bills limiting abortion services and affordable contraception were passed by the Kansas Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Sam Brownback.

On Wednesday, a House committee started consideration of the first abortion bill of the current session that opponents say will create more limitations.

House Bill 2598 will require physicians to tell women that the risk of breast cancer is increased by abortion. It would also give a woman the opportunity to hear the fetal heartbeat before she consents to an abortion.

Additionally, the bill says that schools cannot contract with abortion service providers for sexual education.

Supporters of the bill, such as Kathy Ostrowski, the legislative director for Kansans for Life, said states have the right to promote childbirth.

“It actually helps put in protections for the babies and puts in protection for the parents,” Ostrowski said. “It helps parents understand the fetal development, to understand the risks (of abortions) ... ”

A coalition of nonprofit organizations, such as Mainstream Coalition, Planned Parenthood and Trust Women, criticized the measure.

Trust Women’s Virginia Phillips said the bill would infringe on women’s rights.

“This bill is an intrusive, far-reaching piece of legislation,” Phillips said. “It dictates what people can and cannot do.”

Hearings on the measure will continue today and Friday.

Comments

Mike1949 2 years, 10 months ago

Of course it is intrusive! I can not tell you how many years we the people have heard from the republicans less government. But take a close look at states that have a republican majority. Year after year, the republicans pass more and more regulations that take away our freedom, increase government intrusion into our lives. They try again and again that we the people have to think like them. I don't know about you, but I have always accredited that to a dictatorship.

I am sick and tired of pompous people trying to tell me how to live!

KS 2 years, 10 months ago

Then you should be extremely sick of ObmaCare. Just hang on. You ain't seen nothing yet. This just happens to be on the wrong side of the fence for you. Personal liberties are being lost on ObamaCare too.

Fred Whitehead Jr. 2 years, 10 months ago

What is "Obama Care"?

I cannot find anything on the lawbooks called "ObamaCare".

Is this something new?

Is this something that has been created by republican terrorists to further bash the president that they harbor significant prejudice and bigotry for?

Is this some lable that republican terrorists have created to attempt to gain some political soil with?

Anybody??????

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

O K I guess you were good with the filthy conditions in abortion clinics in Kansas and our former positions as the late-term abortion capital of the nation? Well guess what times have changed and pro-life voters have spoken--change is coming--and abortion is going to be restricted!

Armored_One 2 years, 10 months ago

Abortion restricted.

Foster care costs increased.

Don't believe me, look into the costs of foster care increases for states that have enacted multiple restrictions on abortion.

Numerous studies, endorsed by state governments, put the cost of raising a child at close to 200K. Now multiply that by a few thousand. Multiply that new number by a a few thousand more.

Abortion is cheaper.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

This bill is far FAR more than what this writer states and is a shoddy piece of reporting. I have been writing about and discussing this bill for over two days at http://www2.ljworld.com/weblogs/cait48/2012/feb/6/the-war-on-women-redux/ (You will find links to the actual bill and it's committee history there.) Buried in the language of this bill is a provision that would permit a physician to deliberately lie to and/or withhold crucial health information from a pregnant woman that would seriously impact her health or hide serious fetal anomalies from her for the purposes of preventing her from aborting and protect that physician from being sued. The only exception would be if a woman died, in which case a wrongful death suit could be filed. This means a woman could have a stroke and be disabled for life from eclampsia and could not sue the doctor for withholding that information from her. Nor could she sue if, at birth, she found out she had a baby with anencephaly, Downs or any other myriad birth defects. This is NOT "pro-life". This is anti-abortion and pro-forced birth, no matter what the costs are to the woman. The fact that we have legislators that even think this way, much less actually consider such a thing says much about our state government.

mcmandy 2 years, 10 months ago

This is pretty scary stuff. According to my understanding of what I read, if I am pregnant and have an abortion, my husband (or parents if I were under 18) can sue me, with a second offense being a felony. What if I don't want a kid and the husband pokes holes in the condoms? Not everyone is in a happy, trusting, honest relationship and this basically gives the man the rights in a marriage. And HOW is it OK to ever omit medical information to a patient, pregnant or otherwise? Having a baby with severe disabilities is expensive; allowing for the omission of this information to the mother at the very least takes away several very important months of preparations.

chootspa 2 years, 10 months ago

It also intrudes on a family's private grief. I've known women who chose to abort babies with no chance of life - trisomy anomalies incompatible with life - and rather than go through a pregnancy knowing there was nothing they could do for that baby, they chose to induce labor (ie abort) and mourn as a family.

Now that same mother would have to be lectured about fictitious risks - or worse yet, not even told that her baby had the defect and was going to die. I'm sorry, but legislators that support this sort of thing are monsters, pure and simple.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

"exceptions" make bad law. For every case like the example you site there are hundreds of cases where a woman is not given good medical information or the opportunity to see the fetus and hear the heartbeat. A child that is already dead in the mother's womb is not what is being talked about here!

kochmoney 2 years, 10 months ago

No, a legal right is what's being talked about here, along with your desire to put the government up a woman's hoo-ha.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

Informed consent is very pro-life. This bill is not nearly as "scary" as you are trying to make it!

pocket_of_sunshine 2 years, 10 months ago

Allowing a doctor to withhold important medical information without consequence seems pretty scary to me.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

