0
livendive

Oklahoma Senate Overrides Two Vetoes

Recommended Posts

The first states that all pregnant women must undergo an ultrasound and listen to a description of it before having an abortion.

The second protects doctors from lawsuits when they knowingly mislead pregnant patients.

I can't imagine either of these hold up as constitutional.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/27/oklahoma.abortion/index.html?hpt=T2

Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Dave...

I have to admit that I have a lot to be proud of about Oklahoma, but this ain't one of them. My guess is it will be challenged and repealed. Sometimes Oklahoma can be soooooo progressive and other times soooo bassackwards. God forbid we teach our kids about sex and birth control to prevent the anguish of an early and unwanted pregnancy.. let's really just torture them with this new bill. Oh, you were raped, oh you poor thing... Hey, check out this ultrasound!! Yeah, let's psychologically rape them twice. Good job, Oklahoma. Fucking idiots.


"Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber." ~Plato
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do the so called "pro-lifers" hate women so much? Do they not believe that women should have control over their own bodies? I trust women to make their own decisions. They don't need a MAN (state government) to tell them how to conduct their lives.

These are the same assholes who rail about "government intrusion into private lives" while doing EXACTLY THAT with bullshit laws like this one.

These are the same assholes who don't give a rats ass about the "sanctity of life" once the kid is delivered. They are death penalty advocates. They'll vote down health care, welfare, child care assistance for single mothers, etc, etc, while claiming to be "family oriented".
Hypocritical scumbags, aren't they?

I would MUCH rather have my federal tax dollars pay for abortions than for welfare, or prisons and incarceration for the unwanted kids that grow up to be dirtbags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The first states that all pregnant women must undergo an ultrasound and listen to a description of it before having an abortion.

The second protects doctors from lawsuits when they knowingly mislead pregnant patients.

I can't imagine either of these hold up as constitutional.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/27/oklahoma.abortion/index.html?hpt=T2

Blues,
Dave



Not a chance. Another fine product from a neck state, from AZ, I can attest to what a toilet the legislators are here with the Nazizona, 'show us your papers.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

The first states that all pregnant women must undergo an ultrasound and listen to a description of it before having an abortion.

The second protects doctors from lawsuits when they knowingly mislead pregnant patients.

I can't imagine either of these hold up as constitutional.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/27/oklahoma.abortion/index.html?hpt=T2

Blues,
Dave



Not a chance. Another fine product from a neck state, from AZ, I can attest to what a toilet the legislators are here with the Nazizona, 'show us your papers.'



But you have (on this site) shown support for "show us your papers"????

Which do you believe?
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Why do the so called "pro-lifers" hate women so much?



Why do the "pro-abortioners" hate children so much?

Sorry, had dinner last night with the lady that made the tough choice and dealt with the consequences of letting me live when her life would have been simpler if she had allowed me to be vacuumed out of her uterus before my first breath.
You are only as strong as the prey you devour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

The first states that all pregnant women must undergo an ultrasound and listen to a description of it before having an abortion.

The second protects doctors from lawsuits when they knowingly mislead pregnant patients.

I can't imagine either of these hold up as constitutional.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/27/oklahoma.abortion/index.html?hpt=T2

Blues,
Dave



Not a chance. Another fine product from a neck state, from AZ, I can attest to what a toilet the legislators are here with the Nazizona, 'show us your papers.'


But you have (on this site) shown support for "show us your papers"????

Which do you believe?


It's so much more fun when you cite your example :S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The first states that all pregnant women must undergo an ultrasound and listen to a description of it before having an abortion.

The second protects doctors from lawsuits when they knowingly mislead pregnant patients.

I can't imagine either of these hold up as constitutional.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/27/oklahoma.abortion/index.html?hpt=T2

Blues,
Dave



Not a chance. Another fine product from a neck state, from AZ, I can attest to what a toilet the legislators are here with the Nazizona, 'show us your papers.'


But you have (on this site) shown support for "show us your papers"????

Which do you believe?


It's so much more fun when you cite your example :S


You support us showing the IRS papers proving we health insurance
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The first states that all pregnant women must undergo an ultrasound and listen to a description of it before having an abortion.

The second protects doctors from lawsuits when they knowingly mislead pregnant patients.

I can't imagine either of these hold up as constitutional.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/27/oklahoma.abortion/index.html?hpt=T2

Blues,
Dave



Not a chance. Another fine product from a neck state, from AZ, I can attest to what a toilet the legislators are here with the Nazizona, 'show us your papers.'


But you have (on this site) shown support for "show us your papers"????

Which do you believe?


It's so much more fun when you cite your example :S


You support us showing the IRS papers proving we health insurance


That was clearly the part of the bill I don't like and have said that it probably won't hold up to SCOTUS test. I've said this a few times; do a search.

Shame for you, back to the drawing board: Rush = :$

Not to mention a fiscal requirement is in way = to a law that:

- Cops can be sued if a person feels they aren't enforcing it the way that person likes

- Subjects any brown person to random searches

- Takes families where let's say the parents are illegals and makes the legals (kids) into felons if the parents stay at their house, ride in their car.


Even if the ins req sticks, there is no way you can compare that to this POS bill. The Pima county Sheriff has denouncd it and said he won't go along with it, will sue to have it nullified, etc. One thing for sure, the law really shows neck color, there's no hiding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The first states that all pregnant women must undergo an ultrasound and listen to a description of it before having an abortion.

The second protects doctors from lawsuits when they knowingly mislead pregnant patients.

I can't imagine either of these hold up as constitutional.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/27/oklahoma.abortion/index.html?hpt=T2

Blues,
Dave



Not a chance. Another fine product from a neck state, from AZ, I can attest to what a toilet the legislators are here with the Nazizona, 'show us your papers.'


But you have (on this site) shown support for "show us your papers"????

Which do you believe?


It's so much more fun when you cite your example :S


You support us showing the IRS papers proving we health insurance


That was clearly the part of the bill I don't like and have said that it probably won't hold up to SCOTUS test. I've said this a few times; do a search.

Shame for you, back to the drawing board: Rush = :$
You supported the bill
You are the one who should embarrased
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

you have the luxury of being pro abortion only because your mother wasn't.

Not every pregnancy in pro-choice women ends in abortion. It's pro-choice, not pro-abortion. My son has a mother who's pro-choice.

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0