- Home
- Politics
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Health
- Religion
- Society
- Tech
- Money
- People
- Science
- Galleries
Politics
Arizona State Rep. Terri Proud Wants to Force Women to Watch Abortion
Arizona State Rep. Terri Proud (R) recently told a voter, in an email, that women should be required to “watch an abortion being performed” prior to having one.
AZCentral.com reports that Proud wrote: “Personally I’d like to make a law that mandates a woman watch an abortion being performed prior to having a 'surgical procedure.' If it’s not a life it shouldn’t matter, if it doesn’t harm a woman then she shouldn’t care, and don’t we want more transparency and education in the medical profession anyway?"
"We demand it everywhere else. Until the dead child can tell me that she/he does not feel any pain – I have no intentions of clearing the conscience of the living – I will be voting YES.”
Rep. Proud made headlines earlier this year when she sponsored a bill requiring the Bible to be taught as an elective in high school.
She is now co-sponsoring a bill that would allow employers to opt out of covering birth control in their health insurance plans.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Comments
It's really hard to judge her
It's really hard to judge her and the others with the same opinion. I think that abortion isn't that bad in case parents can't take care of a child. It'll be better if a child is desired, than born and unloved.
Susan Chapman, creator of thesudokugame.net
INTRUSION INTRUSION INTRUSION
INTRUSION INTRUSION INTRUSION AND MORE INTRUSION BY THE GOVERNMENT VIA THE REPUBLICAN PARTY INTO OUR LIVES....
DO REPUBLICANS REALIZE THAT THEY ARE TWO-FACED HYPOCRITES WITH THIS MANTRA OF KEEPING GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR BEDROOMS????????
AMERICAN SHOULD SLAM THEM FOR THIS!!!!!!!!!
MS. PROUD.....FOCUS ON JOBS....NOT GOVERNMENT INTRUSION.
HOW'S THAT FOR A TOP-SELLING BUMPER STICKER!
Sir, you need some anger
Sir, you need some anger management sessions. Three different posts on three different articles and always angry.
jmcv02
As someone who is pro-choice,
As someone who is pro-choice, I appreciate your enthusiasm. However, as a former English teacher I feel as if I must point out some fallacies in your argument so you can learn from your mistakes.
Number one: Though not a fallacy, I would still request that you please turn off the caps lock. It's obnoxious and makes me want to cry. Also, please refrain from over-emphasizing your punctuation marks. I'm sure that people will still be able to tell that you are asking a question if you only have one question mark.
Number two: Your use of generalizations is polarizing and may open up your argument to loopholes. Instead of saying "Republicans", say "pro-life advocates, many of whom are Republican." By associating one particular stance on an issue with one party, we dig ourselves deeper into the trenches of partisan politics.
Number three: Here's a big one. Your use of ad hominem argumentation without any supporting evidence makes your argument seem both biased and shallow. Instead of just calling Republicans "two faced hypocrites", point out examples of hypocrisy, thereby proving your claim and making your argument better constructed.
If you need more help with constructing a solid argument, I'd suggest looking into renting an entry level English textbook, or perhaps asking a student for help.
As someone who is pro-choice,
As someone who is pro-choice, I appreciate your enthusiasm. However, as a former English teacher I feel as if I must point out some fallacies in your argument so you can learn from your mistakes.
Number one: Though not a fallacy, I would still request that you please turn off the caps lock. It's obnoxious and makes me want to cry. Also, please refrain from over-emphasizing your punctuation marks. I'm sure that people will still be able to tell that you are asking a question if you only have one question mark.
Number two: Your use of generalizations is polarizing and may open up your argument to loopholes. Instead of saying "Republicans", say "pro-life advocates, many of whom are Republican." By associating one particular stance on an issue with one party, we dig ourselves deeper into the trenches of partisan politics.
Number three: Here's a big one. Your use of ad hominem argumentation without any supporting evidence makes your argument seem both biased and shallow. Instead of just calling Republicans "two faced hypocrites", point out examples of hypocrisy, thereby proving your claim and making your argument better constructed.