There is nothing about this bill that is "informed consent". Quite the opposite. Your credibility is shot to hell and back. Go play on the Army of God's website and forums where you belong.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

why don't you go play on the NARAL website? You obviously worship at the altar of unrestricted abortion on demand. The dismemberment of a living unborn child in the womb. It is a crime against the family to kill these babies and treat women as chattel!

kochmoney 2 years, 10 months ago

Intentionally giving out false medical info to scare women and encouraging the withholding of information is not informed consent.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

"House Bill 2598 will require physicians to tell women that the risk of breast cancer is increased by abortion. It would also give a woman the opportunity to hear the fetal heartbeat before she consents to an abortion." 1. The supposed "link" between abortion and breast cancer has been disproven by no less than the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health. 2. The bill will not offer women the "opportunity" to hear the fetal heartbeat but demand that she do so by law. The only way she can get out of it is to sign a legal waiver. This is not an "opportunity", it's a mandate. I'm really loving this slanted reporting. Not.

chootspa 2 years, 10 months ago

So women who are getting medical D&Cs for dead fetuses are still required to sign some sort of waiver and go through hoops to reduce their risks of bleeding to death?

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

why should a woman not be made aware that the heart is beating in the child she is about to allow an abortionist to dismember?

tck421 2 years, 10 months ago

cait48, you've made your opinion/view painfully evident. There's a reason why you aren't a real reporter, and you're the reason people dub real reporters as the "liberal media." If a report doesn't favor you're view, it doesn't make the report slanted, and I learned that in J101. Stick to editorials, or get yourself a real media pass, don't use message boards to hate on young reporters, reporting the facts.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

To date, no reporter in this entire state (that I can find, at least) has said anything about section 10 of this bill; that would permit a physician to actively lie to or withhold critical and crucial information from a pregnant woman just because she might choose to abort as a consequence of that information . This is one of the most over reaching parts of this bill. It doesn't just violate "patient rights" or "informed consent" rights, it's a violation of basic civil rights That is not being critical because it's not "favoring my view". Reporting means reporting everything, not just a select number of items. If I feel that, because no reporter has the cajones to point this out, then I have every right to feel that reporting is being slanted.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

After reading your post, and mine and Agnostick's replies, my husband stated something that I feel is very important and at the very core of true journalism. He said, "If a reporter doesn't report everything, then he is not "reporting" the news, he is "making" the news. There's a big difference."

tck421 2 years, 10 months ago

It's a 150 word report, backing the basic details of the bill. Again... if you show this amount of bias on an issue, you obviously don't know a thing about real reporting. I have an opinion...but it wouldn't be installed in a report, because that defeats the purpose of reporting.

denali 2 years, 10 months ago

So... If you maintain you're not biased, why are you avoiding Sec. 10 of the bill?

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

The liberal media is guilty of not reporting many things because of their bias... you need to read the book "BIAS"

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 10 months ago

So much for small, unintrusive government.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

With the serious nature of the abortion decision women should be given all the information they need prior to making this "choice". The law should protect women from the lies that they are often told at Planned Parenthood clinics.

kochmoney 2 years, 10 months ago

Indeed, they should be given all the information they need. This law guarantees they won't be. The lies they're told at Planned Parenthood clinics usually come from the protesters shouting at them as they go in to get their pap smear. I totally agree that the law should protect them from these lies.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

rubbish-- I guess you need to watch some of the undercover videos that have been made at Planned Parenthood clinics--in which the Planned Parenthood staff member covers up for statutory rape!

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Videos like the "ACORN" video? That were edited and patched together to show something completely opposite of what happened? I'll pass.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

The law should also protect women from having doctors deliberately withhold from them that their fetus has no brain or that their blood pressure is through the roof from eclampsia just because they "might" have an abortion. Informed consent is informed consent, kjh. You can't have it both ways.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

your interpretation of that section is not correct...you are reading your pro-abortion bias into it...

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Am I? I think you need to read the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. Pay special attention to the "Due Process" clause.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Oh and by the way, I am not and never have been "pro-abortion". I am pro-CHOICE. Big difference.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 10 months ago

Will doctors also be required to inform women of the potential dangers of childbirth?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Of course not! In fact a woman can have something seriously wrong with her pregnancy and have that information legally withheld from her, if the doctor thinks she might abort because of it. (See my comment above.)

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

The state has the right to favor child birth over abortion...this does not mean that information should be withheld only that the woman should be given support and help by her doctor.

usnsnp 2 years, 10 months ago

So much for the argument of seperation of church and state, the abortion issue is not a civil problem , it is a religious problem. So with the concept of seperation of church and state, the state should not be passing any laws for or against abortion.

KS 2 years, 10 months ago

That's a far stretch. I don't recall seeing anything in the consitution about seperation of church and state? If you know where that is, would you please let me know?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

So we get to trot out this tired old argument. I know beyond a question of a doubt that you have had the links provided to you that detailed Jefferson's writings on the subject along with the Supreme Court decisions that upheld it. They've been all over this board. If you want to play Texas Board of Ed and be deliberately ignorant, go for it. It's your loss.

esteshawk 2 years, 10 months ago

No law respecting establishment of a religion. That means you cannot make laws that promote one religious view over another. Not that youll read this though . ..

Armored_One 2 years, 10 months ago

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Sound familiar at all, or is the Constitution just like the Bible and only dragged out to browbeat people who disagree with your position?

Sanctity of life.

Santity is rooted directly in the word sanctify.

