.
Opinion: Why 'Doonesbury' gets it wrong
Fredricks supports Texas' abortion law. It's currently being satirized in "Doonesbury" (GoComics.com/doonesbury).
March 15th, 2012
07:46 PM ET

Opinion: Why 'Doonesbury' gets it wrong

Editor's note: Melinda Fredricks is vice chairwoman of the Republican Party of Texas and a member of the Texas Federation of Republican Women. In 2008, she was appointed by Gov. Rick Perry to the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission. In 2003, Perry appointed her to the Texas Medical Board, which licenses and disciplines physicians.  

For an opposing view, please click here.

By Melinda Fredricks, Special to CNN

(CNN) – Despite opponents’ claims to the contrary, the real controversy concerning the newly enacted Texas Sonogram Law is that it took an act of the legislature to give women considering an abortion the information they deserve about this medical procedure.

Nonetheless, Garry Trudeau decided to make some ugly mischaracterizations of the law in his “Doonesbury” comic strip.

If it weren’t for the damage his misinformation could create, many Texans would just laugh at Trudeau’s ignorance. For one thing, he seems to think our legislature is made up of only middle-aged GOP men. The 21 women legislators who voted for the bill take issue with that, I’m certain. And while the bill was passed overwhelmingly by Republicans, without bi-partisanship the bill could not have passed the Texas Senate.

However, Trudeau’s misinformation crossed over into just plain nasty when he characterized the Texas Sonogram Law as rape. Disappointingly, a brilliant and talented woman such as former ABC news anchor Carole Simpson defended him in her recent article on this site.

Simpson’s argument is based on a statement that a vaginal sonogram is necessary in order to obtain the information required by the law to be given to the patient, and she alleges it “may even damage the reproductive organs of women who dare to seek an abortion.” This begs the questions, if a vaginal ultrasound is so dangerous, then why in the world did the FDA approve it, and why does the National Abortion Federation recommend it as a standard of care for some first-trimester medically induced abortions?

Moreover, in her article Simpson describes Trudeau’s work: “Another strip shows a doctor about to perform the procedure (emphasis mine), and the bubble of words coming from his mouth says, ‘By the authority invested in me by the GOP base, I thee rape.’” I got to wondering which “procedure” is Simpson referring to – the sonogram or the abortion? Because on Planned Parenthood’s website,  I found that an abortion requires several things to be put into a woman’s vagina and I quote:

During an aspiration abortion:
o A speculum will be inserted into your vagina.
o Your health care provider may inject a numbing medication into or near your cervix.
o The opening of your cervix may be stretched with dilators — a series of increasingly thick rods.
o A tube is inserted through the cervix into the uterus.

And Simpson is outraged over a vaginal sonogram being given before an abortion? (By the way, Planned Parenthood assures women that a vaginal ultrasound is not painful.)

The fact is, the Texas law simply increases the standard of care for informed consent for abortion to the same level that is common for other medical procedures. The principle of “informed consent” is well-entrenched in state law for other medical procedures. But the abortion industry opposes attempts to provide their patients the same amount of information patients might routinely be given for much less invasive procedures. In its clinical guidelines, the National Abortion Federation states that “The findings of all ultrasound exams and the interpretation of those findings must be documented in the medical record.”  Before the Texas Sonogram Law was enacted, abortion providers weren’t sharing those results of the sonogram with the patient.

Sonograms were already routinely conducted by abortion providers before the Texas Sonogram law and the National Abortion Federation recommends vaginal sonograms as standard of care in many first trimester abortions. The Texas Sonogram law simply requires that the doctor provide the patient the opportunity to view that sonogram and to hear the baby’s heartbeat, as well as provide state specified printed materials, and a verbal explanation of the sonogram results.

Moreover, contrary to Simpson’s claims, women who do not wish to see the sonogram image or hear the fetal heartbeat may simply sign a waiver stating they declined to view the information. In the event of a medical emergency, the doctors’ requirements can be bypassed with proper documentation.

Indeed, prior to this law, doctors often performed abortions without ever meeting the patient or even speaking with her. The law requires that a physician who is to perform the abortion meet with the patient at least 24 hours before the abortion is to take place. The doctor must provide basic information to the patient, including medical risks associated with the type of abortion to be performed, probable development age of the unborn child, as well as the medical risks to carrying the child full term.

Simpson says Trudeau believes there is a war on women, and maybe Trudeau is right. But we have differing opinions on who the enemies might be. During the testimony in support of this legislation, several women testified they had been denied an opportunity to view their sonograms at Texas abortion facilities, an egregious violation of their rights as patients. The Texas Sonogram Law simply ensures that physicians offer women undergoing abortion a similar level of informed consent already being provided for other medical procedures in Texas. I’m proud that Texas believes women are strong and smart enough to know the full truth before making such a critical decision. The only thing disappointing about the law is that it was even necessary at all.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of  Melinda Fredricks.

Posted by ,
Filed under: Health • Politics • What we think • Women
soundoff (1,299 Responses)
  1. joe

    Melinda is correct, and Trudeau is wrong, and bigotted. As simple as that.

    March 15, 2012 at 10:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • michaelwg

      Did ya read the Bill there Joe? It's only 15 pages. The font is pretty big, easy on the eyes. If you have I'd love to hear how he's wrong and she's right.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • 1nd3p3nd3nt

      funny how the right wants big government to be involved in our lives.
      I'm curious how many women were 'denied' the right to see an ultrasound?
      most doctors I know refuse payment and refuse to perform a simple procedure requested by the patient, isn't that how capitalism works?

      maybe you nut jobs think the liberal abortion clinics have a quota to meet?

      March 15, 2012 at 10:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • svann

      He's right. Its a shaming rod.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • bam

      funny how bigoted southerners think normal people are bigots.
      ever hear of the Taliban? of course u have cuz they mimic the Christian Taliban here in the USA.
      The States with the money wont tolerate this war on women... It is about time the red states started to get jobs and stopped collecting unemployment. we pay for your laziness... stop crying and trying to control others lives and get a job

      March 15, 2012 at 11:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • William Swinger

      As we all know, DNA is a potent means of identification. It is arguable that the DNA code of any single human being is unique to them alone. DNA serves as the instruction set for producing the entire human being. This DNA code exists for the entirety of life, from shortly after sperm and egg unite, prior to the existence of the complete body to many years after death. This pattern of molecules known as DNA is the literal definition, the instruction set, of the human being that will be created from it. The moment that the complete DNA code comes into existence is the logical, irrefutable beginning of the human being. The DNA code exists shortly after sperm and egg unite and remains throughout life to serve as the instruction set for all construction and function of the body. It is impossible to deny the a human being is produced from the DNA code. It is impossible to deny that the human being retains the DNA code throughout life. It is impossible to deny the DNA code remains long after death. This instruction set known as DNA is clearly the beginning of human life. At the moment the DNA instruction set is complete the process of life has begun. There is no logical way to defeat this argument.

      March 16, 2012 at 12:14 am | Report abuse |
      • memyself

        Except to say 1) an egg is not a chicken (not even a fertilized egg) 2) not all humans are people (embryos are discarded all the time from fertility clinics; brain-dead humans are not people) and 3) humans do not have unique DNA (twins? triplets?). Nice try.

        March 16, 2012 at 4:40 am | Report abuse |
      • Shortround

        memyself, twins and triplets will have different DNA shortly after they seperate. Small mutations will be present in each that are unique to them. Nice try.

        March 17, 2012 at 11:37 am | Report abuse |
  2. Ellie

    Why do the ProLifers think that ALL women who have abortions are uninformed? How can they actually believe that ALL women arrive at an abortion center with little or no idea of what is about to happen and with complete detachment to the decision they have just made! One has just made probably the most difficult choice of one's life, and then one must be shamed by the great??? state of Texas in an effort to reverse one's decision. It is as if I am some silly child who couldn't possibly make a judicious dcision on my own behalf. I guess that is why I find this law so insulting!!!

