Archive for Friday, January 13, 2012

Abortion ban to be proposed in Kansas House

State Reps. TerriLois Gregory, R-Baldwin City, and Connie O'Brien, R-Tonganoxie, are among 25 members of the Kansas House backing a measure introduced by pro-life group Personhood Kansas to outlaw abortion.

State Reps. TerriLois Gregory, R-Baldwin City, and Connie O'Brien, R-Tonganoxie, are among 25 members of the Kansas House backing a measure introduced by pro-life group Personhood Kansas to outlaw abortion.

January 13, 2012, 3:26 p.m. Updated January 13, 2012, 5:29 p.m.


— Twenty-five Kansas House members, including TerriLois Gregory, Baldwin City, and Connie O’Brien, Tonganoxie, have agreed to sponsor a proposed "personhood" amendment to the state constitution to ban abortion and are close to introducing it, the leader of a group pursuing the measure said Friday.

Proponents of the measure face resistance from some fellow abortion opponents as well as abortion rights supporters. The measure in Kansas is similar to an abortion ban rejected last year by Mississippi voters, and Kansans for Life, the anti-abortion group with perhaps the most influence at the Statehouse, worries that a push for an immediate ban will backfire on the movement.

The proposal would amend the state constitution's Bill of Rights, to declare that Kansas guarantees "the inalienable rights" of every person, starting with fertilization of the human egg. The Personhood Kansas Committee, the Wichita-area group advocating the measure, sees it as a potential challenge to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court establishing a right to an abortion.

"We're at a point, 40 years into this, that there shouldn't be any confusion about what's in there, in the mother's womb," said committee Chairman Bruce Garren. "Maybe in 1973, we thought it was a blob of tissue."

Freshman Rep. Randy Garber, a Sabetha Republican, began circulating the proposal among his colleagues when legislators opened their session Monday. Garren said Friday that another two-dozen members had joined him and submitted the measure to the House, so that it could be introduced, probably next week.

Two-thirds majorities in both chambers would have to adopt the measure by two-thirds majorities for it to go to a statewide vote. Garber's proposal would put it on the ballot in the Aug. 7 primary, when approval by a simple majority of voters would add it to the constitution.

In Mississippi, nearly 55 percent of the voters in the state's November general election rejected the "personhood" ballot measure there. Colorado voters rejected similar proposals in 2008 and 2010.

Kari Ann Rinker, state coordinator for the Kansas chapter of the National Organization for Women, said the proposed amendment is the most extreme measure abortion opponents could pursue this year. She said it's broad enough to ban common forms of birth control and even fertility treatments.

"Legislators that sponsor and vote for personhood legislation should be prepared to stand with a class of very, very extreme religious zealots," she said. "These are zealots who stand in direct opposition to Kansas citizens' most basic elements of personal privacy and freedom."


gccs14r 3 years, 10 months ago

And all the fertilized eggs that fail to implant in the uterine wall for natural reasons, what of them? Is there going to be a state agency that collects and analyzes used feminine hygiene products to determine if this took place and update the state's death statistics accordingly? Will there be tiny funerals for these single cells?

KSManimal 3 years, 10 months ago

I have a $10,000 life insurance policy on each kid. It's set up so the same premium covers "infinity" kids for about five bucks. Can you imagine the insurance windfall people could get if every fertilized egg were legally a kid? $10,000 every 28 days...."oops, there went another one...better fill out a claim." How's the insurance company gonna prove otherwise?

Not that these pro-lifers ever think about the repercussions of anything, of course.

Kim Murphree 3 years, 10 months ago

Oh my gosh...women's rights have just taken a giant step know, its fine if YOU believe that abortion is wrong...that's your right...don't get one...but a woman should not become a slave of the state/society the moment she becomes pregnant. Rape, incest, those victims should NOT be forced to bear that child. Constitutionally? The most immediate form of Private Property is your own belongs to you under civil law....Separation of Church and state? If your belief system says you should never have an abortion...then follow it, with great blessings, but no one should be forced to follow another person's belief system. Your beliefs do not negate a woman's right to decide about her own body. When did women suddenly become chattel again? When did we lose our individual rights? Why would other women want to take rights away from women??? Stop this insanity. Let women make their own choices about their own families...they are the ones that take the risk in birth...and by the way, KANSAS is terrible with prenatal care and the health of mothers through birth!

hmmm2 3 years, 10 months ago

What about the beating heart of the life within. That life has rights too. Murder is against the law.

onemansopinion 3 years, 10 months ago

It's not murder. By legal standards, it is a medical procedure protected under established case law. Just clearing up the legal vs. moral conflict in your statement.

Brock Masters 3 years, 10 months ago

Not always and everywhere. There are laws that can lead to murder charges if someone kills a fetus.

This bothers me is that sometimes it is just a fetus and sometimes it is a baby depending on who does the killing. It can't be both ways. It is either a baby or not.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

Not necessarily.

A developing human being in the womb is a complex, constantly changing entity.

That's the problem.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago can be both ways. Show someone a blowup photo of a zygote or a blastocyte and ask them what it is, and I guarantee they won't say "it's a baby".

Kinda like how, when you look at an egg, you don't say "oh, look at the cute little baby chick".

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

Depends on how much brain is attached to that beating heart. The legal definition of death in this state is lack of brain activity, not a "beating heart".

KSManimal 3 years, 10 months ago

Life began ONCE, about 3.5 billion years ago, and has been ongoing ever since.

If "life" is so sacred, then I'm sure these pro-life folks don't eat or fight off infections.

Gedanken 3 years, 10 months ago

The heart doesn't start to beat until around 6 weeks. Some people claim a bit earlier, but no matter what - it sure isn't at conception!

kansanjayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Don't freak out this proposal is clearly not legal under current Supreme Court precedent. The bottom line is that you must begin to rebuild a culture of life a step at a time and you cannot overreach by passing legislation that will have no affect. We should be concerned with passing constitutional laws that bring clarity to the issue and help women to become informed and keep the clinics clean and sanitary. After the education process and some additional changes to the Supreme Court only then can we fully protect the unborn. I would suggest passing the heart beat bill which would ban abortion after the fetal heart begins to beat--this will help to educate the public and even those who call themselves pro-choice to see the other side of the issue-- passing sweeping unconstitutional laws at this time would not have a good result. Perhaps, making legislators vote on the issue, could be part of the educational process.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

"I would suggest passing the heart beat bill..." It would also ban life saving transplants and redefine death. But then science was never your strong suit, was it?