To quote directly from dictionary.com:

sanc·ti·fy    [sangk-tuh-fahy] Show IPA

verb (used with object), -fied, -fy·ing. 1. to make holy; set apart as sacred; consecrate. 2. to purify or free from sin: Sanctify your hearts. 3. to impart religious sanction to; render legitimate or binding: to sanctify a vow. 4. to entitle to reverence or respect. 5. to make productive of or conducive to spiritual blessing.

All five of those entries directly reference religion.

Do you care to try again, or does the English language also need to be rewritten in order to conform to your warped sense of reality?

KS 2 years, 10 months ago

If a female doesn't want the pregnancy, don't get pregnant. Where did all of our common sense go? There are many options there, all legal.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

You really are a piece of work, aren't you?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

It's interesting that all of these mythic "virgin births" were in patriarchal cultures that had an over arching concern with "purity" and "Mama's baby, papa's maybe". (Except for Frigga, who, if I understand correctly, was a demigoddess herself).

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

It is interesting that most of what you write seems to reject God as the ultimate authority. I guess in your mind you yourself are the ultimate authority?

jafs 2 years, 10 months ago

In our society, the Constitution is the basis for our laws.

Not the Bible.

Whether or not people believe in God, and whether or not they believe in God as an "ultimate authority" is up to them, given our 1st amendment right to religious freedom.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

No matter what the Law is the Bible is the authority to the Christian on all of these matters and it clearly rejects killing unborn children!

jafs 2 years, 10 months ago

Ok.

So what?

That belief is yours, and you are free to believe it, but that doesn't give you the right to make laws based on it, since our basis for laws is not the Bible, but the Constitution.

Katara 2 years, 10 months ago

@KS

Have you heard about the recent birth control pill recall?

Michael LoBurgio 2 years, 10 months ago

Dem state senator adds ‘Every sperm is sacred’ clause to ‘personhood’ bill

Sen. Johnson, who represents Oklahoma’s 48th District has introduced an amendment to the bill mandating that the same rights and benefits be granted to spermatozoa, writing, “However, any action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman’s vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child.”

This would outlaw masturbation by men, anal sex, sex with condoms, all forms of fellatio to completion, as well as numerous other acts. She later withdrew the measure, but stated that she had inserted it to highlight the absurdity and sexism inherent in the current bill.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/07/dem-state-senator-appends-every-sperm-is-sacred-clause-to-ok-personhood-bill/?utm_source=Raw+Story+Daily+Update&utm_campaign=c61c60e044-2_9_122_8_2012&utm_medium=email

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

making a joke out of the dismemberment of unborn children is offensive to all pro-life citizens!

asixbury 2 years, 10 months ago

Abortion is not the true issue here. It is allowing doctors to mislead their patients.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

You aren't "pro-life". You're anti-abortion and pro-forced birth. Get your terms right.

Michael LoBurgio 2 years, 10 months ago

If abortion is murder, aren't condoms kidnapping?

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

Did you take biology?? Human life is precious from the moment of conception.

somedude20 2 years, 10 months ago

now that is funny for all the wrong reasons

Michael LoBurgio 2 years, 10 months ago

Abortion is a relevant medical procedure, just ask Rick Santorum.

Roe v. Wade was a bipartisan ruling made by a conservative leaning Supreme Court.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

revisionist history--that was not a "conservative" Supreme Court in 1973. Have you every heard of Earl Warren and the legacy of his liberalism on the Court--it was continuing at that time although Warren himself was gone. Abortion- the dismemberment of the unborn is a nefarious act of killing a child!

dh2012 2 years, 10 months ago

I just recently had a late term abortion that did involve dismemberment. The "dismemberment" portion of the abortion is days after the baby's heart stops. The reason it is done this way is because it is the safest way to perform the procedure. My child had major brain anomalies and had my baby made it to birth, would have had a horrible life. We got several opinions from several different doctors. Our baby would have had to have a feeding tube its entire life. We were also told that our baby would likely have little to no interaction with others. One doctor told us that if our baby lived that it would not be able to recognize us as its mother and father. The pain that our baby would have gone through in its life would have been far greater than the pain it may have experienced while being put to sleep. What was best for me would have been to keep my baby; however, what I felt was best for my baby was the termination. I was once a pro-lifer myself, so I already know all of your arguments. Just keep in mind that you can never understand until you are in the position yourself. I repeat, you will never understand. You will never know the pain that my family went through with the loss of our baby. We did what was medically best for our baby. As a mother, it is my job to make sure that my baby is not suffering and in pain. Also, after seeing numerous doctors, I heard my baby’s heartbeat numerous times. I know that I made the right decision for my baby, and hearing the heartbeat an additional time would not have changed my mind.

lunacydetector 2 years, 10 months ago

IF your story is true, what state did you do this procedure, and what was your baby diagnosed with?-i've seen ultrasounds of many babies and was wondering how they detected the 'brain anomalies?' surely there was an official medical diagnosis.

i'm a firm believer in dealing with the hand i've been dealt. convenience for the sake of convenience isn't worth taking a life, but that's just me.

kochmoney 2 years, 10 months ago

So basically you're calling her a liar and then calling her morally wrong for deciding that she didn't want her baby to have a short life full of suffering. You're a real Mensch.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Wow! You really know how to twist the knife, don't you?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

My comment was to lunacydetector. Who is obviously a male and has never been faced with such a tragic heart break.