    March 15, 2012 at 10:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shortround

      I could say "Why do ALL pro-abortion think pro lifers think they're not informed?" but that would be a stereotype, therefore incorrect. And yeah, I believe they may be informed, but not completely. I'll shoot down the "it's the mother's body" argument right now. When sperm and egg combine, the genes in the chromosomes cross over each other, mixing the mother's and father's genes. On top of that, mutations occur that aren't present in either mother or father. This is a totally new and unique organism, it DOES NOT have an exact copy of the mother's genes, the only way it could be realistically considered part of the mother's body. Trying to claim this because "it's inside her" is also wrong. You wouldn't consider braces a part of the mouth, despite their attachment. How come then, something that is living, breathing, with a beating heart, be considered part of the mother? It can't, plain and simple.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • Nuclear_Wynter

        Yes, you are however allowed to remove the braces at anytime, whenever you want. Regardless of whether or not its a part of her or an entirely seperate being. It has no rights to sustain itself on someone else or reside in someone else's body. No person has ownership or residency rights over another person.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • memyself

        Not breathing dumba$$; gets it's oxygen (along with everything else) from the umbilicus/placenta (part of the mother); much like a parasite. An egg is not a chicken. An acorn is not an oak. A zygote/embryo/fetus is not a person.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • michaelwg

        Thank you so much for the biology lesson. Just to try it out, I took a toothpick, ran it along the inside of my cheek, pulled out a few cells that are uniquely me, that contain my personal genetic code, and I watched them die. I guess I aborted myself huh? In fact, if I got 3 or more that's even more than your conception stage.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • michaelwg

        Thank you so much for the biology lesson. Just to try it out, I took a toothpick, ran it along the inside of my cheek, pulled out a few cells that are uniquely me, that contain my personal genetic code, and I watched them die. I guess I aborted myself huh? In fact, if I got 3 or more that's even more than your conception stage.
        This sounds silly, you might say something like "But YOU are still alive, that was just a part of yourself" And then I might say "What if I killed my identical twin instead" I imagine you'd say "But that's a person not a clump of...oh..."

        March 15, 2012 at 10:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • bam

      they dont think that.... they just think up different ways to attack the women....
      Santorum wants to pass a law where 4 people must be present while the doctor wands the women then yell S L U T in her face all at once... to inform her about what she did to get there

      March 15, 2012 at 11:19 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ann

        yes, because it would be awful for her not to have that information, right? They're just showing that they care about her.

        March 16, 2012 at 3:13 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Brent

    So... women want FREE contraception (mandated by the government) but they have a problem with government requiring them to be informed about a very dangerous medical procedure...

    F'ing hypocrites – every last one of you!

    March 15, 2012 at 10:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jason

      There's a big difference between "wanting information" and FORCING penetration without consent for a completely legal medical procedure. I am absolutely amazed that the party of "small government" never seems to have a problem with making laws forcing their religious morals on others, even if it means forcibly inserting objects into a womans body. The author completely ignores this too, somehow just skipping over the fact that it forces this on a woman...and also assumes that the "information" is even necessary or wanted.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • 1nd3p3nd3nt

      there's a difference between being 'informed' and being sodomized.

      if HALF the energy of the anti-abortion crowd went into adoption practices, there wouldn't be a woman alive today that would choose an abortion over adoption.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Observer

      This is getting to be as IMPORTANT as the Barney the Purple Dinosaur outrage.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • SlothropRedux

      Hi Brent – I agree totally. The government should never mandate that insurance meets any specific requirements at all. If I have personal disagreements with, say, covering penicillin for an STD that someone gets because of their licentious lifestyle, or treatment for trichinosis because they aren't wise enough to follow God's commandment not to eat pork... why should I be forced to pay through my insurance that covers those wicked ways?

      I'm looking forward to the day when insurance is completely unregulated. It will be cheaper than ever. Of course it might not cover anything at all, but at least I won't be forced by government to pay for things I don't believe in.

      Give me a nice, libertarian country... like Somalia.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • michaelwg

      Contraception prevents abortions. Texas has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the country do to abstinence programs. Texas has one of the lowest abortion rates. Teen mothers are generally dirt poor and will stay dirt poor. In other words, this Liberal is tired of subsidizing conservative stupididy causing abstinence babies. I pay for their medicaid, their food stamps, their school lunches, the medicare later on, etc etc. All because you geniuses can't stop having babies.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • memyself

      The risk of death from childbirth is 11 times greater than the risk of death from an abortion procedure during the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.After 20 weeks, the risk of death from childbirth and abortion are about the same. So much for the 'very dangerous medical procedure'.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:42 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Dennis

    It still wrong what Texas has done........the GOP likes nothing more to control our lives even more!! And I don't care how many women where involved in voting on this stupid bill, it is just one more move to make it more difficult for women to get an abortion. It is pushing a religious belief on others – has nothing to do with health!!

    March 15, 2012 at 10:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Counterww

      What a bunch of bs. The woman can opt out by signing a waiver. Do you read?

      March 15, 2012 at 10:16 pm | Report abuse |
      • michaelwg

        Did you read the Bill?

        March 15, 2012 at 10:31 pm | Report abuse |
      • Nuclear_Wynter

        Yes, but its obvious you didnt, You can opt of of viewing the information collected from the ultrasound, you cannot opt out of the ultrasound itself.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hansel

      Being anti-murder is NOT a "religious belief". You libs claim to care so much about the poor, oppressed, etc. but then you want to let innocent babies to die??? Hypocrites.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • michaelwg

        just calling something murder doesn't make it murder. Give me some evidence that a zygote, a two celled organism, is a person. Do they get a death certificate? a funeral service? Are you against Capital Punishment? Did you protest the Wars that have taken over 200,000 lives in the past 10 years? Not 2 celled organisms, but real living breathing people? Do you want to abolish the 2nd amendment?

        March 15, 2012 at 10:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        And what about the unfertilized ova? Where are their rights?

        March 15, 2012 at 10:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • linda123

        An embryo isn't a baby. Get over it.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • LJ

        Going even farther michael, is a death investigation launched when there is a miscarriage?

        March 15, 2012 at 11:21 pm | Report abuse |
      • Scott

        Since when are any of those things proof of life? When someone starves to death in the Sudan, were they not a person since they didn't get a death certificate? Were all the slaves who didn't get their person papers in the South not people? We fought a war over a bunch of cattle? Tell me, what is a zygote going to develop into? A '65 Mustang Convertable? It's a human being in development. What if I decided that you hadn't sufficiently developed and performed a post-pardon abortion? What's the difference?

        March 15, 2012 at 11:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • bam

      the christian taliban way... u r either with them or u r against them
      Santorum wants to pass a law where 4 people must be present while the doctor wands the women then yell S L U T in her face all at once... to inform her about what she did to get there

      March 15, 2012 at 11:20 pm | Report abuse |
  5. angryoldguy

    This kind of insane banter and argument is proof positive that America has gone off it's nut!

    March 15, 2012 at 10:06 pm | Report abuse |
  6. C. Cole

    I was born in Texas. Served in the military through Texas. And was always proud to be a Texan. But in the last decades or so, and especially in the last 3-4 years, I've been embarrassed to tell people where I am actually from. It's people like this that give Texas a really, really, bad reputation.

    March 15, 2012 at 10:03 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Beth

    As awoman who had an abortion at 20, was told it was a clump of cells, no big deal, my right, my choice; to then 7 years later see an ultrasound of my very much wanted son at the same gestational age was a huge shocking wake up call. I cried for years when I thought of that abortion. How much I regretted it is monumental. I wish I had been shown my "fetus". Seen the tiny arms & legs and heart beat. If I had I NEVER would have gone through with the abortion. And that I believe is the problem, loss of income. So many of us didn't know. Bought the PP party line. We talk to each other , you all don't like us cause we remind you that abortion sucksbigtime. You never forget. It haunts you till the day you die.

    March 15, 2012 at 10:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • 1nd3p3nd3nt

      so what you're saying is you didn't realize what you were doing when you got an abortion? you didn't realize you were going to be ending the life of your child?

      you needed to see a blown up picture of it in order to understand what you were doing?

      there are some people that use abortion as birth control, that I disagree with. But to feel sad and depressed about abortion is a normal response to have.

      I am sorry that you didn't learn more about the concept of what an abortion was, or how the reproductive system works until after you had an abortion.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Donnie the Lion

      Beth, many people can procreate, but not everybody can be a parent. The child deserves a parent who can really take care of them, not just someone with good intentions. You did the right thing. Don't make having a child about you and your ego. Make it about the what is best for the child. Always.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • Scott

        Donnie, it's time for you to be aborted. It's in your best interest, really.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • RUSerious

        Can I borrow your crystal ball Donnie?

        March 16, 2012 at 9:19 am | Report abuse |
    • geeky

      You had a choice. You made the choice. No one forced you to do anything. Blaming PP for your regrets is a cop-out.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • Counterww

        Point is, it was not an informed choice, and that is what pp wants, and other anti lifers. You don't want women to know the truth.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:20 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        That is pretty brazen and hyperbolic. What makes you think that?