Katara 3 years, 10 months ago

kansanjayhawk (anonymous) replies…"help women to become informed"....."After the education process ..."

Well, of course. Women are simply to stupid to know what they are doing. I mean, even Brownback's own budget director believes that single mothers are incapable of spending EITC money on their children's needs.

Interesting. Women are too stupid to understand abortion and therefore should not be allowed to have one and are too stupid to be trusted to spend money on their children's needs. How do you fellows resolve this conundrum?

Excellent strategy there, Gov. Brownback. Tell about 50% of the population that they are incapable of making decisions for themselves and their families.

verity 3 years, 10 months ago

Such smug condescension and arrogance towards women. If only we knew the facts we would see it your way.

Mike1949 3 years, 10 months ago

I wonder if these same people want to picket fallen vets at their funerals also? The seem to be from the same lot!

Fred Whitehead Jr. 3 years, 10 months ago

Yeah, the Phelpes and the Kansas Republicn Party seem to be working hand in hand to convince the rest of the nation that Kansas is the home of systematic foolsihness and facist reformation.

kansanjayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

I guess you are forgetting that the Phelpes were Democrats---they always sought nomination in that party.

Pastor_Bedtime 3 years, 10 months ago

The Christian nanny-state government knows what's best for all. Next they'll be outlawing contraception, and mandating bible study for all.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

Try again, Ag. The idea that the GOP stops caring the minute the baby leaves the birth canal has been well illustrated in this state alone.

kansanjayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Once again you ignore the fact that most of our medical care facilities were started by churches and religious institutions. Christians believe in helping those who are struggling and those who are in need. We believe in loving our neighbors including the unborn in the womb.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

And the entire public health movement was what? Cornflakes? The only hospitals based on religious institutions in this state are in big cities like KC, Topeka and Wichita.The largest hospital in the state is actually affiliated with a state university. Most hospitals are county based institutions in the county seats. You don't get out much, do you?

kansanjayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

you need to do a little more research and you will find that many of these organizations were started as "faith-based". Winchester, Newton, Halstead, Garden City, Great Bend--all with faith based-- hospitals stated by people of faith.

KSManimal 3 years, 10 months ago

And if I walk into any one of those religious-origin facilities, ask for prenatal care, and mention that I have NO health insurance....guess what happens.

ksjayhawk74 3 years, 10 months ago

Just tell them Jesus sent you. That should work.

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

This is why the right to an abortion is a federal issue. States can't just make random stuff up and expect it to actually become law. It is pandering to the base, pure and simple. And the fight between the state and the feds will spend millions of everyone's tax dollars. Nice.

Jeremiah Jefferson 3 years, 10 months ago

why not... california and colorado legalized pot and cities and dont even get me started on gun control in New York, California, and DC...

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

I believe CA and CO legalized medical marijuana, not legalized it for everyone. AZ did as well. The Supreme Court also turned back many of the restrictions cities and states had placed on gun ownership. Why? Because they went against federal law.

Just because a state says all women have to wear a burkha, that doesn't mean they can get away with enforcing it.

kansanjayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

I guess you think "Federal" politicians do not "pander" to the base?

Kate Rogge 3 years, 10 months ago

Koch money is behind this legislation, and Koch money bought and paid for our governor and these 25 House members. What's next? Legislation funding a state 800 number we can call to report pregnant neighbors and coworkers? Legislation requiring pharmacists to report customers who request pregnancy tests?

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

Please give us the names of the 25 buffoons. Thanks in advance.

leexra 3 years, 10 months ago

That is exactly what I was thinking. Seventeen men and three women. Thanks for the link!

thebigspoon 3 years, 10 months ago

Here is an excellent chance to do something positive for yourself, if you believe in choice and women's rights to make their own decisions for their bodies. The toll free phone number for this Personhood outfit is on the linked site, so all you have to do is have everyone you know call the number and tell your representative that you believe this to be wrong and a deal-breaker when it comes time for re-election. Make your statement in no uncertain terms. Maybe, just maybe, we can make a difference by actively taking part in the political process and hit these people where it counts--at the ballot box. Let them know you are the boss, not those who contribute to their camaigns,

texburgh 3 years, 10 months ago

Wow! Virgil Peck is one of the 25! He's so pro-life, he suggests shooting immigrants from helicopters!

That photo says it all!

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

LOL! This ranks up there with the guy in Georgia who wanted to make every case of abnormal vaginal bleeding a "crime scene". Look guys, Mississippi tried it last fall and got their rears handed to them. I suggest you try some other way. Your TRAP laws are doing a good job, aren't they?

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

I had not heard of that Georgia weirdo before, so spent a bit of time googling and reading. Jeez frickin' Louise!!!

coloradoan 3 years, 10 months ago

How about providing the link to save everyone time searching? Thanks.

kansanjayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

Well I guess you could elect some liberals and change all that--oh, not enough votes-- well then sorry...that's the way it goes...

onemansopinion 3 years, 10 months ago

This isn't a question of "liberals". This is a question of a lack of moderates in the House. They like to pass legislation that the state has to spend taxpayer dollars defending in the courts in a failed attempt to get their constituency served while still being able to claim, "Hey, we passed the law, it was those overreaching judges that intruded into your lives".

This IS What Is the Matter With Kansas. No jobs bills, but plenty of repressive/regressive social policy bills. Just embarassing.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

So you're saying the will of the majority is paramount and should be used to force and enslave the minority? There's this thing that will stop you. It's called the Constitution.

1htmama 3 years, 10 months ago

There are some times that abortion should be allowed. It should not be allowed to be used as a type of birth control which is what a lot of women use it for. If you are adult enough to have sex then either use birth control of some type or don't have sex. Be responsible for your actions and face the results.

onemansopinion 3 years, 10 months ago

They aren't allowed to "face the results" without a full range of LEGAL options because of regressive bills like this.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

Hel-lo. Abortion is ALWAYS going to be "birth control". Duh.

So what you're really arguing here is that you think that there are some times that birth control by abortion is OK and other times that it's not OK. Yeesh. Talk about being hypocritical.

And, speaking of being're telling women that they have to take responsibility for their actions, and then refusing to 'allow' them to take responsibility. Good grief.