kochmoney 2 years, 10 months ago

I'm sorry for what you went through, I'm sorry for your loss, and I'm sorry for the deluge of ignorant comments you'll get about your experience here.

lunacydetector 2 years, 10 months ago

i just want some FACTS to back up this guilt free third trimester abortion.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

So you want her medical records? There's this thing called HIPAA.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

A. It's one bill, not bills. B. If you think it's good legislation, go live in Iran, where you belong.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

wow-- what a personal attack-- I thought liberals were "open-minded" and wanted to be inclusive and have diversity? I guess only if we are on the pro-abortion plantation can we speak or we risk cait48 sending us to Iran?

asixbury 2 years, 10 months ago

The issue is not abortion. Doctors should never be given the right to lie or mislead their patients. This is what this bill will create: doctors no woman can trust to tell the truth about their pregnancy and the unborn child.

asixbury 2 years, 10 months ago

The issue is not abortion. Doctors should never be given the right to lie or mislead their patients. This is what this bill will create: doctors no woman can trust to tell the truth about their pregnancy and the unborn child.

asixbury 2 years, 10 months ago

You must be a man, to think this is a good bill. Or being sarcastic, which is more likely.

gr 2 years, 10 months ago

Women's rights?

I hope everyone remembers that when it comes to forced vaccinations of cow pus and/or other foreign substances, that it's a woman's right do choose what they want to do with their bodies and babies....

Hooligan_016 2 years, 10 months ago

Getting sick of all the BS that's being slung around in the State legislature. You want to know why all the kids/young talent are leaving the state? Here's a great example.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

defending the unborn is not BS--it is the highest calling for a legislator--you just happen to disagree that abortion should be restricted. Those of us who are pro-life have worked very hard to get leglislators elected who agree with our position on this issue and you lost!

Armstrong 2 years, 10 months ago

if I remember correctly there are several states that border Kansas. I know, just took the fun out of the hysteria

chootspa 2 years, 10 months ago

Yes, and I'm sure getting in a car and driving for up to 4-6 hours for all your OB appointments just in case your doctor is witholding information isn't a burden to anyone.

Armstrong 2 years, 10 months ago

4 - 6 hours? We're talkng Kansas 2 hours max. then you can have all the abortions you want. Happy now

asixbury 2 years, 10 months ago

Not if you live where I used to; smack-dab in the middle. It's a pretty long drive then.

kochmoney 2 years, 10 months ago

I'm sure most women would rather have accurate medical information at their OB appointments, not abortions, but this law incentivizes doctors to leave out information.

chootspa 2 years, 10 months ago

But of course. It keeps the conservo-populists happy and distracted to see their social agenda being hashed out. It's even better when it's so over the top that it doesn't stand up in court. That means they can campaign on passing it again!

Meanwhile, the state is wholesale pillaged by the rich. Don't worry. They can still get basic women's healthcare anywhere they want. They'll be fine.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

Do a little research and you might find out that many of the pro-life legislators in Topeka are women and mothers! They are against the killing of unborn children and are willing to put their political careers on the line to stand up for principle!

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Neither you nor they are "pro-life". You're anti-abortion and pro-forced birth.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

That is one opinion--I disagree with you--pro-life legislators are, in fact, "pro-life" that is they want to help women in these crisis situations and they want to end the killing of the unborn for profit!

jafs 2 years, 10 months ago

Please list the actions that these legislators are taking that are in fact "pro life" for people once born.

kochmoney 2 years, 10 months ago

Do a little research, and you'll find that women make up far less than half of the body, so the decision will be with a bunch of old men.

Kim Murphree 2 years, 10 months ago

Women are chattel to this Governor, and all his cronies. Did you expect anything less??? Those of you who voted for them? Guess you don't trust or even like women either.

somedude20 2 years, 10 months ago

This goes out to the ladies, with all of these laws against you in this state, why do you stay or is this junk going to make you leave?

I curse you Brownback! I love women and if you chase them away like some kind of jesus rat, I will stop eating fish!

kusp8 2 years, 10 months ago

Meh.... Planned Parenthood or any other myriad of organizations will get an emergency injunction against this from being put into effect. Thus the law will be overturned at the state level or the national level. I'm not too worried about it. Is it a bogus law, yes. Will I spam my congress people about it, yes. Do I think it'll help, probably not.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

While I agree with you to an extent, there are some things I think you should consider. If this bill passes it will, by necessity, have to be defended in court at a cost of hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of dollars to the state; a state that (supposedly) is already so broke that it can't fund education, healthcare or even it's own retirement plans. Secondly, as I said before, the very fact that we have legislators that would even think this way, much less consider it, is beyond any degree of humanity. These people were voted into office. They can be voted out.

kochmoney 2 years, 10 months ago

This crap will only end when people say enough to the social agenda and stop voting for it. Right now there's no political price to be paid for being a rabid forced-birther.