        March 15, 2012 at 10:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shazaam

      Your story is ss authentic as a tea party chain email.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Michelle Shocklee

      Thank you for sharing, Beth.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patrick

      Wow. Sounds like you were misinformed. That can be haunting. You could have known all these things the first time, and you wouldn't even have needed this law to do it. Nor the second time. Nor now.

      Best wishes with your struggles.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Seph

      I really appreciate you adding your comments to this discussion... I feel that yours is a voice that is seldomly heard or acknowledged during these discussions. Although your story is a painful and tragic one, it is one that needs to be heard. Thank you so much for sharing. Also, even though I know how this is going to sound, and that there will be a negative reaction to it in the comments; I want you to know that I have come to believe through studying the bible (not just in what people have told me, but in reading for myself) -that there is a God who is perfect who judges sinners (which means everyone... no matter the sin... all sin... equally) who has every right to punish us, accuse us, damn us... but instead chose to send an alternate in our place to absorb the guilt of our sins (all of them) in order to free us from the punishment we justly deserve. In other words, in Christ there is freedom from guilt... now and through eternity. Something to think about.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • memyself

      should never have moved to Alaska

      March 15, 2012 at 11:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Fureyous

      Beth, I wish I could believe you but I don't. Your tears may have had many sources but your abortion wasn't one of them. I doubt you saw an ultrasound of a fetus the size of yours if you had a first trimester abortion. I hope you find peace, and one way to do that is to forgive yourself. Both for having an abortion, and for having to drum it up into some big psychological disaster imposed upon you other than what it was: a safe, legal medical procedure.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • Scott

        I want me some safe, legal slaves. Hey, it was legal once, it can be legal again.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scott

      Beth, my heart breaks for you. There are many women out there just like you who now realize what actually happened. I'm also sorry that these so-called choice advocates belittle you for your experience. I hope you give your current child everything you have – they will remember a happy childhood with loving parents.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ann

      Having regrets is normal. Your story shows that women don't take this kind of decision lightly. It's unfortunate that you didn't seek more information about that first pregnancy as you were making your decision. If your decision would have been influenced by knowing how developed the fetus was, you certainly could have asked about that or done some research to look it up. I'm not trying to knock you for not doing that, but really, the information was there.

      Still, most women do know what they're doing when they make that appointment. Feeling conflicted and regretful doesn't mean they made the wrong decision. Sometimes, it really is the best thing to do at that time of your life.

      March 16, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Hunter

    Trudeau is NOT wrong. This law is invasive, unnecessary and insulting to the intelligence of any woman unfortunate enough to have to be considering abortion. No woman wants an abortion, but it is sometimes the most logical solution to a huge problem. It is not murder. Thank God for people like Gary Trudeau who are brave enough and talented enough to speak out for what's right!!

    March 15, 2012 at 10:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • sgdfgb

      thank you for posting something rationale and relatively unopinionated

      March 15, 2012 at 10:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • J R Brown

      A rape is an act committed against a woman without her consent. Any women getting the sonogram has consented to the procedure, so the accusation of it being a "rape" is nothing more than an outright and deliberate lie. Anyone so clueless as to actually confuse the two as being comparable should be introduced to a psychiatric professional as soon as possible.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:20 pm | Report abuse |
      • 1nd3p3nd3nt

        sodomized is a much better description.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:26 pm | Report abuse |
      • Aristocles

        More to the point, a rape is a harmful thing. This is just a medical examination. Even if it is required before getting a far more invasive procedure, it is still just an examination; no women is being hurt by this routine exam. Get a grip, people.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • 1nd3p3nd3nt

      i do not consider an abortion murder. But it is killing your own child. It may be the most humane way to do it, but let's not blur the lines here, an abortion is ending your child's life.

      It is a very emotional, sad, tragic thing to do. That being said, i would rather there be an option of abortion, than to read about a murder suicide, or a mother drowning her children, or a baby left in a dumpster, or a mother microwaving her child, coat hangers in alleyways, or any number of horrible, true things that have happened.

      too often people get caught up in the 'unreality' of life. Life is hard, messy, and complicated. Often times we find ourselves making the less evil of choices. I thank god everyday i wasn't born in the sudan and had a gun held to my head, forced to kill my own mother. Such is the thing we call life.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Susan

      Hunter you stated "It is not murder". If a fetus is alive before the abortion and dead after the abortion how is it not murder?

      March 15, 2012 at 10:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • memyself

        @Susan ... because a fetus is not a person. A fetus does not feel pain in the way a person feels pain, does not suffer in the way a person suffers, is not conscious or aware or sentient in the way a person is. As gestation continues these capabilities begin to develop, and so the state has an ever increasing interest in protecting what is becoming a person. But during the 1st trimester the fetus is simply not a person, and so the woman's rights trump the state's interests.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:59 pm | Report abuse |
      • Susan

        How can killing a fetus be murder if committed against an unwilling mother and yet be legal if the mother requests such killing?

        March 15, 2012 at 11:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • Scott

        So we can go use coma patients for target practice – no harm, no foul, they won't know it.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • RUSerious

      I'm curious other than the moral and ethical concerns proposed by prematurely ending a life what makes an abortion a difficult decision? It just hacking out a dysfunctional body part right? So why would allowing(it's an option) the patient to see that body part before they remove it cause any stress for a patient undergoing a routine medical procedure?

      It's hard to rationalize to someone they aren't murdering while trying to explain how a even viewing a sonogram might make them feel guilty or shamed of their actions. Feel guilty or shamed of what? There's no guilt or shame in removing an appendix, or kidney. There is guilt and shame in protecting your way of life at the cost of another. If there were no moral issue here there wouldn't be any guilt or shame to invoke.

      March 16, 2012 at 9:11 am | Report abuse |
  9. Erik

    OK, we'll make this fair then. Let's make the chicken hawks like Perry and his ilk watch a video of a soldier being blown up when they deploy another 18 year old to the useless war they voted for. Sure the soldiers had a choice to sign up, I don't think they wanted to be pawns in a politicians only war.

    March 15, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hansel

      As governor of Texas. what "war" did Perry "vote" for? The Alamo?? Amusing how ignorant you libs are.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:04 pm | Report abuse |
      • Erik

        Hansel, apparently your pain splatter generalizations also blur your reading comprehension too, notice the world "like" in there? Also disagreeing with the poilcy automatically makes me a lib? Pretty weak talking points on any given day, but good enough for Fox though. We've lived through Perry enough here in TX, why don't you look up his thoughts on the wars or the situation in Iran. He talks big and tough, but he's not sending his own kids into any war.

        After his debacle with the HPV vaccine, he should have been impeached is governor, he's really not fit for any office.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • Hansel

        Ah, so if you use the word "like", you can unfairly lump someone in with something they had nothing to do with. Let me try: People like Obama ruined the retirement accounts of those poor Enron employees. Hey – it works! Being a lib is fun – you get to make all kinds of absurd statements!!

        March 15, 2012 at 10:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hunter

      Perfect point, Erik!

      March 15, 2012 at 10:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patrick

      I think you are on to something there. But not Perry or his ilk – propose a bill that any soldier that wishes to enlist must watch a series of films depicting the serious risk to life that their choice will involve.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ann

      Good idea, but I don't think it would work. They already get to watch capital punishments – LOTS of them. I think guys like that actually enjoy it. (Aw, heck, there might be an innocent one once in a while, but hey, them's the breaks.)

      March 16, 2012 at 3:25 pm | Report abuse |
  10. El Flaco

    Melinda Fredericks, like all Conservative women, should stick to her housework and let her husbands speak for the family. Mrs. Fredericks opinion is cute, but irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

    Any patient who wants a medical procedure can simply ask her doctor for the procedure, explaining her reasons for wanting it. Rick Perry does not need to be in the examining room with the patient and her doctor.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • TrueReality

      So, only women who agree with you should be allowed to voice their opinions in public? And those who disagree, by default, must not be thinking beings in their own right, but just brainwashed pawns?

      March 15, 2012 at 10:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • jorline

      And the left says only the right hate women...you proved them wrong

      March 15, 2012 at 10:22 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Not Fat

    Garry Trudeau has more IQ points in a hang nail than Rick Perry has in his brain.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hansel

      Oh wow – that is hilarious. Did you think of that yourself? Man, you are the clever one. Must be nice responding with cruelty and mocking – guess that is what happens when you cannot actually refute the author's points.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • Stinger

        Perhaps Not Fat was NOT trying to be funny and he really believes it is possible for a hang nail to have a higher IQ than any person's brain. Which would only make me highly question the presence of any level of IQ in Not Fat and any value in his comments.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • jorline

      IQ Points...
      BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

      March 15, 2012 at 10:24 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Joshua Ludd

    "However, Trudeau’s misinformation crossed over into just plain nasty when he characterized the Texas Sonogram Law as rape."