Like it or not, you have no more right to tell a woman that she CANNOT have an abortion than you do to tell her that she MUST have an abortion. Why? Because SHE is responsible for her actions and the results...not you. Get it?

Cai 3 years, 10 months ago

Usually, the people stating that abortion shouldn't be used as birth control are stating that there should be something that encourages/legislates/protects/does something to prevent women from using abortion as their only birth control time and time again. There are other ways to prevent a woman from having children despite the fact that she is having "relations" with men. Pills, shots, IUDs, condoms, etc. These should be our first line. The percentage of women that do this or would do this is indeed small. Very small. But that doesn't mean that its not a contingency that some of us want to espouse as the 'line' that abortion shouldn't cross.

For me, personally? I'm there. Abortion should not be primary birth control, but I don't get the right to choose for anyone else in either direction.

Kate Rogge 3 years, 10 months ago

Let's bag and tag them! GPS monitoring ankle bracelets, pregnancy jails, roadblocks along state highways...

alm77 3 years, 10 months ago

It didn't pass in MISSISSIPPI; it's not going to in Kansas.

Ann Hamil 3 years, 10 months ago

Yes, but it will get more far right voters out to the polls in the August primary, insuring that the 8 moderate republicans targeted by the Koch brother's interests for removal go down in flames. This is a red herring to that end. They know if won't pass or will be struck down in the courts. The real goal is more redistribution of income upward from the poor and middle class. (see Brownback's new tax plan story).

KSManimal 3 years, 10 months ago

THAT's the most accurate post in this entire thread, right there. +1,000,000

Kate Rogge 3 years, 10 months ago

Absolutely right, goodcitizen. This is throwing red meat to the uber-faithful to ensure voter turnout.

3 years, 10 months ago

somehow i get the feeling this is merely a red herring to keep the libs busy with something else so that brownback can slide in something nasty while they're not looking...

Dan Thalmann 3 years, 10 months ago

Yes. I would like to see the list of 25 legislators to thank them for supporting this measure. I'll never figure out why liberals would support protecting baby owls, but not human babies. Strange.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

Absolutely! Because owl zygotes are so cute. Oh...wait. Never mind.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

It's always interesting to me that men get left out of this equation.

Aren't they also choosing to have sex without contraception? And, aren't they also making a poor decision if they don't want children? Etc.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago


I'm saying that "women choose to have sex without contraception" neatly leaves out the men who are also choosing that, no?

The "poor decision" would thus be both partners, not just the female's.

If you're going to blame people for not using birth control, you have to blame both the men and the women who choose that.

Any man who has unprotected sex and doesn't want children is making a poor decision, don't you think?

kansanjayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

We can only begin to educate the public about the brutal violation of human rights that is abortion on demand if we present laws to counter it. This is democracy at work and a fair compromise will result in fewer abortions taking place in Kansas--that is a good thing--good work legislators!

LadyJ 3 years, 10 months ago

Notice they have no plan for making sure the father is equally responsible for the baby. I never got a dime of child support out of my loser ex. The system can be manipulated. Someone once told me that in their country there is no such thing as a baby without a father. By law, every baby must have a father on record. But hey, Missouri is just a short ride away.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

Oh...but they do have plans "for making sure the father is equally responsible for the baby". It's called the "Fatherhood Initiative". Where non-profits that receive funding from the State are now expected to teach measurable fathering (not parenting, mind you) skills...regardless of their clientele or purpose. Big help, huh?

Richard Heckler 3 years, 10 months ago

Jobs are not on the agenda ............ simply Brownback!

hmmm2 3 years, 10 months ago

But you had that baby. And your baby can smile and embrace you. You will have an event after pregnancy make it one you can live with.

Richard Heckler 3 years, 10 months ago

Other Brownback...

Gov Sam Brownback is not telling Kansas Ciitizens aka leaving out certain details:

His income tax cut/tax cuts = a state wide tax increase = local taxes need to increase in order to make up the loss.

Hundreds of state legislators from all 50 states have gathered in New Orleans for the annual meeting of the American Legislative Exchange Council, known as ALEC.

Critics say the Washington-based organization plays a key role in helping corporations secretly draft model pro-business legislation that has been used by state lawmakers across the country.

Unlike many other organizations, ALEC’s membership includes both state lawmakers and corporate executives who gather behind closed doors to discuss and vote on model legislation.

In recent months, ALEC has come under increasing scrutiny for its role in drafting bills to: attack workers’ rights roll back environmental regulations privatize education funded with our tax dollars deregulate major industries * passing voter ID laws.

Nonetheless, this year’s annual ALEC meeting boasts the largest attendance in five years, with nearly 2,000 guests in attendance. Center for Media and Democracy organization released 800 model bills approved by companies and lawmakers at recent ALEC meetings.

Center for Media and Democracy released 800 model bills, legislation that is straight out of the corporate playbook and drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council.

Richard Heckler 3 years, 10 months ago

a bit more Brownback...

The Koch Brothers, big tobacco, insurance companies, and the drug industry: all behind the shadowy corporate front group known as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

On the surface, ALEC is mostly comprised of thousands of state legislators, each paying a nominal fee to attend ALEC retreats and receive model legislation.

In fact, public sector membership dues account for only around one percent of ALEC’s annual revenues. ALEC's pro-corporate, anti-consumer mission is clear.

Few have ever heard of it, but the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, is the ultimate smoke filled back room.

On the surface, ALEC’s membership is mostly comprised of thousands of state legislators. Each pays a nominal membership fee in order to attend ALEC retreats and receive model legislation. ALEC’s corporate contributors, on the other hand, pay a king’s ransom to gain access to legislators and distribute their corporate-crafted legislation.

So, while the membership appears to be public sector, the bankroll is almost entirely private sector. In fact, public sector membership dues account for only around one percent of ALEC’s annual revenues. ALEC claims to be nonpartisan, but in fact its free-market, pro-business mission is clear.

The result has been a consistent pipeline of special interest legislation being funneled into state capitols. Thanks to ALEC, 826 bills were introduced in the states in 2009 and 115 were enacted into law.

Behind the scenes at ALEC, the nuts and bolts of lobbying and crafting legislation is done by large corporate defense firm Shook, Hardy & Bacon. A law firm with strong ties to the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries, it has long used ALEC’s ability to get a wide swath of state laws enacted to further the interests of its corporate clients.