Joe Hyde 2 years, 10 months ago

Every voting age female citizen in Kansas needs to seriously contemplate the relentless personal rights violations being visited on her by these radical Republicans, and protect her options accordingly in all future elections.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

The rights of children are being violated in the abortion chambers.

asixbury 2 years, 10 months ago

Unborn children's rights matter more than the mother's now? That seems pretty backwards to me. Besides, this is not an issue of anti- or pro-abortion; it is the doctors being allowed to withhold information about a pregnancy that could be devastating.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

"Unborn children" are not a protected class of people under Federal law. Women are. States can pass all of the "personhood" amendments they want. It still won't make any difference at the Federal level. And I fully believe it will be a cold day in hell before "personhood" makes it to the US Constitution.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

I see lips flapping and hear sound coming out but I'm not hearing anything intelligent. Does anybody else?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

An interesting thing I noticed... I went through and looked at all of the pictures of all of the committee members. With the exception of one Asian appearing woman there isn't a single person of "color" on this committee. No Hispanics, no blacks, no Indians. There are a number of women but the overwhelming majority are middle aged to old white men. A lot of them are outright scary looking. And these are the people who have set themselves up in charge of my uterus?

Jeff Barclay 2 years, 10 months ago

Proponents praise latest abortion bill in Kansas legislature. The goal is to save babies. The ultimate in wordsmithing- "Women's healthcare" synonymous with "the right to an abortion." What about the rights of healthcare for the unborn? This issue is emotional and complicated, but casually taking the life of an innocent unborn children for the convenience of it's mother seems incredibly selfish to me.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

If you think having an abortion is a "casual" or "convenient" thing for women than you must have a pretty low opinion of women in general. There's a new battle cry out there. You might learn it. It says "Trust Women". And if you can't do that than I think the problem is with you, not them.

evilpenguin 2 years, 10 months ago

SB is a despicable pig of a man. If a foetus can't survive outside the womb on its own, it's not a person. By introducing all these forced childbirth measures, you are going to drive childbearing women from KS, increase the number of deaths of women due to homemade abortions and alienate a huge portion of the people of Kansas. Not everyone believes in God, why should we be forced to fulfill SB's idealist religious view of the world? Stop making stupid laws based on your own opinions, and start ACTUALLY representing people on useful issues

lunacydetector 2 years, 10 months ago

“This bill is an intrusive, far-reaching piece of legislation,” Phillips said. “It dictates what people can and cannot do.”

Obamacare threw out the First Amendment right to religious liberty. the military wouldn't let catholic chaplains discuss the government's planned intrusion on catholic institutions at their services. santorum wins minnesota, colorado, and missouri.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

And this has what to do with this present legislation? Can you stop talking about Obama long enough to see what's in front of your face and can have a deeply serious impact on your wife, mother, daughter, sister, cousin, girlfriend? Or do you just not care?

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

The point is that they were attempting to interfere with the "religious liberty" of the chaplains based upon Obama politics! This was an attack upon the religious freedom of all Americans!

pocket_of_sunshine 2 years, 10 months ago

I love how here you are worried about religious freedom and yet you turn around and try to enforce YOUR belief in YOUR Bible on others. How, exactly, does that work?

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

I have never stated my position in that way at all.

lunacydetector 2 years, 10 months ago

why would something from the pulpit need to be routed through army censors first? sounds like a huge infringement to me.

....i get you, don't ask don't tell?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

If you want a serious answer I can give you one. Yes, it may possibly prevent an abortion. But it will do so at an extremely high cost; medically, emotionally and financially. It will create untold damage to women that, apparently, you aren't aware of nor care to hear. Bottom line, if you can't trust women to make this decision for themselves then you obviously have a very low opinion of women in general.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

How much so-called "emotional damage" is one fetus worth? Abortion on demand is anti-woman and anti-child it is the killing of a human being in the womb. Christ commanded us to love our neighbor and speaking out against abortion is exactly what Jesus. We are to model our savior as we call for the nation to repent of the sin of abortion.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Let me qualify something I just said. "Yes, it may possibly prevent an abortion." It will prevent that abortion, not because that's the woman's decision, but because she will be forced into giving birth, either by medical, financial or emotional manipulation. Just out of curiosity, how would you like to be forced into that kind of decision?

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

How does "informed consent" and information "force" anyone to do anything. Face it-- the liberals at Planned Parenthood--do not want women to be informed because they are in the abortion industry for the MONEY!

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

And just how is permitting a doctor to lie to and mislead a pregnant woman so she won't abort "informed consent"?

Enlightenment 2 years, 10 months ago

Halt the presses! As upsetting as this is, it is simply a smoke screen by the Republicans to disguise their inability to be productive while they hold office. Take a look at the issues being moved forward in the House, all are moral issues or senseless topics that have no impact on improving our state or local economy, i.e. permitting guns on college campuses and public facilities and women's rights and abortion issues.

Republicans know the hot buttons in this state and nation and they use them to their advantage. Just wait and see, while the public is in an uproar over the abortion issue, the Republicans will be operating behind the scenes with ways to satisfy their real supporters, the big businesses and corporations.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

hold your horses--there is alot more to come-- taxes, economic develpment, and undoing policies put in place by Sebelius.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Be honest, Fretster. You mean nowhere near as stupid as she is.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

In other states, it appears there's a fun new game making the rounds among female legislators; introducing amendments to these bills that are male oriented but equitable to the restriction being proposed. In Virginia, a female legislator introduced an amendment to a bill that would have required ultrasounds and listening to the fetal heartbeat before every abortion that stated that, before a man could receive Viagra, he had to have a full cardiac workup including blood pressure screening and a cardiac stress test. The bill was defeated. In Oklahoma, a "personhood" bill was introduced with an amendment added by a female legislator that stated that, if "personhood" is granted to a fetus then, by law, no man could deposit semen anywhere but in a vagina. Here's the actual amendment: “However, any action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman’s vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child.” I truly hope these keep coming.

mom_of_three 2 years, 10 months ago

reminds me of a quote from Legally Blonde "For that matter, any masturbatory emissions, where the sperm is clearly not seeking an egg, could be termed reckless abandonment."