    What else would you call forced penetration that you are not given any option to avoid besides not having the legal procedure for which it is medically unnecessary?

    March 15, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Stinger

      Interesting deduction. So then, would that make abortions rape that is consentual?

      March 15, 2012 at 10:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • memyself

        if it's consensual and not coerced, then it isn't rape... dumba$$

        March 15, 2012 at 11:03 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Willyboy

    Melinda, sweetcheeks, you should pull your head out of Governor Goodhair's crusty crack and breathe some fresh air. You and he and the rest of you GOPper freaks need to keep your gnarly fingers out of womens' orifices – unless it's your own, Melinda, sweetcheeks...

    March 15, 2012 at 9:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • gstlab3

      THIS WHOLE THING ABOUT A WOMENS RIGHTS AND MAKING IT A RIGHT TO HAVE AN ABORTION OR WORSE TO GET FREE LIVING ON THE BACK OF HER NOW DISENFRANCHISED HUSBAND THROUGH NO FAULT DIVORCES AND CHILD SUPPORT IS ALL MEANT TO DESTROY MILLIONS OF YEARS OF SOCIAL EVOLUTION FOR THE SAKE OF OF CONTROLLING POPULATION GROWTH OF CERTAIN DEMOGRAPHICS.

      MEN ARE NO LONGER THE HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD OR SOCIETY.,
      GOVERNMENT AND BIG BROTHER HAVE REPLACED HIM.
      HIS GOOD PAYING JOBS ARE ALL BUT GONE EXCEPT IF HE SELLS HIS SOUL TO WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT IN SOME FASSION PROMOTING THE TAX AND CONTROL PARADIGME.

      YOU NO LONGER HAVE LOTS OF YOUNG MARRIED FERTILE WOMEN NEEDING WELL PAID HUSBANDS TO RAISE THE FAMILY AND THEIR STANDARD OF LIVING.

      ALL YOU NEED NOW DAYS IS MORE TAX PAYER MONEY ADD TO IT A SPERM BANK OR AN EX-HUSBANDS PAYCHECK AND YOU'RE HOME FREE.

      WOMEN NO LONGER HAVE TO RAISE THEIR OWN CHILDREN WITH PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND DAY CARE ALL PAID FOR BY EXSTORSION OF THE EX-HUSBANDS PAYCHECK.,
      HELL THEY ARE NOTHING MORE THAN GLORIFIED BABY SITTERS WHO INDOCTRINATE THEM INTO BELIEVING THE COMMUNIST AGENDA.

      EUGENICS.,
      THIS IS WHAT IS GOING ON HERE.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:16 pm | Report abuse |
      • Willyboy

        Shhhh, now gstlab3. It will be OK. No need to shout. Now, there's a good paranoid freak. Take your meds now and go to bed.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:31 pm | Report abuse |
      • linda123

        Shhh, now, put on your tinfoill hat and all the crazy stuff will go away. That's a good boy.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:03 pm | Report abuse |
      • RevMum

        My friend, you clearly have some serious issues with self-esteem and analytical ability, as well as a pretty obvious paranoia problem. Please, do go talk some of these things out with someone who can help you with a healthier and happier outook on life. I mean this sincerely.

        March 19, 2012 at 4:39 am | Report abuse |
    • jorline

      Sweetcheeks?

      Thought the left didn't patronize women.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • Willyboy

        You're certain Melinda is a woman? I want proof! Nurse?!! Break out the probe!!

        March 15, 2012 at 10:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Stinger

      Willyboy, you are just rude and crude.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • Willyboy

        Why, thanks, Stinger... Kinda like Melinda and her crazed gang of GOPper gynos...

        March 15, 2012 at 11:32 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Frank

    First, my apologies from the state of Texas. We've always been a bit big-headed and sometimes like to swagger a bit, but really, we try not to be just outright stupid........

    Until now. (Remember, W was not really from Texas)

    What this woman is saying is an outright lie. This is a very organized attack by (mostly) right-wing evangelical Christians in an attempt to do away with legal abortion. This is not the only state where this is going on so beware. The plan is to shame, humiliate, scare, and cost-prohibit women that are having an abortion during an already traumatic time with the end goal of eliminating abortion. They are nothing short of dishonest and the author is no exception.

    In reality, what we should be doing is requiring head sonograms for the Texas Congress to make sure that indeed there is a brain attached to their spinal cord.

    Of course, the lives that will be lost with back-alley abortions that always go up in numbers when this kind of this is enacted, will not cause an eye to bat, even when they are teenagers. Love the fetus, hate the child is the cry of the Texas Republican party. Ra ra ra.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kevin Davidson

      This is the same legislature that passed Voter ID laws that were struck down in the last day or two. There have been something like 10 voter fraud cases in the U.S. in the last 50 years but Texas (and a number of other GOP states) deem it crucial to pass these idiotic laws. Of course the real threat is the effect of Voter ID laws on minority voting. One analysis estimated that as many as 2.4 million Texans would be unable to cast votes if the election were tomorrow. A true public servant in the legislature, Republican or Democrat, would be screaming at the injustice. Instead, Perry defends it as a necessary law and has slammed the Department of Justice for 'Overreaching'.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:03 pm | Report abuse |
      • jorline

        You're so full of crap. Have a link for the 2.4 mil estimate?

        Personally, I worry about people who are afraid to get a photo ID. If you want to drive a car in ANY state you have to have a photo ID....like a driver licence.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • michaelwg

      As someone who ACTUALLY read the Bill, and looked at what groups came in and gave testimony for and against, and what people actually wrote it. I absolutely agree with you. She's being very disingenuous.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:06 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Reasonably

    Why do you want the government to rule your va gina and uterus? If they came after my genetalia there'd be guns involved.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:55 pm | Report abuse |
  16. steve

    I don't even need to read the comments section any more – I just scroll to the bottom and say, "I pray for the 80% hatemongers on both sides and salute the 20% with thoughtful comments on both sides."

    March 15, 2012 at 9:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • TrueReality

      I think 80/20 is way too optimistic...

      March 15, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • steve

        I stay optimistic because I don't read the comments section anymore. Thise was supposed to be the new possibility of rational, respectful discourse. We have all – most of us anyway – failed. Myself included. Why?

        March 15, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • TrueReality

        Myself included too. If I knew what was good for me, I wouldn't read the comments, or even the news, at all – it's too depressing. The internet could bring out a new level of discourse. Instead it brings out the worst and stupidest in people. We could have Athens, but we have Pandemonium. Why? I don't know... People are naturally adversarial, for one thing. Overall, they're not interested in conversation, or learning from others. They're interested in winning. They have their preconceived notions – anything they hear that substantiates their own views, they accept at face value, while anything that contradicts them, they reject out of hand, regardless of its validity or well-attested sources. Human nature...

        March 15, 2012 at 10:05 pm | Report abuse |
  17. TrueReality

    People are just upset that a woman dares to be anti-abortion. Turns out not all women agree with your extremist campaign.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • linda123

      Any woman can be anti-abortion. Hey, it's her opinion and her right. She just can't insert her beliefs into my decision.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:19 pm | Report abuse |
  18. Renee Marie Jones

    Shame on you, Melinda. I don't know if you have been brainwashed by conservative liars or whether you are just shouting their slogans for some personal gain, but you should be ashamed of yourself and you should stop it.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • TrueReality

      Shame on you, Renee Marie Jones. I don't know if you've been brainwashed by the liberal liars, but not all women agree with the liberal propaganda that says "women's rights" = "abortion rights".

      March 15, 2012 at 9:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • SeetotheUnt

        Shame on you, TrueReality, for advocating the oppression of an American citizen based on ideological insanity. You and lunatics like you are more damaging to our country than al Qaeda could ever dream of being.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • TrueReality

        Shame on you, SeetotheUnt, for advocating leftist insanity and extremism. You and lunatics like you are more damaging to our country than al Qaeda could ever dream of being. See? We're not so different. We each think the other side is destroying America. We just happen to be on opposite sides.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • Terre08

        S T F U TrueMakeBelieve. You have a lot more in common with the taliban than any liberals, like you they are conservative religious nuts.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:11 pm | Report abuse |
  19. SeetotheUnt

    I can think of one word that describes the author of this article. It rhymes with Runt. It starts with a C. It is completely accurate.