ALEC’s campaigns and model legislation have run the gamut of issues, but all have either protected or promoted a corporate revenue stream, often at the expense of consumers. For example, ALEC has worked on behalf of:

  • Oil companies to undermine climate change proponents;
  • Pharmaceutical manufacturers, arguing that states should be banned from importing prescription drugs;
  • Telecom firms to block local authorities from offering cheap or free municipally-owned broadband;
  • Insurance companies to prevent state insurance commissioners from requiring insurers to meet strengthened accounting and auditing rules;
  • Big banks, recommending that seniors be forced to give up their homes via reverse mortgages in order to receive Medicaid;
  • The asbestos industry, trying to shut the courthouse door to Americans suffering from mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases; and,
  • Enron to deregulate the utility industries, which eventually caused the U.S. to lose what the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) estimated as $5 trillion in market value.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

Oh, come on. Use your brain. A zygote is not equal to a living, breathing female human being.

I am sooooo tired of folks like you wanting to force Americanized Sharia laws on the rest of us.

Cai 3 years, 10 months ago

okay - but what about consciousness? the things that make us human. A zygote, or your definition of life cannot live by itself. So if that's life and a woman has a miscarriage, do we charge the mother with murder for failing to keep that zygote alive? Or is it just manslaughter because it was an accident?

gccs14r 3 years, 10 months ago

Egg and sperm cells are alive independent of a fertilization event.

Armored_One 3 years, 10 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

mawils 3 years, 10 months ago

If you or a teen thinks they are responsible enough to have sex then they better be ready to except the consequences of your actions. Either you have the baby and keep it or give it up for adoption. It's not the babies fault you were stupid and irresponsible. Abortion should only be ok if you were raped or if the doctors say the baby or mother will not live due to a medical condition. If you are not ready to except the possibility of pregnancy keep your legs closed!!!

Linda Endicott 3 years, 10 months ago

Let me rephrase that for you..."if you are not ready to accept the possibility of pregnancy, then keep your pants on!!"

There...that covers it for both boys and girls...

I still laugh over the old "keep your legs closed" thing...Ann Landers used to talk about holding an aspirin between your knees...

But you know, female anatomy being what it is, it doesn't work...all they gotta do is roll you over...

Ha, ha...

However, what's not funny is that you seem to be assigning all of the blame and responsibility on the know she can't get pregnant by herself, don't you??

Jimo 3 years, 10 months ago

You better issue a press release so the biologists can learn of your startling discovery. Another one to God honoring him as "Greatest Abortionist of All-Time".

Mandie Eutsler 3 years, 10 months ago

I would hazard a guess that these turtles must be an endangered species. Humans aren't going away any time soon. Oddly enough, I've noticed that typically people who oppose abortion and support crazy laws like this one also approve of the war on terror. It's fine that hundreds of thousands of women and children have been considered "collateral damage" when their apartments, daycares, and homes were destroyed by a "smart" bomb. So that kind of murder is fine because they were in the way while us Americans were fighting for our freedom. It's all about freedom isn't it?

Armored_One 3 years, 10 months ago

And the continued expansion of the American Theocracy Movement pushes just a tad bit further.

voevoda 3 years, 10 months ago

There are serious moral issues with abortion, but not everything that is immoral ought to be illegal. Most of the things that are prohibited in the Ten Commandments are not illegal--nor should they be. For hundreds of years, Christian theologians have debated when human life starts, how to categorize willful termination of a pregnancy, or what penalty, if any, should be imposed in cases of abortion. Even now, deeply pious Christians (and persons of other faiths) disagree on these points. Why should the Kansas state legislature seek to impose an opinion held by some but far from all citizens on every woman in the state?

realisticvoter 3 years, 10 months ago

And that is a real concern for you since you live in Kansas. Further do you even have any idea what beaches are affected and how much area that really is?

voevoda 3 years, 10 months ago

Compare the consequences, FalseHopeNoChange, between the prohibition on walking on beach grass and the proposed prohibition on termination of a pregnancy even before the implantation of a fertilized egg. If you can't walk on the grass on the beach, what have you lost? What has it cost you? Nothing. But if women cannot terminate problematical pregnancies or even use forms of birth control that prevent implantation of a fertilized egg, what are the consequences? Sometimes death or seriously damaged health; living for months with the consequences of rape; enormous expenses for medical care; responsibility for the financial support of an unwanted child for the subsequent 18+ years. The situations aren't remotely parallel, FalseHopeNoChange. I'm surprised that you would make yourself seem ridiculous by proposing that they are.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

And men?

Don't they also make these choices, and aren't they equally responsible for them and the outcomes?

voevoda 3 years, 10 months ago

FalseHopeNoChange, You seem to think that by engaging in the act of sex, a woman is committing herself to become pregnant, and if she doesn't want to risk a pregnancy, she shouldn't have sex. Okay, let's examine your premises: Many women who seek abortions do so after the failure of birth control. They were explicitly not consenting to pregnancy. Abstinence is a fine ideal for unmarried women (and men). But it is hardly a practical alternative for married women. A majority of women who seek abortions are married.

Jack McEnaney 3 years, 10 months ago

Shouldn't we then err on the side of caution? Think about how much has changed in the past forty years or so with respect to abortion and what we know about it. How much have we learned from sonograms in that time? It was believed in the good ol days that the "zygotes" didn't feel a thing, they weren't even really alive. Now there have been many people who assisted in abortion who say that when you watch the sonogram of an abortion being performed you can see the zygote fighting for their life trying to escape. This makes me think that for some reason we haven't learned everything yet. Isn't that what scientists are called to do? Learn as much as they can? And until you can prove that no such life exists should we really be eliminating creatures that have heartbeats, hiccups, and depend on us now, just as we will depend on them in fifty years?

voevoda 3 years, 10 months ago

Who should suffer the consequences of your "caution," jhawk43? Women whose health would be damaged or who would lose their lives because of a dangerous pregnancy? It's easy for persons for whom the question is only theoretical to make decisions based solely upon hypotheticals and moral reasoning. But real women today are facing these issues every day. Who is better placed to decide: a group of state legislators, or the women who will have to live with the consequences--or even die because of outsiders' "caution"? Let women decide these very complicated and wrenching medical and moral issues for themselves, without the intrusion of government.

