Senator pushes for Abortion discussions on the web to be restricted.

[Chikara]

Here, have an article.

Instead of focusing on job creation, congressional Republicans have spent their time passing socially conservative legislation like the "Let Women Die" bill that would allow hospitals that receive federal funds to deny women life-saving abortion procedures.

Now Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), one of the most die-hard anti-choice lawmakers, has jumped on the bandwagon by sneaking a radical anti-abortion amendment onto a completely unrelated piece of legislation. DeMint's amendment would ban women and their doctors from discussing abortion over the Internet:

Anti-choice Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) just filed an anti-choice amendment to a bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programs. The DeMint amendment could bar discussion of abortion over the Internet and through videoconferencing, even if a woman's health is at risk and if this kind of communication with her doctor is her best option to receive care.

Under this amendment, women would need a separate, segregated Internet just for talking about abortion care with their doctors.​

I laughed. I laughed hard.

This is a classic case of "Because everyone who disagrees with me shouldn't be allowed to talk about their opinions." Or in this case, options as well.

 

[GFA]

This is sad. He has much more pressing issues to work on for one, and secondly what the hell is he thinking. I thought Republicans were all for the Constitution. I know it's a taboo topic, but what the Hell happened to freedom of speech.

 

[Shiny Celebi]

Thats unconstitutional. You cant ban someone from talking about Abortion just cause this guy is anti choice. This is a ridiculous waste. No way will this bill pass.

 

[Dawn]

...Banning /doctors/ from talking about it with women /specifically/?

...

That won't even cut down on the worst part of it..! ...The ignorance that swamps any discussion on the internet directly discusses abortion as a topic without fail.

Sharp remarks aside, I don't know. Something seems kind of odd here. I question if we've been given all the facts, namely because this seems like ever so perfect conservative bashing material straight from a liberal source. Could someone really have been this dumb? I'm somewhat skeptical, to say the least.

I mean really. This is about what I've gathered from the story.

Pro-life opinions projected as wrong
Pro-lifers projected as fools/backwards
Politician somehow gets it in his mind that he can sneak that sort of thing through a bill as if that ever had a remote chance.
Politician goes through with stupid plan, gets caught quickly as expected
Politician's move is projected as representing pro-lifers as a whole

...Am I missing something here? It sure feels like I'm missing something.

 

[(=Nemesis=)]

...Banning /doctors/ from talking about it with women /specifically/?

...

That won't even cut down on the worst part of it..! ...The ignorance that swamps any discussion on the internet directly discusses abortion as a topic without fail.

Sharp remarks aside, I don't know. Something seems kind of odd here. I question if we've been given all the facts, namely because this seems like ever so perfect conservative bashing material straight from a liberal source. Could someone really have been this dumb? I'm somewhat skeptical, to say the least.

I mean really. This is about what I've gathered from the story.

Pro-life opinions projected as wrong
Pro-lifers projected as fools/backwards
Politician somehow gets it in his mind that he can sneak that sort of thing through a bill as if that ever had a remote chance.
Politician goes through with stupid plan, gets caught quickly as expected
Politician's move is projected as representing pro-lifers as a whole

...Am I missing something here? It sure feels like I'm missing something.

Welcome to the U-S of A! Where, if you're stupid, everyone you agree with must also be stupid! It's the foundation of American politics! Well it certainly seems like it when I read things like this.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

...Banning /doctors/ from talking about it with women /specifically/?

...

That won't even cut down on the worst part of it..! ...The ignorance that swamps any discussion on the internet directly discusses abortion as a topic without fail.

Sharp remarks aside, I don't know. Something seems kind of odd here. I question if we've been given all the facts, namely because this seems like ever so perfect conservative bashing material straight from a liberal source. Could someone really have been this dumb? I'm somewhat skeptical, to say the least.

I mean really. This is about what I've gathered from the story.

Pro-life opinions projected as wrong
Pro-lifers projected as fools/backwards
Politician somehow gets it in his mind that he can sneak that sort of thing through a bill as if that ever had a remote chance.
Politician goes through with stupid plan, gets caught quickly as expected
Politician's move is projected as representing pro-lifers as a whole

...Am I missing something here? It sure feels like I'm missing something.

Exactly. This is just a smear tactic from the radical abortion lobby. This legislation would not prevent you or I from talking about abortion on PC, or any other discussion forum. All it does is make sure that a harmful procedure is only performed in the most necessary circumstances.

 

[Mr. X]

While I usually support pro choice, even i'll admit that this is just a plain smear tactic.

Although, it should be illegal to deny a person any type of life saving procedure... Even if that procedure is a abortion.

 

[Esper]

I'm amused. I shouldn't be since this is the umpteenth piece of anti-abortion legislation that's been suggested/passed/implemented since the midterm elections when we should be focused on the economy or anything else, but what does amuse me is how quickly pro-lifers and people sympathetic to pro-life sentiments are up in arms about this being a smear tactic. The fact is that DeMind did put this amendment forward, and the idea of barring any discussion of any medical procedure in any form of communication between a woman and her doctor is ridiculous and perverse.