    Put it all together folks...

    March 15, 2012 at 9:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Stinger

      Perhaps we should ask Bill Maher

      March 15, 2012 at 11:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • jorline

      LMOA....I don't think you could put 1+1 together.

      Love the way liberals paint the right as women haters.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:25 pm | Report abuse |
  20. Kevin Davidson

    I live in Texas and unfortunately, this is the kind of drively we are exposed to by Perry and his crony appointees on a regular basis. The logic spin is mind dizzying but the average rural Texan has been so thoroughly brainwashed that anything a Republican says is gospel that it will be at least a decade before there is any hope of reason winning out.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Report abuse |
  21. Michelle Shocklee

    As a woman, a mother of two, and a Texas resident, I want to say thank you to the men and women who voted for the Sonogram Law. Abortion is a serious medical procedure. A woman's reproductive health is at stake, including future children. This law ensures those women seeking abortions will have the opportunity to review their sonogram before embarking on an irreversible decision. Most women will continue with the procedure but some won't. How is that a bad thing?? (Posting under my real name. I encourage you to join me. Posting anonymously makes it too easy to say things we wouldn't normally say if we were having the conversation in person.)

    March 15, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kevin Davidson

      Michelle,

      I think its a bad thing because it involves the government in something that should be a very private decision. Is there really a need to have a sonogram if you have decided to have an abortion? I could understand providing an option such as a checkbox on a form if the woman wants to see it, but forcing them to view and hear a sonogram is pushing the guilt card to an extreme. In that sense, I agree with Mr. Trudeau's sentiment.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • wwwFBCAKEcom

        How often do women act on their feelings and not facts. Quite often my friend. A reality check is needed when someone is about to choose to end a life that is not their own.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • Michelle Shocklee

        Kevin,
        I sincerely believe the abortion procedure is a serious medical matter. I personally know women who had an abortion "because my boyfriend made me" or "because my parents would kill me" and so on. Most women seeking abortions probably aren't thinking of it as a "medical procedure" but rather a means to be rid of a problem. But many women who have an abortion later have serious medical issues including premature births and even sterility, especially if they had a venereal disease at the time of the abortion. Having a sonogram and understanding what they're seeing is one more way to make sure they understand (especially the very young women) this is serious.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • wwwFBCAKEcom

      Agreed. Amen!

      March 15, 2012 at 9:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • wwwFBCAKEcom

      OctoberBaby is Awesome movie that you must go see.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Nuclear_Wynter

      Women are able to make their own decisions and they do not need someone legislating how they are to make those choices. Women shold be given any infomration they request. Making a woman have a procedure in which as the law says she is not even REQUIRED to view the information. Let that sink in. The procedure is REQUIRED but viewing the information is NOT. So how is this about giving women information? Its not, its about shaming woman and trying to get them to make an emotional decision rather than a logical one. If women regret their decision, guess what? That's a part of life, making decisions you regret. Another part of life is taking responsibility for your decisions and not claiming there wasnt enough laws in place preventing you from making poor decisions

      March 15, 2012 at 10:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patrick

      "This law ensures those women seeking abortions will have the opportunity to review their sonogram before embarking on an irreversible decision."

      Yet women can do this without the law, so what is the point? Force?

      March 15, 2012 at 10:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mark

      The problem is that some women do not want to have object after object inserted into their Virgina and be ridiculed, harassed, and feel violated during a time of making a very difficult decision. While the internal sonogram is recommend most women do not want it in them. Do you really enjoy your visits to a gynecologist that stretches out your lady parts to do an exam? I think not. What this bill does is subjects women to more stressful situations that are not needed. While you might disagree with abortion you are not the one making the choice. This bill sets back women's rights by decades.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:42 pm | Report abuse |
  22. tox

    Really? A critique of a cartoon? Over-simplification is in their nature.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:46 pm | Report abuse |
  23. Ken

    Only another year or two and I'll be in Canada and so glad to be rid of this god forsaken place. Keep Jesusland for yourself. You wanted the country, you can have it. Maybe I'll consider coming back when the rest of the left grows a backbone and decides to revolt.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hansel

      Bye. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ken

        Oh, don't worry... I won't. You couldn't open it fast enough for me to get through it. Enjoy your theocracy.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • jorline

      Bye!

      March 15, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hunter

      Don't blame you at all, Ken. I think a lot of us feel that way. The religious right is destroying any supposed freedoms we have in this country, and it's getting crazier everyday!

      March 15, 2012 at 10:13 pm | Report abuse |
  24. donnas

    Maybe Texans don't realize that men are the cause of unwanted pregnancies? How about passing out free condoms?

    March 15, 2012 at 9:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • mola1959ct

      How about just sterilizing the guys and get rid of the problem totally.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        Maybe we can make a giant EMP-otence device.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • jorline

      How about your mother keeping her legs crossed...would have saved us from your drivel.

      March 15, 2012 at 11:31 pm | Report abuse |
  25. Hansel

    I dare you liberals to ACTUALLY RESPOND to her points. All you people can do is spew hatred. Sad.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Nuclear_Wynter

      Well then lets debate this with reason. the article is a complete mischaracterization of the bill. They are framing it as giving women information they need to make an informed decision and that they are trusting women to be smart and intelligent and assuming also doctors. Yet, politicians with no medical training have decided to make a non-medically necessary procedure mandatory before receiving a medical procedure they just so happen to vehemently oppose because why? Oh thats right they believe they are better equipped to determine what medical information a woman should have prior to JUST this procedure. Better than the doctor and the woman. And in trusting these women and doctors they feel are so intelligent and capable, they are telling them they need to make it mandatory and there justification for making it mandatory is that well, (according to this article) they are already going to have various medical equipment stuck up there anyway and it wont hurt so whats a little additional probe you didnt want? In addition, the other argument is, well there are a few women who agree with this law, thats fine, lets ensure that they make laws that apply specifically to their medical procedures and everyone else can make decisions with people with medical training. Isnt that a favorite Repub response when wealthy people say they should pay higher taxes? Those people can just send in more money. If these women would like governmnet officials to determine which medical procedures they should have and make them mandatory, they are more than welcome to visit the members of their government before each doctors visit.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • mola1959ct

      I dare you to read the responses. They are aimed at her points. Get over yourself.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • Brouhard

        Okay, here's my reasoned response– to say that politicians "who know nothing about medicine" should not make rules about medicine is an invalid argument. Politicians also are not bankers, educators, or experts in business, yet they make reasoned rules about each. If you posit that a legislator must be an expert in order to legislate, you neuter them completely. This is why they call our form of government a "representative" form of govt - they represent the experts to tHeir best ability.

        Regarding "a few women" who share her views...it's interesting that you assume the majority of women must feel as you do. If that's so, then the next election will vote these few women out of office. For now, these "few women" were voted in by a majority of voters in their districts.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        While you make some good points there, the term "representative government" refers to the fact that we use representatives for make the decisions for us rather than decide ourselves, as a democracy would.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • Nuclear_Wynter

        I did not say politicians should make rules about medicine. Was not my argument at all. My argument is that politicians should not be making rules that do not incorporate the opinion of medical staff and should not force non-medically necessary procedures on anyone. Politicians should not dictate what medical treatments are necessary that is a doctors job not a politicians job. Every doctor seeing this bill says this ultrasound will not provide any relevant medical information. Its an attempt of When politicians being to decide medical treatments they have stepped outside the confines of their jobs. I don’t assume a majority or a minority of women feel as I do, its irrelevant how many feel this way. If I am in the minority, then the government should protect my rights from being overwhelmed by the majority. If I am the majority, my position would ensure that women who do not feel as I do would still get to have the procedure and the information because they are within their right to request it. But if women who disagree with have their way, I have no rights to refuse the procedure.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • michaelwg

      Have you actually read the bill? Or does she just sound convincing to your right wingyness?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patrick

      Keep reading, they are there.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:45 pm | Report abuse |
  26. donnas

    When will legislators STAY OUT of my uterus??? What goes on inside of me is my business. If they want to make a real difference in abortion rates, pass out free condoms to MEN. Without men, there would be no unwanted pregnancies and very few abortions, as no semen would be deposited that causes pregnancy....but, hey, maybe they don't know this yet in Texas!!