Jack McEnaney 3 years, 10 months ago

How many women are getting abortions so they don't die. I have a relative who gave her life so that another relative might have a chance to live. She had breast cancer, the docs wanted her to have an abortion, but instead she died so this girl might live. Let's compromise voe. Abortion only in cases where the woman will certainly die otherwise. In all other cases it is out until we know more. What do you think.

Katara 3 years, 10 months ago

I am guessing that your relative did not have any other children. Most women who are given the same option and who also have other children choose to live to raise their other children.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

Either way it's an impossible decision, I would think.

Like Sophie's Choice.

voevoda 3 years, 10 months ago

I think, jhawk43, that it's rarely a case of certainty whether a pregnancy will kill a woman, but quite often there is a statistical risk. Should women be forced to give up their lives for the sake of a fetus? According to some religious traditions, the life of the woman counts more, but apparently not in yours; you're happy to force women to sacrifice their lives, just like your relative did. That was her choice, but other women might reasonably choose differently--and the law must allow them to do so. What about the cases where there is some risk to the woman? Who should decide then? By your way, it would be some state-designated board that would decide whether a woman's circumstances warranted an abortion. Those so-called "experts" would make the decision even though they didn't have to suffer any consequences for it, and the woman would have to live--or die--with the consequences of a decision she was forbidden to make for herself. I'm sure, jhawk43, that you wouldn't want to be a woman in that circumstance, with some government body making life-or-death decisions for you. So why would you want to put anyone else in that situation?

Jimo 3 years, 10 months ago


I thought at first you meant: Shouldn't the gov't act with caution before choosing to insert itself into matters that have been the sole responsibility of women since the dawn of time.

Instead, I now see you were referring to the other definition: Always be cautious so that the devil doesn't confuse us with misleading "scientific" "facts" in "scare" quotes.

Somehow I have the sneaking suspicion that "how much has changed in the past forty years" doesn't refer to scientific knowledge but rather an accumulation of unscientific propaganda that parlays ignorance into political action.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

This is baloney. A human zygote lasts a whole 4 days. It doesn't even grow...the cells merely divide without growing (mitosis). It doesn't turn into an embryo till the 5th day...and it's gotta be an embryo before it becomes a fetus.

So anyone claiming that they have "assisted in abortion [and] say that when you watch the sonogram of an abortion being performed you can see the zygote fighting for their life trying to escape" is either deliberately lying for dramatic effect...or sure as heck shouldn't be assisting with abortions because they are utterly clueless.

ivalueamerica 3 years, 10 months ago

Judeo Christian Shahira Law.

The Kansas Taliban is at it again.

blindrabbit 3 years, 10 months ago

I like the Kansas, Mississippi connection! Mississippi has Haley Barber, Kansas has, you know! Makes the Kansas slide to insignificance and ignorance faster!

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

So will this mean that Planned Parenthood won't have to change the size of their janitor's closet after all?

Richard Heckler 3 years, 10 months ago

Abortions cannot be necessary until after a pregnancy is on the table. So what exactly is Gov Brownback and his busy bodies doing to prevent pregnancy? Nothing!!! Why you ask? Because they don't know how and they frown on education = promoting ignorance.

How do they intend to take control of wild sperm?

Planned Parenthood prevents abortions:

Birth control allows us to prevent pregnancy and plan the timing of pregnancy. Need birth control? * My Method * Compare Effectiveness of Birth Control Options * Abstinence * Birth Control Implant (Implanon) * Birth Control Patch (Ortho Evra) * Birth Control Pills * Birth Control Shot (Depo-Provera) * Birth Control Sponge (Today Sponge) * Birth Control Vaginal Ring (NuvaRing) * Breastfeeding as Birth Control * Cervical Cap (FemCap) * Condom * Diaphragm * Female Condom * Fertility Awareness-Based Methods (FAMs) * IUD * Morning-After Pill (Emergency Contraception) * Outercourse * Spermicide * Sterilization for Women * Vasectomy * Withdrawal (Pull Out Method)

Richard Heckler 3 years, 10 months ago

Now once this abortion issues takes center stage for the one millionth time what on earth will Governor Sam Brownback and his out of state cronies be doing to us while the spotlight is on the hot issue of abortion?

Grab your wallets!!! Governor Sam Brownback is not a friend to consumers,the unemployed or the common taxpayer. There can never be enough eyes on Gov Sam Brownback and his ALEC agenda.

Gov Sam Brownback will be busy with his ALEC buddies and their special interest money going after republicans who do not blindly support the Brownback/ALEC agenda.

Voters across the state need to very aware that Gov Sam Brownback is behind this covert operation of replacing the Kansas republican party with his radical brand of politics. Gov Sam Brownback is not a republican.

irvan moore 3 years, 10 months ago

we are leaving out one very important point, these idiots are going to be wasting a lot of our legisative time and money

Armored_One 3 years, 10 months ago

Should they outlaw vasectomies as well? Hysterectomies?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 10 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

kujayhawk7476 3 years, 10 months ago

This proposed law will be ruled unconstitutional. With all of the other problems this state faces why do we continuously waste time in the legistalure on this issue. Throw the bums out who keep this issue in front of us!

Armored_One 3 years, 10 months ago

So will there be a ban on naturally occuring pregnancy halting products, like ruda, which has been used in the Caribbean for several centuries by santeras, priestesses of santeria?

This website directly states what herbs to use to induce a miscarriage.

Restrict abortion to 18 and older, with the usual exemptions of rape and incest. Under 18, the infant is immediately placed into foster care and made available for adoption.

Katara 3 years, 10 months ago

There are a lot of prescribed medications that can cause miscarriage as well.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

Are you seriously suggesting that a 12 year old girl who is molested by her dad also be forced into bearing his child? I sure hope not.

Armored_One 3 years, 10 months ago

"Restrict abortion to 18 and older, with the usual exemptions of rape and incest."

I'm guessing you didn't read this sentence all that closely, so I thought I would cut and paste it to give you a second chance.

Centerville 3 years, 10 months ago

But abortion has been so good for Kansas! Why, otherwise, Sibileus would still be fetching coffee for the trial lawyers.