I will admit that a headline like "restrict discussion of abortion over the internet" is attention-grabbing, but the content of the article is still quite specific. And, of course, it's still true.

 

[(=Nemesis=)]

"what does amuse me is how quickly pro-lifers and people sympathetic to pro-life sentiments are up in arms about this being a smear tactic."

A counter-counter-smear smear. I'm impressed.

 

[Alley Cat]

This is just ridiculous, the internet is just a means of communication, it's nothing more or less than writing a letter, just that replies can be instantaneous. It's definitely a lot quicker. This bill would have a lot of opposition from the pro-choice and pro-free internet people. This would be a crime against both of their views. I personally think that this is really just a stupid thing to even consider passing. Why would the government do something stupid? Oh wait, we're talking about the USA I forgot.

Women are just the same as men, and they would need to talk to their doctors too. Taking that right away would be asinine. What would be next, banning cancer patients from talking to their doctor about cancer? People like him make me lose faith in this country.

 

[GGJ]

It really shouldn't bother ya fellers about the whole pro-life/pro-choice things but what really tickles me in the wrong places is how this ain't even constitutional.

1st Amendment: Freedom of speech.

Right there.

Its a bloody shame how they stoop so low that they don't even regard the words of our forefathers that created tis nation.

Bloody shame

 

[FreakyLocz14]

Abortion, even if it is a medical necessity, is too serious of an issue to be discussing over Skype. If it is a medical necessity, women should see their doctors for a referral so that we can be sure that it's a necessity before we end an innocent human life.

 

[Alley Cat]

What if the patient has been seeing the doctor, and they reckon that an abortion would save her life? Say this patient wants to hold out until the last moment, because they want their child. Say a situation arises where she cannot get in to see her doctor, then this would be a practical solution. Maybe the doctor wanted to get a visual on the patient, but due to some outside force, they could not come to meet?

Also, there is a difference between discussing their abortion, and committing. It would take a shady doctor to preform an examination over Skype, and declare that grounds to go through with the procedure. No, that'd just be inane and anyone who did that should get their medical license revoked. But they would still be able to discuss alternatives, how to deal with it etc, or relay important information through the internet. Also keep in mind that it isn't just through a video-conference, it is over the net in general. That would include sending emails, or reaching out to them on a board such as PC(i.e. one aimed at abortion/health NOT pokemon).

 

[Black Ice]

Abortion, even if it is a medical necessity, is too serious of an issue to be discussing over Skype. If it is a medical necessity, women should see their doctors for a referral so that we can be sure that it's a necessity before we end an innocent human life.

i still dont see the problem with discussing serious issues over skype

 

[Her]

The utter ignorance and stupidity that this Jim DeMint person has is really quite hilarious. It's ok to believe that abortion is wrong, but to deny people the opportunity to talk with thier doctors at least about the possibility of an abortion is just... god, some people in this world.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

i still dont see the problem with discussing serious issues over skype

Doctors really need to see their patients in person to make informed medical decisions.

 

[Alice]

This is sad. He has much more pressing issues to work on for one,

If he's this stupid, I don't want him working on more pressing issues in the first place.

 

[Shining Raichu]

What I find hilarious about this topic is that abortion is legal, even in situations where the woman's life is not threatened. So this proposed legislation would make it so that it's legal to have an abortion, yet illegal to talk about it with your doctor over the internet. It's laughable at best and seriously concerning at worst.

The progression toward a woman's right to choose went linearly with history. There's nothing that annoys me more than somebody trying to re-open a battle after it's already been won.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

If he's this stupid, I don't want him working on more pressing issues in the first place.

You'll have to talk to the people of South Carolina about that.

What I find hilarious about this topic is that abortion is legal, even in situations where the woman's life is not threatened. So this proposed legislation would make it so that it's legal to have an abortion, yet illegal to talk about it with your doctor over the internet. It's laughable at best and seriously concerning at worst.

The progression toward a woman's right to choose went linearly with history. There's nothing that annoys me more than somebody trying to re-open a battle after it's already been won.

The battle is not as cut and dry as that. The pro-life movement has women several victories limiting the barbaric practice of elective abortion. The courts recognize that the "right" to have an abortion is not unlimited, and we will vigorously limit the practice to the fullest extent that the law allows.

 

[Mercurybro]

This sounds a lot like one of those dumb rules that would never be enforced, like it being illegal to tie a llama up onto a four-way stop sign in the winter in Colorado or something. Or if it would be enforced, it would cost a heck of a lot of money and manpower to try to control something that would be impossible to control.

Oh, I know! It's like that one time they outlawed alcohol!

EDIT: I'd love it if there was an unbiased description of this amendment floating around on the web, though. I don't trust that source very much.