If you need more help with constructing a solid argument, I'd suggest looking into renting an entry level English textbook, or perhaps asking a student for help.
A double post sort of takes
A double post sort of takes the wind out the sails of your pseudo-intellectual critique.
I think that she should watch
I think that she should watch a video of a mother and child dying in delivery because of a failure to do an abortion that should have been performed.
Or, and this is a really radical idea.....how about the religious nuts STOP TRYING TO FORCE THEIR RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE INTO LAW OF THIS SECULAR NATION.
Perhaps this state rep needs to take a look at the US Constitution; specifically, the 1st amendment.
One need not be anti-choice to oppose abortion for themselves, but one does need to be anti-American to use your religion as a reason to pass a law that denies choice to those that do not share your view.
The insanity principle is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results. The far right, the far left, vegans, creationists and other extremists believe in the insanity principle, religiously.
This is not about religion. I
This is not about religion. I don't go to church and I still think abortions are wrong with a few exemptions. Its a developing child abortion destroys. I wouldn't support an abortion ban, let people chose for themselves.
jmcv02
If you think abortions are
If you think abortions are wrong, don't get one. If your religion forbids it, don't get one.
On the other hand, if you consider it a viable option to dying in childbirth or from complications, or a good alternative to watching it and yourself starve because you can't begin to afford to raise a child; and your religion doesn't care one way or another on the topic - choose what's right for you.
If the overly religious think it is preferable to have a child born than aborted before it becomes a child because the parents can't afford to raise it, why not have the churches offer to pay them a monthly stipend to have the child and raise it properly? A congregation of 100 people could easily support the $1k or so per month it would take to help them make it. Giving $10/person each Sunday for 18 years means that the church could support 4 families and prevent 4 of the abortions they currently spend all kinds of money and vitriol opposing with negligible results. Not only would they be helping to stop abortion in a helpful and constructive way, but they would also be taking real steps towards reducing poverty without becoming their sole means of support ($12k/year for 2+ people is hardly comfortable living, but if it supplements a minimum-wage job, it makes raising a kid that's not malnourished possible).
Do I expect any churches to put their money where their mouths are and actually do it? No, $10/week from their parishioners is far too great a price to ask of these "godly" people whose role model said to give up all their worldly goods to take care of the poor and disadvantaged and sick. And it cuts into the priest's second-house-and-airplane fund, too.
I agree with that sentiment.
I agree with that sentiment. It should be a choice made by the individual based on their beliefs.
The problem is that the CHRISTIAN RELIGIOUS NUTS are trying to ban abortions altogether, effectively trying to force a single religion's view on the rest of the nation, as law of the land.
THAT is where the opposition to the anti-choice crowd is based; the rest of the nation does not want to be ruled by "Christian sharia" or heresy laws. And abortion will only be the beginning. Once they gain a legal foothold with that, then other single religion viewpoint laws will be enacted and soon enough it will be jail or death for violating them.
History proves that and I DO NOT WANT the Pope, or any other religious leader/religion to rule my government. Mixing politics and religion is what started the collapse of the Roman empire.
Our founding fathers figured that one out when they wrote the 1st Amendment (which was ratified the same year as the Constitution), which establishes (in the words of Benjamin Franklin and John Adams) a wall of separation between church and state.
The insanity principle is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results. The far right, the far left, vegans, creationists and other extremists believe in the insanity principle, religiously.
I'd agree with this law if,
I'd agree with this law if, and only if, it was Terri Proud's abortion being performed that they had to watch, and a new film is produced each year the law is in force to make sure it is accurately portraying current medical techniques and standards.
Shouldn't the law also include being required to watch videos of the operation in question for every kind of surgical procedure? So that if you are having a wisdom tooth removed, you'd need to see a video of that kind of procedure; and if you're going to have a colon polyp removed, you'd need to watch a video of that procedure?
It's a seriously bad thing when a) politicians attempt to legislate morality, b) under-educated politicians with no medical background attempt to legislate medical procedures [especially since it will add significantly to the cost of medical care].