    March 15, 2012 at 9:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • TrueReality

      When people stop killing babies, that's when we'll stay out. When will the liberal government stay out of every other aspect of my life?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • MeriNC

        If it's not your baby, it's not your damned business.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • michaelwg

        Define "baby"

        March 15, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • Nuclear_Wynter

        When "babies" or "people" stop taing up residence in my body against my will, I sure will

        March 15, 2012 at 10:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • AfterMe_TheDeluge

        "TrueReality"? You don't have a clue what truth is.

        Abortion does NOT kill BABIES. A baby is something you can hold in your arms and can survive outside its host's body. If it's inside my body, it's part OF my body and NOBODY ELSE'S BUSINESS! Especially any male politician.

        Want to do away with abortions? Then make contraception MANDATORY for both males and females, unless they both decide to have a child together. End of problem!

        As for Melinda Fredericks, she is a traitor to her gender and, as such, beneath contempt. Republican Women is an oxymoron (look it up!), as is Christian Conservative.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:16 pm | Report abuse |
  27. budhot

    Never EVER going to Texas. What a bunch of inbreeds.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • jorline

      Gee, we'll miss you!

      March 15, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • guy

      inbreds

      March 15, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Report abuse |
  28. MurphyMD

    Every time I read an article or opinion piece about this issue, I always seem to find many, many errors about what is medically necessary for an abortion procedure. In some cases, a speculum and dilators are not used and a simple pill is taken. An ultrasound is not necessary and does not provide any necessary information to either doctor or patient. Journalism of this nature spreads misinformation and this is why medical articles should not be written by anyone but an MD. Nor should anyone without an RN or MD serve on any kind of state medical board, as Fredericks does.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:37 pm | Report abuse |
  29. Dave

    This tea bagger is just full of it. Just because she's a woman (allegedly) doesn't mean the the GOP tea party hasn't declared war on the women of this country

    March 15, 2012 at 9:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • jorline

      Get a life.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:01 pm | Report abuse |
  30. budhot

    This evil, disillusioned woman is clearly the face of the female Republican party in Texas. It's been 40 years since this HASN'T been an issue so why now? Politics and far right extremism. It is more important than ever to get the vote out to put these people back down the nasty holes they've been in for so long. Harsh rhetoric? Hardly. These people are truly evil, ignorant and the worst thing that can happen to a free nation.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mr Oh

      This still is a non-issue. Some people are trying to focus on the economy - how a big super nanny government that confiscates the resources of society's most productive people is not the best way to dig out of this hole we're in. It was the dems who brought this political curveball to the forefront because they have no game when it comes to creating real jobs. Give a man a fish (big gov't), and he eats for a day. Teach him how to fish (free market), and he eats for a lifetime.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Report abuse |
      • 1nd3p3nd3nt

        if only it were that simple. If it was actually a free market versus big government simplistic view on the world, then we'd have resolved this issue years ago and we'd all be taught it in school.

        Unfortunately, too many people don't invest enough time into thinking about the issue, and as such, fall for the over simplification of it.

        there's a reason why government got involved in the 'free market' and it wasn't because of some liberal political agenda, it was because companies were using people as slaves. Read the history on it, our national reserves had to be called up to stop the killing of mine employees by their company.

        It may sound ridiculous, but it HAPPENED.
        The 'free market' doesn't even exist. The whole concept is based on survival of the fittest and what did that give us? the human species.

        if species were companies, the free market will give us ONE company that dictates to all the others how things are going to be. Doesn't sound like the all the good things you've been told about the free market, does it?

        March 15, 2012 at 10:06 pm | Report abuse |
  31. michaelwg

    The 5 authors of the Bill are all G.O.P.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:33 pm | Report abuse |
  32. Tracy in Chicago

    Just a bit of info: this woman is a former middle school math teacher. I'm not really sure how that makes her qualified to speak on a medical issue. Anyone know?

    March 15, 2012 at 9:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mr Oh

      She is not any less qualified than Trudeau is to be making a cartoon strip about it.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Report abuse |
      • svann

        She certainly is not authoritatively qualified to be calling Trudeau wrong.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:36 pm | Report abuse |
  33. G2

    "I’m proud that Texas believes women are strong and smart enough to know the full truth before making such a critical decision. The only thing disappointing about the law is that it was even necessary at all." If Texas believes women are smart enough to know the full truth before making such a critical decision, then why did they pass a law forcing the ultra sounds? Hypocrites. Let people make there own decisions and live with the results. Isn’t that what republicans & T-partiers are so quick to say? No, their agenda is to be the morals police and use their bought and paid for legislators to make it law. In this sense, this is why evangelicals are no better than the Taliban.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:32 pm | Report abuse |
  34. Crazy

    Legislators don't get to determine the "standard of care".. doctors do. And certainly one party should not. This is merely justification for torturing a woman who is making a difficult decision. Shut up and get out of our lives.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:29 pm | Report abuse |
  35. rsjacksonus

    So how is a sonogram rape? Apparently then Planned Parenthood are rapists, according to the arguments of many people I see here. If rape is just based on penetration then isn't the process of abortion rape too?

    March 15, 2012 at 9:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • budhot

      PP screens for cancer and many other medical issues. Abortion is less than 3% and they most often only refer. Your hysteria proves your ignorance.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        "rape" in this case is a metaphor for requiring a woman to take an unnecessary invasive procedure to have another procedure formed.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • joe

      Do you know what rape is? Seriously. The difference is, the government is FORCING one procedure on women, whereas the other is choice. Get it?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Spencer Medvick

      Because inserting something – anything – against a woman's wishes is rape. At least in Ohio.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • jorline

        That's what your mother said.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rob

      Penetration isn't rape if you consent to it. If you are penetrated against your will, then yes, it is rape.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • rob

        When an abortion provider tells you to do the procedure it's fine. When a republican tells you to do the procedure it's rape.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:52 pm | Report abuse |
  36. Billy

    I've seen women change their mind after seeing the sonogram, these are all abortions that women would have gotten had they not seen the truth.

    I've also seen women traumatized who had an abortion and found out the true level of development after the procedure.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • mola1959ct

      Then they have to live with their choice. But it is their choice. Having some object shoved into a person against their will is just plain rape, and many women will not get over that.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike in Houston

      As a doctor, minister, counselor, or concerned friend, you have the right to encourage a woman to get the sonogram and have it described to her. That is your right, as is the right of the woman to have it done. The information is there if the choose to have it.

      But, by enacting a law FORCING every woman to participate is coercion. Perhaps you are okay with coercion. I am not. If they live to regret having an abortion, let them take responsibility. Let them speak out and try to convince others. Using legislation to manipulate an emotional vulnerability, though... shameful.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Report abuse |
  37. Evil Hollywood Liberal

    blah, blah, blah. Shill for the Republican Party, who decries "Big Government" yet seems to have no problem sticking their nose into people's most intimate and personal affairs and decisions. Shame on her.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:25 pm | Report abuse |
  38. Eric

    "several women testified they had been denied an opportunity to view their sonograms at Texas abortion facilities, an egregious violation of their rights as patients" - so the solution is to FORCE every woman to have an invasive procedure done on them, regardless of whether they want it or not? Wouldn't a more logical solution, assuming your objective is to provide women with a high standard of care instead of shaming and humiliating them into not getting an abortion, to pass a law that would make it illegal to not administer a sonogram IF a woman requests one?

    March 15, 2012 at 9:23 pm | Report abuse |
  39. longshot

    Are doctor's calling for this procedure? No. The religious right is forcing an invasive medical procedure on women. Yet they claim religious freedom if insurance companies cover contraceptives at no cost to them. They are living in a dying age. Dinosaurs. The demographics are against you and no amount of Fox News and Limbaugh will overcome that.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shortround

      It's not even religious based, as all religions I know of are against all but therapeutic abortions. These people are extremely misguided, if they want to keep women from having abortions, they should take it to Washington, not force these procedures on them. As a Catholic, I'm against abortion, but I'm also against rape, which this seems to be. This law is well intentioned but good intentions do not make an immoral act moral.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Report abuse |
  40. MaryM

    And there you have it folks, the GOP/TP, repubs forcing un-necessary medical procedures on women, again.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • longshot

      but god forbid if a female employee of a church related hospital or university gets contraceptives – that's against their religious freedoms!