Jimo 3 years, 10 months ago

I always wondered who rented Osama's old cave.

lilygrace 3 years, 10 months ago

What is the obsession that Republicans have with all things sexual? If they could they would set up shop in every woman's uterus to monitor and control the action. If they're not worried about what women do with their own bodies then they fret over homosexuality. Republican's like to say reduce big government and regulations but they are the most intrusive group of "regulators" I've ever seen.

frank mcguinness 3 years, 10 months ago

No actually, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Bob Allen, Glenn Murphy Jr, John Ensign, Newt Gingrich, RNC Bondage clubs, Mark Sanford, David Vitter, Ed Schrock, and about a million more names are all Republicans/ Conservatives who were all too focused on Sex/ Homosexuality before they became embroiled in their own problems.

woodscolt 3 years, 10 months ago

Wrong, Tom (marianna island kidnap and torture women) Delay, Newt (the salamander have I got an affair(s) for you) Gingrinch, Dubya(No lie is to big for me to sell)Bush, Jack, (have I got a scam for you) Abramhoff ,Ralph (have I got a prayer for you scam and terrorist) Reed, Grover (pledge or die) Norquist , Oliver ( our bin laden) North..... are democrats. Your so confused falsey.

Gedanken 3 years, 10 months ago

You are confusing about regulating it and getting "some". Again, it is their own damn business. I only care if it shows the hypocrisy of the person or has a detrimental effect on their job that I elected them to do. Personally, I am okay with the president getting some side action if it makes him a bit calmer the next time he has to decide to start a war or not. Everything else is between him, his family and whatever spiritual guidance he may have.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

The problem is that this isn't just about the rights of the unborn. It's also about the rights of the breathing, thinking, independent mother without whose womb the unborn cannot survive for a good deal of it's "unborn life". Plus it's also about the rights the rest of us do...and do NOT...have in relation to them both.

Like it or not, we have no more right to tell a woman that she CANNOT have an abortion than we do telling her that she MUST have an abortion. We simply are NOT the arbiters of personal health care decisions that are rightfully made by a woman and her doctor. And, like it or not, we do NOT have the right to tell a woman that she must die for her unborn child...while that very same woman absolutely DOES that the right to make that decision for herself.

And the "rights" of the unborn? Sorry, but it does NOT have more rights than its mother. It does NOT have the right to demand that she die so that, maybe, it might live. It does not have the right to demand that it be carried to full term, regardless of the emotional, health or other costs to the mother. Indeed, it cannot claim or be aware of ANY right for itself because, after all, it's unborn. So the truth is that the only people demanding its "rights" are those third parties who actually have no place in the decision-making.

Frankly, the idea that something with no brain waves and no heartbeat, or something the size of a kidney bean (2 months) or that weighs an ounce (3 months) is a "person" with all the rights that go along with being a "person" is aburd. But it's what these 3rd parties who really should have no say want to impose, regardless of the unintended consequences and regardless of the mother. Sorry, but there's no "respect" there. Certainly not for the one person who can actually express her opinion and demand her rights be respected.

Armored_One 3 years, 10 months ago

Since you are so keen on doing away with abortion, I'm sure you will have no qualms with raising taxes to pay for free prenatal care for all pregnant women, greatly reduce the price of NICU, state funded child care, and a few other programs that would be needed.

Otherwise, you just want power over someone else's life, most likely because you have little to no power in your own life, be it a reality or a perceived reality in your mind.

frank mcguinness 3 years, 10 months ago

I'm glad our state budget has the ability to fight this in a federal court for the next 3 years.

I truly think this is a good thing for Kansas because despite our conservative population, once we become tangled in a huge financial/ legal mess we will most likely get fed up with our ultra conservative legislators/ governor and reject them in subsequent elections. Remember we have a history of electing moderates and even democrats in Kansas.

Centerville 3 years, 10 months ago

Merrill makes a good point: it's up to you (not your government) to prevent your own unwanted pregnancy. And, I'll remind you that our former governor pronounced that there's no such thing as statutory rape - it's just "Romeo and Juliet".

Jan Rolls 3 years, 10 months ago

Let's list the names and addresses of these 25 idiots so when the babies are born we can drop them off that their houses so they can take care of them.

Armstrong 3 years, 10 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

woodscolt 3 years, 10 months ago

First there was a coupe to take over the republican party and then under the guise of the republican party there was a coupe to take over our country and then a coupe to take back our country became necessary. The time is long since passed to to take back america. The republican party platform more resembles that of the westboro baptist church than that of the real republicans (moderates) who still have their platform grounded to mother earth and the American people, agree with them or not. Call it like it is: the republican party = the alexican party= the for profit only perpetrators of the coupe: The few, the greedy, the powerful, the verrrrrrry rich getting richer at the expense of the Joe plumbers.

Jimo 3 years, 10 months ago

Cause the first thing every woman wants to face after returning from the doctor after a miscarriage are two nosy policemen to start a potential murder investigation!

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

Oh and by the way, math, the truly huge point here is that Tebow's mother CHOSE to reject it. She wasn't forced into it. Choice goes both ways.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

It's amazing how many of these "pro-life" people refuse to believe that when the rest of us say "pro-choice", we really do mean pro-CHOICE, not pro-abortion.

Being pro-choice doesn't mean we'd EVER even consider having an abortion ourselves...just that we realize that's it's not a choice we can make for someone else.

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

Does this mean Tebow can never be President?

Interestingly, I tend not to take the advice of doctors in the Phiippines either.

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

Did you read math's comment? Tebow was born in the Phillipines, hence the president comment. His mother also received some bad medical advice from doctors there.

I really don't care if you like my posts or not.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

The very same thought had crossed my mind after all that birther nonsense :-)

Jeff Kilgore 3 years, 10 months ago

While I am pro-choice, several things irritate me about the whole issue. First of all, with every means of contraception available, pregnancy is 99% avoidable. Then, if the hard-line conservatives drop the price of RU-486, this whole issue would die away.

I sometimes believe that both liberals and conservatives keep this debate going just to keep some feeling of mutual hate alive.

voevoda 3 years, 10 months ago

RU-486 would be banned under the proposed legislation.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

The vast majority of abortions now being done are "chemical abortions" (by RU-486) rather than "mechanical abortions" (either by D&C or vacuum). Believe me, RU-486 would be the FIRST to go down.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago


And they don't answer the question I've been asking either - what about the men?

sciencegeek 3 years, 10 months ago

Quit wasting the taxpayer's time. You got all kind of concessions on this issue the last session, so how about working on something PRACTICAL, like the budget and education and creating jobs?