Seriously, allowing employers to pick and choose what types of medical care are covered under the health plan is an entirely unwarranted invasion of employee/patient privacy. Forcing an employer's backwards religious views upon employees and their covered family members in the doctor's office is no different from requiring employees to participate in religious ceremonies of the employer's choice in the workplace.
No wonder people in AZ shoot their politicians.
Why should I help pay for an
Why should I help pay for an abortion if I don't agree with it? Give me the right to choose thats all I ask, I don't want to force my opinions on you. If you don't like your employer because they're are religious get a new job, youre not a slave you can leave.
jmcv02
Nobody's asking you to pay
Nobody's asking you to pay for anybody else's abortion. This is a law trying to stop women from getting an abortion. It says nothing about who's paying for it. If a woman wants to pay to have an abortion she should absolutely have the right to do that.
Its a law about having to
Its a law about having to watch a video before you get the procedure. According to universal healthcare I will have too, theres no opt out. i hope I can just keep the goverment out of my healthcare!
jmcv02
Sadly the health care law
Sadly the health care law isn't universal health care. It requires everyone to have private insurance. That means that the money is coming from the patient's premiums. If you want to talk about opting out of things you disagree with then I want all of my money back from the Iraq war, oil subsidies and Cheney's heart transplant.
But, I agree that we shouldn't pass more laws requiring unnecessary and deliberately embarrassing medical procedures like this and the sonogram laws. A woman should be able to walk into a Dr's office, ask for a medical procedure and get it. Legislators should never be mandating unnecessary procedures as prerequisites to the one the patient needs.
Actually I believe it
Actually I believe it requires you to have insurance period whether private or goverment plan if you can't afford private insurance or pay a penalty. Im glad its not universal, like i stated before the goverment shouldn't choose or have any part in my healthcare whatsoever. I'm an adult I don't need a nanny. I agree with you i wish i could opt out of goverment actions I don't agree with!
jmcv02
Huh. Isn't she from the same
Huh. Isn't she from the same camp who says that children watching violence go out and perform it themselves?
Well, if she wants to go all Clockwork Orange on us, fine. I'll help hold her eyes open and make her watch videos of women breaking down when they find out they're pregnant from rape and can't have an abortion in their state.
Hey, I know people in that
Hey, I know people in that camp. And they are serious whackadoo's.
I think that it's safe to say that most of us born between WWII and Vietnam grew up with the (what was in WWII considered adult cartoons) Bugs Bunny, Yosemite Sam and all the rest, along with the 3 stooges and some of the other "slapstick" movies. They were all pretty violent for the day and the majority of us grew up recognizing the difference between real and TV violence.
But I digress.
This is just another attempt to try to force the religious agenda of the extreme wrong on the rest of the country, one state at a time.
Religion based laws are poison to our way of life, to our Constitutional rights and must be purged from the bloodstream of America before it becomes fatal to us all.
The insanity principle is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results. The far right, the far left, vegans, creationists and other extremists believe in the insanity principle, religiously.
I'm also stumped by "If it’s
I'm also stumped by "If it’s not a life it shouldn’t matter". A lot of people are just simply grossed out by blood and couldn't handle watching any kind of surgery. I wish these bible thumping sociopaths would for once be honest about their intentions. They will pass any law they can possibly squeeze through while they have control to restrict any legal medication or medical procedure regardless of how demeaning or painful that restriction may be. These people are completely heartless sick SOB's. If they could pass a law saying "all abortions can only be done by beating a woman in the stomach with a bat until she miscarry's" they would. If they could pass a law saying abortion Dr's can only use rusty scalpel's they would because they don't care about any human after birth.
Anybody who votes Republican this year should have their head examined.
I can not even reply to this
I can not even reply to this dumb BLOND twit.
Another absurd move by the
Another absurd move by the pro-life crowd. Do we make heart patients watch surgery before getting a bypass? How about people getting a nose job?
Instead of trying to chip away at abortion, the pro-lifers should start a constitutional amendment drive. If it passes, they win. If it doesn't, then they should shut up and move on.
Unless the constitution is modified, Roe v. Wade will remain the defacto "law of the land," as an extension of the personal right to privacy.