      March 15, 2012 at 9:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shawn

      For all of you that keep saying it's being "forced" upon women, do me a favor and actually read the law as it is written instead of bashing people for their views..Any women that doesn't want the sonogram or any of the other information can DECLINE

      March 15, 2012 at 9:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        My reading of the law says the sonogram is required, but the information can be avoided if the patient wishes.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • Nuclear_Wynter

        The law actually says that the infomration from the ultrasound is REQUIRED to be placed in the medical records as preliminary step to get the abortion. No where does it say this procedure is optional

        March 15, 2012 at 9:48 pm | Report abuse |
  41. jason

    Vice Chairman of the Republican Party of Texas and a member of the Texas Federation of Republican Women. In 2008, she was appointed by Gov. Rick Perry to the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

    Propaganda spewing shill

    March 15, 2012 at 9:21 pm | Report abuse |
  42. indiegirlie

    Difference is (and it's a BIG difference), one is a personal choice, the other is a decision by other that's forced about the woman.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • Alexandra

      It's not forced: you can sign a waiver. Get informed.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:32 pm | Report abuse |
      • anonymous

        According to this article, the waiver is for viewing results, not the procedure itself.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:47 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        That is not the law I read. Please provide the citation.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • sharoom

        No, the waiver only applies to those who live more than 100 miles away from an abortion provider, and it only waives the requirement for having the sonogram 24 hours in advance of the abortion procedure. Instead, the waiver allows you to have the sonogram 2 hours prior to the abortion. In short, you cannot waive the sonogram. You HAVE to take it.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • James Bach

        The law that was passed actually says: "(3) TEXAS LAW REQUIRES THAT I RECEIVE A SONOGRAM PRIOR TO RECEIVING AN ABORTION" The waiver relates to viewing the results, but the procedure itself is mandatory.

        Can any of you who claim that the procedure is not mandatory please go look at the law and tell us what we're not seeing? It's at http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/82R/billtext/html/HB00015F.htm

        March 15, 2012 at 10:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • g.r.r.

        No. You MUST go through the ultra-sound. It is required. It is nothing but rape. Quit being dishonest about this.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • cerista

        (b) On the same calendar day but not less than one (1) hour
        before the abortion procedure is to be commenced and before any
        sedative or anesthesia is given or administered to the pregnant
        woman, either the physician who is to perform the abortion or a
        sonographer certified by the American Registry of Diagnostic
        Medical Sonographers, must:
        (1) perform an obstetric ultrasound on the pregnant
        woman on whom the abortion is to be provided;
        (2) display the live, real-time obstetric ultrasound
        images in a quality consistent with current medical practice in a
        manner so that the pregnant woman may view them;
        (3) provide, in a manner understandable to a
        layperson, a simultaneous verbal explanation of the results of the
        live ultrasound images, including a medical description of the
        dimensions of the embryo or fetus, the presence of cardiac
        activity, and the presence of arms, legs, external members and
        internal organs; and
        (4) make audible the live, real-time heart
        auscultation, when present, for the pregnant woman to hear, in a
        quality consistent with current medical practice and
        simultaneously provide, in a manner understandable to a layperson,
        a verbal explanation of the live heart auscultation;

        March 15, 2012 at 10:17 pm | Report abuse |
  43. Loathstheright

    Doonesbury is right, the writer is wrong.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • rob

      awesome argument!!!

      March 15, 2012 at 9:47 pm | Report abuse |
  44. she says what

    This article is written by someone who is not a medical doctor, but was appointed to a board to oversee drs, in her other job she looks over liqour. Wondering what her credentials are? Perry appointee... hired soley for the purpose of doing his dirty work... this writer is nothing but a paid underling who gets paid by the Texas taxpayers to do nothing. Bottom line? Her and Perry don't want abortions so they make it as difficult as possible.. using the phrase.."We want women to be informed." LOL, so just another group of good ol Texans who know more about women then women do.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:18 pm | Report abuse |
  45. g.r.r.

    The argument that a woman undergoing abortion will put multiple things inside is NOT a reason for the rest. The argument used here is the same as saying that if a woman is no longer a virgin, then rape can not occur. Rape by definition is unwanted penetration. That is what is going on here. Texas is saying that if you want an abortion, you must consent to a raping by the state. Nice job neo-cons.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • Alexandra

      Again, you don't have to do it. There is a waiver you can sign. No one is "forced" to do anything. It's just another option, or "choice" a doctor has to offer. And what is wrong with CHOICE?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • g.r.r.

        You need to re-read things. This is NOT a choice. If you want an abortion, then the doc MUST do the ultrasound on you, and you must watch it.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        Why don't we have the choice now?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:47 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        Why do we need a law to provide a choice we already have?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:48 pm | Report abuse |
      • Random

        It is NOT a choice. The procedure is required. The only thing the woman can decline to do is view the results.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:54 pm | Report abuse |
      • stix

        The waiver is only allowed in emergency cases. Most everyone will not qualify.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:44 pm | Report abuse |
  46. Dan I.

    You neglect one very important point in your "the abortion is a more invasive procedure." NO ONE in the State of Texas is being forced to undergo that procedure. You and your ilk have decided "Because MY morals and MY religious beliefs say X I will FORCE women throughout the state [and the country if you get your way] to undergo medically unnecessary invasive procedures to soothe my conscious."

    March 15, 2012 at 9:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • Alexandra

      O for Pete's sake, 3rd one in a row. NO ONE IS FORCED! There is a WAIVER! It is just a mandatory OPTION.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        Citation, please.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • Meg

        The article states: "Moreover, contrary to Ms. Simpson’s claims, women who do not wish to see the sonogram image or hear the fetal heartbeat may simply sign a waiver stating they declined to view the information."

        The waiver is for not viewing the results of the ultrasound; it is NOT to refuse the ultrasound. The ultrasound still takes place, whether the woman wants it or not.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:48 pm | Report abuse |
  47. tateman

    Texas did give us Ann Richards who was one of the bravest and outspoken women I have known and who also came to the defense of the most vulnerable among us. She was the opposite of this Republican shill who doesn't get Gary Trudeau and who probably loves Rush Limbag of hot air.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:15 pm | Report abuse |
  48. jj

    As much as I hated reading this deceptive article, the comments more than made up for it. I'd say the lady is clueless, but she isn't – she is merely part of the religious right's disinformation wing.
    (and I love reading the comments. Generally, they quickly become unreadable from all the idiots out there. This was a pretty smart group!)

    March 15, 2012 at 9:14 pm | Report abuse |
  49. Carl

    Once again, we have a case of opinion being mistaken for thought.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:13 pm | Report abuse |
  50. Ravi

    Melinda Fredricks: "...contrary to Ms. Simpson’s claims, women who do not wish to see the sonogram image or hear the fetal heartbeat may simply sign a waiver stating they declined to view the information...."

    That is a BLATANT LIE. No where in the text of the law is any mention of a waiver;
    See the full text here:
    http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/82R/billtext/html/HB00325I.htm

    March 15, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Billy

      Maybe because that is not the bill that was passed, look closer next time. HB15 is the one you want to look for...

      March 15, 2012 at 9:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • Alexandra

        Thank you Billy! People are freaking out about a non-issue.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • Scal

        As others have said, the waiver is only for the information. The procedure is still mandatory.

        March 15, 2012 at 11:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jmacc77

      Actually, it's in reference to http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/82R/billtext/pdf/HB00015F.pdf#navpanes=0

      March 15, 2012 at 10:16 pm | Report abuse |
  51. AC

    What is wrong with the Republican Party? All I hear from them is smaller government, more freedom, no mandates, and then they come up with this drivel. As a 50 something white male, I'm embarrassed for my country's Republcan voters spouting this non-issue, attack against women. How can you justify having these two faced, uneducated, self-serving nit-wits speak for you?