Just outlaw abortion, birth control, homosexuality, sex outside of heterosexual marriage, and be done with it. Better yet, just have Sam put it in an executive order to save the legislature the time.

deec 3 years, 10 months ago

Legalizing abortion did not substantially increase the number of abortions; it just made them safer. I have a book from the 1930's in which it is estimated that the number of abortions in the U.S. at that time was about a million. I have a magazine from the mid-1960s, in which the number of abortions is estimated to be about a million. Facts about abortion rates: • Nearly half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and about four in 10 of these are terminated by abortion.[1] Twenty-two percent of all pregnancies (excluding miscarriages) end in abortion.[2]

• Forty percent of pregnancies among white women, 67% among blacks and 53% among Hispanics are unintended.[1] In 2008, 1.21 million abortions were performed, down from 1.31 million in 2000. However, between 2005 and 2008, the long-term decline in abortions stalled. From 1973 through 2008, nearly 50 million legal abortions occurred.[2]

• Each year, two percent of women aged 15–44 have an abortion. Half have had at least one previous abortion.[2,3]

• At least half of American women will experience an unintended pregnancy by age 45, and, at current rates, one in 10 women will have an abortion by age 20, one in four by age 30 and three in 10 by age 45.[4,5]

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago


Doesn't that seem like a rather large number of unintended pregnancies to you?

I know birth control isn't perfect, but it's a lot better than 50% effective.

voevoda 3 years, 10 months ago

jafs, If you think about the statistics, the numbers make sense. Even the best birth control methods used in complete consistency with instructions fail--1%-7% each year, depending upon the method. Add to that natural inconsistency in usage--the occasional missed pill, miscalculation of fertile period, defective condom, etc. Multiply that by the number of years that women are fertile and sexually active--about 30 years, according to the figures deec is citing. About half of American women experiencing an unintended pregnancy seems statistically likely.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

It didn't say that half of women experience an unintended pregnancy, it said that half of the pregnancies are unintended - that's rather a different thing.

That means if a woman gets pregnant 4 times, 2 of them are unintended.

I know that's a little simplistic, but it illustrates the difference.

Also, your 1-7% includes a defective condom failure, "natural inconsistency" is a nice way of saying people aren't careful enough, etc.

I would venture to say that many people have unprotected sex, and should be using birth control, based on the statistics provided.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

It seems like you answered your own question.

The reality is that birth control is only effective IF it is used and used correctly. And, to assume that will happen? Well, excuse me while I go roll around on the floor laughing for a while :-)

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

But, it's not funny if a lot of those situations become abortions.

That's a point that should be considered.

Wouldn't it be better to prevent unwanted pregnancies with birth control than with abortion?

Beth Ennis 3 years, 10 months ago

when is the religious right going to stop forcing their religion down everyone else's throat? Don't they know we were formed as a secular country for a reason??? Which religion are we going to pick to base our laws on. Christianity? Too broad--which one, Catholic, Lutheran, Baptist, Methodist, Mormon? Which one. Then, if we make abortion illegal, we need to make adultery illegal, and divorce illegal and then maybe multiple wives legal (not husbands mind you, there is no where in the bible where one woman had multiple husbands). Oh, I forgot, drinking, smoking and dancing would be illegal too if we based it off of what the Baptists believe. The Mormons don't believe in caffeine, so no pop, coffee or tea either. (wonder if chocolate is in that group?) Where does it stop? I am a Christian, but that is MY choice. No one forced me. God doesn't force us to believe in him and follow his wishes, why do these conservative religious types think they should be forcing God on everyone else? That is not what he wants. You can't have it both ways. If we could actually teach sex education, to include abstinence AND birth control, and then make birth control affordable and easy to obtain, the abortions could be safe, legal and very few and far between.

Mike Wasikowski 3 years, 10 months ago

"We should error on the side of life, not death."

That sounds like good advice to me. I trust you'll support the right of a woman with an ectopic pregnancy to have a life-saving abortion rather than sentencing her to death?

Beth Ennis 3 years, 10 months ago

for you it might not be about religion, but it is a religious issue. If christians would teach their children about abstinence and birth control, a lot of abortions wouldn't be necessary. If we made birth control easier to get, a lot of abortions wouldn't be necessary. The religious right prevents schools from teaching sex education. So many are hypocrites who weren't virgins when they got married. I work with some as does my husband. But they don't want their children to be taught anything but abstinence. That is not realistic.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

The problem is that we devalue the lives of women by telling them what they must or must not do with their wombs. By telling them that they are not as important as something smaller than a kidney bean. By telling them that, because they obviously brought this all on themselves, they've proven they aren't capable of making intelligent decisions, so total strangers get to decide for them.

"Erring on the side of life" doesn't mean granting legal "personhood" status to zygotes at the expense of thinking, breathing, unique human beings.

And "erring on the side of life" doesn't mean that "you" get to determine whose life is erred on the side of when there is a real live thinking human being 100% directly involved and affected.

Frankly, erring on the side of life sounds really good...but it ignores the fact that death is an natural part of life, and that this simply isn't a black-and-white issue.

kansanjayhawk 3 years, 10 months ago

I think you are going a little OVERBOARD---using no common-sense -- where we respect religious values but do not go to extremes... Abortion... is a issue we should all be able to agree on as it is the destruction of a human life!

JayhawkFan1985 3 years, 10 months ago

A cultural revolution of Taliban proportions is underway in this state. Another step in their giant leap backwards....