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

Killing and dismembering the unborn is not "fun and games" and the Christian community is very serious about ending this abuse of women and children.

mom_of_three 2 years, 10 months ago

What abuse? If a woman chooses to have an abortion, its her choice.

And I suppose taking rights away from women to choose what to do with their bodies is okay with you?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

The only people abusing women are you and your Bible thumping friends standing outside women's healthcare clinics harassing women going in for a pap smear.

HendrixMusician 2 years, 10 months ago

I strongly disagree with this bill. Just with my opinion being that if a women is in an abusive or untrustworthy relationship what control does she have over him poking holes in the condoms or not having consent for sex and then not wanting the child and it being rape. And then they want to make it seem like a bonus to get the chance to hear the fetal heartbeat? That doesn't make any sense at all. I understand that it might be wrong to have an abortion but what it boils down to is it is the woman's choice and it's also her choice to give anyone the reason as to why she is getting the abortion. Putting more limitations on trying to help this situation out seems pointless to me.

Corb12 2 years, 10 months ago

Standing from a moral issue I strongly agree with this bill. But women should have the personal choice for what they want to do with their pregnancy. There should be more information at the disposal for the woman so she can make an educated choice for herself. Now the argument is that the infant can feel the abortion. The infant is still a human; this is not a scientific experiment. I would also hate to break it to the people that are Pro-Choice. Did you know that there is an emotional impact to the woman after the abortion. Some women struggle with negative emotions after they’ve had an abortion, a psychological responsecalled as Post-Abortion Stress. PAS can occur days or years after the abortion. Additionally, scarring or other injury may prevent a future pregnancy, or make it higher-risk. The risk of miscarriage is higher for those who have an abortion with their first pregnancy. Lastly, there is a link to breast cancer. The risk of breast cancer is higher for women who had an abortion before age 18 or after age 30. For women who have had no children and have had one or more abortions, their risk of breast cancer is 50 percent higher than their normal genetic risk. (National Cancer Institute, 1994) This is my personal belief on this issue.

verity 2 years, 10 months ago

If you have a moral issue with abortion, fine. But before you say you agree with this bill-read it and the fiscal note attached to it.

Your example from the National Cancer Institute (1994) is more than a little outdated even if it was ever made. As far as the emotional damage anti-abortion people like to drag out---give me a scientific study, not some anecdotal evidence or something put out by the anti-abortion lobby. Besides, many decisions have an emotional result---should we outlaw all of them? What about the stress caused by all the roadblocks this bill is putting in front of women? What about the stress people have from being in a battle/war zone?

It is my private and personal decision. It is not yours to make for me. If I choose to have an abortion, I will, as will many other women. Fortunately for me, I will never have to make that decision, but I stand with all the women who may have to.

Corb12 2 years, 10 months ago

Is it really our personal and private decision? The Bible declares that God values all human life and that He wants all people to come to repentance to inherit eternal life. The Bible explains that the entire life of a human - from the beginning to its natural end - is sacred, since God determines the length of those days. The Bible tells us God is involved in our creation from the womb. "Did not He who made me in the womb make him, And the same one fashion us in the womb? (Job 31:15). Please explain to me how abortion is the just and moral thing to do?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

It probably isn't to you, given your religious reasons. However, if someone doesn't believe as you do, does that give you the right to force your beliefs on them? The US Constitution says no.

mom_of_three 2 years, 10 months ago

"It is my private and personal decision. It is not yours to make for me. If I choose to have an abortion, I will, as will many other women. Fortunately for me, I will never have to make that decision, but I stand with all the women who may have to"

  • A zillion

Corb12 2 years, 10 months ago

This is not your personal and private decision. I pray for you that you would never choose abortion for that is ending a God given life. I would love to believe your argument except where is the father in this situation? Does he not have the right to be a part of the decision? (a zillion is not a number!)

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

So, you agree that physicians should be legally allowed to lie to or deliberately mislead women in their healthcare with no consequences? Women have plenty of information available to them. Believe me, given the legal restrictions already placed on them, women do not go into abortion uninformed dupes. Well, that is if they aren't given legally mandated mis-information, such as the abortion-breast cancer link that was actually DISproven by the National Cancer Institute, not "proven", as you claim. Did you know that some women struggle with negative emotions after having a baby? It's called PPD, Post Partum Depression/Dysphoria. Sometimes they get PPP, Post Partum Psychosis. PPP can last months and even years and will lead some women to completely wipe out their families, killing all of their children. I guess that's an excuse not to have a baby at all, huh? This makes about as much sense as you bringing up PAS. "The risk of miscarriage is higher for those who have an abortion with their first pregnancy." There is no scientific evidence for this whatsoever. Got any links that aren't circular ones from Operation Rescue to back it up? Oh and by the way, the risk of breast cancer is less for any woman who has been pregnant, whether that pregnancy was carried to term or not, than a woman who was never pregnant at all.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

It is disappointing that the liberals on this site are so against informed consent and allowing women to have information. This bill will allow a woman to be informed of the results of multiple studies that have suggested there might be a link between breast cancer and abortion. We need to do everything we can to favor the birth of these little ones over their dismemberment and destruction. When we defend the unborn we speak for the "least of these" as Christ has commanded each Christian to do. Abortion is an abomination and those who favor it are supporting a philosophy of selfishness and hedonism.

mom_of_three 2 years, 10 months ago

Liberals are not against informed consent. I think Liberals object being lied to and given outdated and incorrect information (about the link to breast cancer).

If you don't like abortion, and think its selfish - THEN DONT HAVE ONE.

mom_of_three 2 years, 10 months ago

And I think somewhere it says something in the bible about not lying and telling the truth.
a part of this bill says a doctor doesn't have to tell the patient the truth about the health of the fetus, or can withhold information which could assist women in making their decisions. Wonder what God would say about that?

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

there have been multiple studies...not just one...and it is the liberals at Planned Parenthood clinics that have been caught on tape lying to women and girls hence the need for this type of law!

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Links links links, kjh. You never do back up your mouth.

ebyrdstarr 2 years, 10 months ago

If this bill were about informed consent, it would also require doctors to inform women considering abortion about the risks of carrying a pregnancy to term. Including things like postpartum depression and psychosis. The risk of stroke or hemorrhage or uterine rupture during childbirth. The risk of undergoing a c-section. Episiotomies. Just for starters. If you are so in favor of informed consent, why are you not insisting that pregnant women be provided with all of this information as a matter of law as well?

verity 2 years, 10 months ago

Against informed consent? Surely you can do better than that. Do you think I can't inform myself? (That was rhetorical, obviously you think I can't.) Have you even looked at the bill and seen what is involved in the informing? This law is N. O. T. about informing, it is about putting so many obstacles up that an abortion cannot be performed. This is dishonest at best. But a total ban on abortions will not pass muster, so it is being done in an underhanded and dishonest way. What does your God say about dishonesty?

And since when is it against the law to be selfish or a hedonist? In my opinion you are being selfish because you are trying to foist your religious opinions on me. Since when do I have to follow Christian principles---if in fact the Bible is as you interpret it? Too many times it seems that when people declare they are speaking for God, they are only hearing themselves.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

you misrepresent my opinon. The bottom line is that there is a battle between competing worldview: the secular humanist selfish "me generation" view and the Judeo/Christian worldview that upholds the value of each individual.

jafs 2 years, 10 months ago

That's a very broad, and false dichotomy you present.

There are many generous non-believers and many selfish believers.

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 10 months ago

Would informed consent include providing statistics to new church attendees regarding the frequency of sexual assault and predation on the part of clergy and church staff? How about statistics regarding the percentage of theocrats who have disgusting dark little secrets that would destroy them in the eyes of their all-forgiving church?

Corb12 2 years, 10 months ago

Sorry I clicked on the wrong comment!

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

I guess you can write whatever law you desire and present it to the legislature on those other issues...however, this legislation is dealing with protecting the rights of women seeking abortions by allowing them to have all of the information they need prior to making that "choice".

thebigspoon 2 years, 10 months ago

The issue, kjh, that Cait is speaking to is that "informed consent" is exactly what this bill prohibits. Can you set aside your blinders for just a second and read what is actually printed?

Your religious beliefs are sacred to me, no matter what thtey are. Your inabillity to see that others have beliefs just as sacred to them is reprehensible.

The thing that is happening is Kansas is that "religion" is masquerading as law. This is not the way it was meant to be and not the way even you should think, according to your way of thinking that personal liberty is the be-all and end-all of life.

I abhor situations that lead many women to choose abortion but will defend their right to such procedures as the only person who can make a decision as tearing as this is the woman. People have no right to dictate to others their response to critical situations. Unless you've had the opportunity to make this decision, shut the hell up about how anyone else should behave.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

many times politics comes into play with these organizations based upon the need for funding and the need to please the current pro-abortion Obama Administration.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

You just have all the answers, don't you kjh? if it doesn't fit in with your worldview it's all "Obama's fault". Uh-huh. Now let me go get my hip waders because it's getting deep here.

ebyrdstarr 2 years, 10 months ago

Except the study Ag cited is from the 3rd year of Bush's presidency... So not written to mollify a rabidly pro-baby killing president.

I'm always troubled when people automatically accept any study that supports their view but reject any argument that challenges it.

Michael LoBurgio 2 years, 10 months ago

The day ABORTION becomes an unquestionable right, is the day MEN become pregnant.

77% of anti - choice members are men, 100% of them will never get pregnant!

verity 2 years, 10 months ago

Do you have a link for that statistic? I have noted that men do seem to be represented in larger numbers than women, but don't have anything other than my own observation.

mom_of_three 2 years, 10 months ago

There are not abortion proponents - I, for one, am PRO CHOICE.

Let each woman decide for herself.

As soon as you figure that out, we will be just fine.

mom_of_three 2 years, 10 months ago

irresponsible behavior - a liberal trait?

Hello pot, meet Kettle.

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 10 months ago

Nanny-state Christians can't even keep their own houses in order, but they feel the need to micromanage your wombs and reproductive bits. Defend the unborn, my foot. It's time to defend our country and constitution against anti-American efforts of the Christian Taliban..