Fred Whitehead Jr. 3 years, 10 months ago

This is all simply a matter of the fraudulant "christian" right wing facists wanting to beat their chests and bellow in the run up to the national election. Kansas voters have been flummoxed by these republican terrorists for years now, never mind that the real issues are revenue, jobs, health matters (not including rpression of health services to women) and a host of other real issues. But the incendeary nature, the head-line grabbing appeal of this matter to the brain dead and bucolic rural religious nut cases who voted them in is seen by these idiot fools that we have elected is imagined to be useful to their causes to run it up in the face of federal law, to grandstand on what great religious examples they are and a lot of other crap and baloney. I seriously doubt that any of this will accomplish anything except continue to convince the rest of the nation that the state of Kansas and it's theocratic governer and cronies is a wasteland of foolishness and throwback nitwits.

jaywalker 3 years, 10 months ago

Round and round we go. If only men gave birth. Then abortion would be a God-given right and we wouldn't have to hear about this nausea.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

We'd just have to hear about their nausea. On and on and on and on and on and... :-)

voevoda 3 years, 10 months ago

When the state legislature is willing to make sure that women don't suffer harm because of pregnancies, then it might be in a position to require women to carry through with them. What would the state legislature need to do? 1) Guarantee free medical care for all women, including birth control and pregnancy care, and for any children born to them, up to age 18. 2) Provide tax credits for children sufficient to offset any financial hardship. Yes, that means retaining and greatly increasing the tax credit the governor wants to eliminate. 3) Guarantee paid maternity leave for women who give birth, and prohibit firing them or eliminating their positions because of pregnancy and childbirth. 4) Enforce stringently the obligation of fathers to provide for their offspring a full 1/2 of the cost of their support, regardless of the father's marital status, income level, or other financial responsibilities. Confiscate their property down to their home, car, and personal possessions if necessary. The same with mothers, especially non-custodial mothers. 5) Support medical research generously to a) reduce risks in pregnancy, including especially in older women and in women with chronic medical conditions; b) identify and correct inherited genetic defects; c) formulate a variety of safe and effective methods of preventing conception. 6) Provide inexpensive, high-quality, conveniently-located day care for pre-school children, including infants. If you don't think that the state government can or should do the above-listed, then you ought to agree that the state has no business dictating to women that they must carry all pregnancies to term.

Tanya Spacek 3 years, 10 months ago

Careful now, you're making too much sense.

mrf 3 years, 10 months ago

There seems to be a lot of confusion about this bill and so many commenters are just focused on the part that outlaws abortion. Other commenters righteously state that there should be no need of abortion, we have birth control methods. What most people are missing about this law is that it also prohibits most popular forms of contraception including the pill, IUD, and the morning after pill. So whether you agree or not on abortion, if you or anyone you know use birth control, this bill would make that a crime. It takes away everyone's right to be responsible. That is why Mississippi rejected it.

Those 3 women and 22 men who sponsored this horrendous bill should be ashamed. I think a responsible task as citizens is to ask them about their preferrential birth control use. Since they have no problem with gov't getting into the bedrooms of all Kansans, I think we as state citizens should know if they use birth control and if so, what kinds. If that doesn't send them a message, than nothing will.

Katara 3 years, 10 months ago

You make excellent points. I hope that people on here listen and take action with their legislators because of your points.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

Please explain how this law outlaws birth control, other than the "morning after" pill?

All other methods of birth control I'm aware of don't prevent implantation of a fertilized egg, they prevent fertilization of the egg.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

Please go research Mirena and other forms of IUDs. There are any number of BC methods that don't prevent conception; they prevent implantation.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

My previous research showed me that IUD's prevent fertilization.

What other forms are you talking about?

I'll look up Mirena.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

Mirena is an IUD - 2 out of the 3 possible ways it may prevent pregnancy prevent fertilization - 1 way may have some impact on implantation.

That's from their own website.

Also, it's a bit disturbing to me that they say they don't actually know how it prevents pregnancy - I would be unlikely to choose it over other forms of bc, especially ones in which the mechanism is clear.

My main point is that there are plenty of bc methods that prevent fertilization, so even if they outlawed ones that prevent implantation, if there are any, consumers would still have a wide range of contraception available.

The real problem with bc is that people aren't using it enough, or correctly, in my view.

mrf 3 years, 10 months ago

This should help. It clears up the difference between conception versus implantation. Hormonal birth control methods, like the pill, patch, ring, etc. prevents implantation, not conception.

But male viewers beware since the words uterus and Fallopian tube are involved. It might make you queasy to hear such saucy language, but when we start making laws that are specific to women's health, you need to know how the plumbing works. And why would anyone want to ban effective birth control methods? Really, we don't live in a theocracy.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

Birth control pills prevent ovulation first and foremost, then make it harder for sperm to fertilize any eggs - the last and most likely least effective way they prevent birth would have to do with implantation.

I don't know why people have misinformation about these and iud's, etc.

By the way, I'm not interested in banning any birth control personally - my main point is that there are plenty of effective methods available that prevent fertilization.

mrf 3 years, 10 months ago

Well that's good, but apparently the state senators have no problem banning birth control.

The other main problem with this bill is how is it going to be enforced? Who gets punished for using birth control? Doctors, pharmacists, women? And an even more problematic question, if a fertilized egg is a person, then what happens to embryos at IVF clinics? What happens if a woman has a miscarriage? Will she get charged with homicide? Manslaughter? There are serious ethical questions about this law.

Will we discuss the ethical questions about calling a fertilized egg a person? Do they care? Probably not. We, both men and women need to force these questions onto the lawmakers.

jafs 3 years, 10 months ago

All good questions.

And, yet, whether or not they're asked or answered, even if the law is passed, people will have access to a wide variety of effective contraception.

The problem with bc is that people don't use it, or use it correctly, in my view - not that it's not available.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

Interesting that you used the website that you did to quote from, considering how much refutation was actually given in the article. I'm guessing that all you read was the case file information, the equivalent of what one commenter called "Pro-lifer porn". So is that what gets you off? Reading about how a child too young to know anything else was being forced out of a normal life for her age and thinking, "That isn't good enough."? I wonder what would be a good enough reason for you if you were 15?

TinmanKC 3 years, 10 months ago

I will listen to pro-lifers when they also support the repeal of the death penalty and health coverage for ALL.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 10 months ago

And you're assuming that people who don't have health coverage don't have jobs...why???

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

So then you really aren't "pro-life"? Because if you were, you would do anything to preserve it, including granting healthcare as a right, not a privilege.

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

Tom McCune 3 years, 10 months ago

These people are attempting to defy the will of God, which actually required the temple priests to perform abortions in some situations. Under biblical law, the unborn fetus was not a person. It was considered property.

If you don't like it, talk to Moses. He wrote it. I didn't.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

An afterthought. Has any one else noticed that 92% of the people who signed on for this bill are...oh yeah, MEN?

Katara 3 years, 10 months ago

The same procedure is also used if placenta remains in the uterus after birth.

Cait McKnelly 3 years, 10 months ago

Another conspiracy theorist. ooooOOOOOooooo

Commenting has been disabled for this item.