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

Ha, ha, Christian taliban--you just don't want pro-life people to be able to speak up and give their opinions ? Guess what we have every right under the constitution to make our voices heard on any issue we desire! Just because you don't agree or want to engage in name-calling does not change the fact that abortion is wrong. The dismemberment of an unborn child should never be construed as a "right". Christianity has always stood up for the defense of the weak and powerless.

jafs 2 years, 10 months ago

You can speak all you like and believe as you wish - that doesn't confer the right to impose those beliefs through legislation.

And, you must not know very much about Christianity - it has often been used to oppress those. The Bible was used to condone slavery, remember the Inquisition?

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

what give you the right to impose "abortion on demand" upon other citizens who don't want that killing in their country. This is a moral issue for Christians and we will never cease to demand that abortion end and the killing stop!

jafs 2 years, 10 months ago

Our Constitution, and legal system.

Particularly the SC which decided that abortion is a right.

You make the same mistake over and over again - you conflate your right to religious belief with the right to impose your beliefs on others.

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 10 months ago

aha--there you have it--this is the level it goes to with the pro-abortion extremists! Announcing that the Governor should have been aborted! Clearly it shows the weakness of your agrument and the fact that the pro-abortion philosophy comes straight from the pit of darkness.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Good link, Ag, but this makes him any different from Newt Gingrich how? (Well, other than the "abortion" stuff, but then we don't know that Newt hasn't done that and just never got found out, given how he likes to sling around his "seed".)

ivalueamerica 2 years, 10 months ago

In Numbers 5, 11-31 God commands priests to provide abortions to adulterous women to rid them of that which is in their belly and to become infertile.

The Bible, of course, has NOTHING to do with US law, but the hypocritical lies of false Christians should be noted here.

Michael LoBurgio 2 years, 10 months ago

The Biblical God is NOT pro-life, he advocates child murder, infanticide, child abuse and abortion:

http://www.evilbible.com/god%27s%20not%20pro-life.htm

Michael LoBurgio 2 years, 10 months ago

Contraception use reduces need for abortion, so you'd think anti-choicers would embrace it. But fact is, they just hate sex.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

By the way, a new study just out shows teen pregnancy is at a thirty year low. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkup/2011/02/teen_birth_decline_back_on_tra.html Why? Because of increased education and free access to cheap contraceptives. Oh my. What are pro-forced birthers/competitive breeders gonna do about this?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

"Obama and his extemist left base will determine what is constitutional and what is not." Now THAT'S a laugh given that we have a conservative Court and the Chief Justice is a Bush II appointee. Really math? Really? I thought you were all for "personal rights"? So you think it's not a violation of civil rights for a doctor to be allowed to lie to and mislead a grown adult about their healthcare information just to influence something they might do?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

That's interesting, math. Obama's bc policy was actually law under Bush II. Oh, did I out that?

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

So did you get your required dose of Fox News today? Don't want you slobbering all over the place. either. But if you do, there are these keyboard covers you can buy that will help protect your computer.

Katara 2 years, 10 months ago

What has been left out of this discussion so far is that this bill prevents wrongful death and wrongful life lawsuits.

Essentially the doctor is shielded from the consequences of withholding information or outright lying to the patient.

If a mother dies as a result of the doctor's actions, her family cannot sue. Women cannot sue for any injuries sustained as a result of withheld or deliberately misleading information. You cannot sue if anything happens to the fetus as a result as well.

This bill takes away a basic right - the right to redress grievances in a court of law.

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 10 months ago

Which is why it will go down in flames, Katara. It's a violation of basic civil rights. For once these yahoo slack jawed mouth breathers from the back woods of Kansas pulled in something that has nothing to do with Roe V. Wade. They are attempting to legislate and codify away the civil rights of an entire class of people (and women are a recognized class by federal law) at the state level. Someone needs to ask them just how that went for the South.

verity 2 years, 10 months ago

Has anybody who supports this bill answered the question "Is is ok for your doctor to lie to you or withhold the truth from you?"

Unless you are willing to have your doctor lie to you about anything and everything then you are a total hypocrite for supporting this bill.

verity 2 years, 10 months ago

So they want the doctor to lie to them?

David Reynolds 2 years, 10 months ago

None of this would be necessary if women & men practiced self control & safe sex. Promiscuity is the issue.

With freedom of choice comes responsibility for the results of the choice. If the individuals will not accept their rightful responsibilities then government does as demanded by the populous.

asixbury 2 years, 10 months ago

Why can't you simply answer the basic question mentioned above? That is the real issue with this bill; not abortion.

verity 2 years, 10 months ago

"Promiscuity is the issue."

I will have to give you credit for speaking the truth, which is more than most of the anti-choice proponents do.

First of all, not all abortions are sought because of "promiscuity." Secondly, since when is "promiscuity" illegal?

Katara 2 years, 10 months ago

Citizen1, perhaps you can answer my so far unanswered question.

There seems to be a premise that women who get pregnant that were not planning on being pregnant were being irresponsible and failed to use birth control.

What happens when the birth control fails through no fault of the woman?

http://tinyurl.com/75aqv5o

How is this irresponsibility?

I really would like an answer to this question. I've asked 6 different times of people who claim the problem is lack of self control, irresponsible behavior, promiscuity. etc. and not one seems to answer that question.

verity 2 years, 10 months ago

They also can't/won't answer the question as to whether it is alright for a doctor to lie to his patient.

Katara 2 years, 10 months ago

Or that this bill violates a basic civil right that we enjoy- the right to redress grievances in a court of law.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.