    March 15, 2012 at 9:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • MDCambridge

      It is a back-handed acknowledgement that the economy is getting better.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • dw

      I completely agree with you. As a republican, I am utterly confused about the direction the party is heading. I always thought being a Republican meant less gvt intervention and telling me how to live my life.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • KRIVKA

      You may have heard some people claim the Republican's are fascists, they represent the theocratic "American Taliban".
      On the opposite side are people who claim the Democrats are socialist. If you know anything about politics, the former is more "true" than the latter. There is a very active drive to make this country into the exact copy of a medieval state that all of our ancestors either escaped from, or were were forcibly stetted here. Not a joke and not an overstatement. The Republicans no longer represent the American way of life. Think about it.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:24 pm | Report abuse |
      • scarface86

        Take off the tin foil hat.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Alexandra

      "two faced, uneducated, self-serving nit-wits" Wow. Way to form a constructive argument. As a woman getting a Ph.D. in biochemistry, I have no problem with doctors being mandated to provide a woman with the OPTION of having an ultrasound. Only the doctor is forced provide a service that the woman can CHOSE to take advantage of or not. This is not a big deal and does nothing but provide the woman with more opportunities for information. You can't force someone to do a medical procedure and no one is doing that here. So please do your research before you call me an "uneducated, self-serving nit-wit" I don't appreciate it.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • Random

        I don't know who called you a "two faced, uneducated, self-serving nit-wit" but until you show that you are able to write anything that isn't patently false, I will have to concur with them.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • eve11

        It is not the ultrasound that is waived. The ultrasound is performed no matter what. You can waive seeing the results and listening to a heartbeat if there is one. The doctor must still describe the sonogram and you cannot avoid that.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shortround

      Forget what's wrong with the Republicans. They're all career politicians. No matter what they pass or don't, what they advertise during campaigns, their first goal is always reelection.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
  52. Patriarchae

    I really am ashamed to call myself a Texan. Only here in Texas could the radical religious right force their beliefs on all women, empowered by the state government. Only here in Texas could politicians with the full backing of the Catholic Church inflict unhealthy amounts of emotional anguish on women who are already going through a large amount of distress (despite what the religious right seem to think, deciding to have an abortion is an absolutely distressing decision, not a "lifestyle choice").

    The really sad thing is that so many women are brainwashed by the Church to believe that this is ok, to believe that they shouldn't have the right to make their own choices about their own bodies.

    It is also downright pathetic that most of the anti-abortion rhetoric comes from those who have never been in a position where having an abortion was an option, or the only choice. They have never had the experience yet wish to impose their will on everyone.

    So many of my fellow Texans and Americans make me absolutely sick.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • rsjacksonus

      As a fellow Texan its nice to see someone standing up for "informed choice". What if that sonogram showed something was wrong that could've harmed the mother, hence supporting the need for an abortion? If you actually read and understood the article nowhere in there does she mention Catholics or Christians or any other religious groups. She is mentioning that the law is required to keep up with the patient's right of informed choice. It's a basic patient right across the board. Why the problem with that? Plus, she was point out the lies of a particular reporter. Nowhere in the article does she advocate for anything other than that. I applaud her for standing up for the rights of patients and defending the truth.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:25 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        The problem is the invasive procedure required to meet the law.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:31 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patriarchae

        Why would it matter if they found a problem that supported the abortion? The abortion is being done regardless, likely because that problem was ALREADY found before. Stop beating around the bush and just admit it: the sonogram law is not there to help "protect" patients or detect problems, it is there simply as a scare tactic.. That has NOTHING to do with anything relevant to the abortion. Call it what you want, but it is certainly not an "informed choice" (especially considering it is forced and not a choice... absolutely laughable).

        March 15, 2012 at 9:32 pm | Report abuse |
      • TrueReality

        No more invasive than requiring everybody to buy health insurance, whether they want to or not. Anyway, nowhere in the actual text of the law does it mention the "invasive" medical procedure you refer to, it simply requires a sonogram/ultrasound of some sort, not all of which use the "10 inch wand" people are talking about.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • scarface86

      The argument is when life actually starts. Those who believe life starts well before a baby is born believe it is murder. I think this argument will last forever until there is a firm definition of when it starts. To say that all those opposed to abortion are religious is false.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shortround

      The child isn't a part of the mother. Basic biology should be enough to prove that. The genes of the child are a combination of those of the mother, the father, and mutations in the DNA. If the child were truly part of the mother, it would contain the same genetic information. Last I checked, humans don't reproduce by budding. Therefore, the child is a separate human being. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with these forced procedures, but abortion itself is murder, so this law should never have came up in the first place. Therapeutic abortion is a different scenario, as two lives are at stake, and in that case it is up to the mother. The fact that many of you would get more worked up about a dog getting killed than a human child is disturbing, as well. I am aware that no dogs were mentioned, but that was a needed point.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:06 pm | Report abuse |
  53. u don't know anything

    Lady...if you are a female ROBthePUBLICan...then that's just the first step to admitting you are mentally retarded...

    March 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • Alexandra

      Wow. That was helpful and a well constructed argument. Get a life you troll.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • Meg

        You're the woman getting a Ph.D.? And you use that language? Interesting.

        (from another person with a Ph.D., coincidentally)

        March 15, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Report abuse |
      • scarface86

        Are you saying someone with a doctorate cannot be in tune with pop culture? Are they just supposed to be nerds?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Report abuse |
  54. dc

    Why is it the Liberal "free-thinking, open-minded" Democrats can not discuss anything with logic. For any comment they disagree with, their vocabulary only contains degrading words like "Idiot, Moron, Racist, Stupid, Hypocrite." It's pretty obvious who the REAL tunnel-visioned hypocrites are...

    March 15, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • u don't know anything

      ok limbaugh

      March 15, 2012 at 9:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • momoya

      Why the red herringed strawman? Why not provide a relevant argument? Is calling names the best you can do?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • MDCambridge

      I agree that ad hominem attacks should be left to adolescents, but I do not see any logic coming from the right. I only see the right attempting to legislate morality, something our founding fathers clearly abhorred.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • MikeSaneJose

      What in gods name are you blathering about? Logic?? LOGIC!!! I cant here one argument from the religious right that doesnt involve assumptions from a 2000 year old book who they think was written by a mythical man in the sky, who they also believe has a personal connection with.
      To prove your point...
      LISTEN MORON/IDIOT/JACK#$$, we do not accept your 2000 year old book as the basis of everything we do.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • Shortround

        It's not the basis of everything we do, that's the fundamentalists. That was a very ill-informed comment.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mack

      The reality is that this is a forced procedure that most of these women would not have otherwise wanted. The women have made a legal choice and the procedure's sole purpose is to try and get them to change their mind. There's no logic behind this law at all – that's why it enrages people and make them call other people names. I'm not so sure that's a bad thing. Just like I'm going to stand up and scream obscenities at Fred Phelps when he and his numbskull followers picket a funeral, I'm likely going to do the same when nonsensical laws like this one come down from people who make a living claiming the government should stay out of peoples' lives.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • longshot

      this law is idiotic, stupid and moronic. if there was any basis in medical need or logic we could have a logical discussion. but since the basis for this is the fairy tale invisible man in the sky who tells you right from wrong, who's good and who's evil, it's hard to have a logical discussion with you.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bozobub

      It's also painfully obvious you are willfully blind to the exact same behavior from your own GOP/TP colleagues. Sorry, point all the fingers you like; you'll find someone pointing right back at'cha.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:20 pm | Report abuse |
  55. momoya

    How stupid is the author of this piece?? The issue is CHOICE.. If someone else is deciding to vi olate that body part, then it's r.a.p.e.. If the person wants that body part violated for a medical procedure, it's not.. How stupid can you be?

    March 15, 2012 at 9:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • rob

      Didn't you read the article??? The procedure s routine for many abortion providers. Texas is just making the share the results with the patient. Thats rape???

      March 15, 2012 at 9:44 pm | Report abuse |
  56. longshot

    Face it, some people are just driven by fear, hatred and stupidity. The far tea party right are, quite simply, morons. They favor ignorance over knowledge, faith over facts. The latest GOP candidates and all these anti-science, pro-religion-fairy-tale bills show them for what they are. Years ago the GOP was filled with intellectuals. Not any more, they've all been run out.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • scarface86

      So was the President pro-science when he supported a law that allows baby who lived through an abortion to sit in a room and die without trying to save them. How exactly is that pro-science?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • memyself

        cite reference? or is this just something you "know"

        March 15, 2012 at 11:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shortround

      I'm saying the same thing as before. This law is immoral, but so is abortion outside of those being therapeutic in nature.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Shortround

      And you don't need to believe my religion, but it's really unnecessary to insult it.

      March 15, 2012 at 10:12 pm | Report abuse |
  57. hudson5585

    You are being hypocritical and disingenuous when you say "we are giving women the information they deserve." This is clearly not about giving information. This is about intimidation. The tactics you are using against women who are contemplating an abortion are unspeakable. Shame on all supporters of this law.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • RDGinNC

      I would really love for you to explain yourself to my wife. She had an abortion at sixteen and still has nightmares. All you want to do is call people stupid. These young girls need to know what is happening. They are the ones who might suffer the rest of their lives because all you want to talk about how you are being raped. Get real. How many women have lived their lives full of guilt because they were told it is just a medical procedure?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • Patrick

        That is fine. Just provide the information without the invasive procedure. It is not needed and has no medical purpose in typical cases.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:38 pm | Report abuse |
      • hudson5585

        I would explain it to your wife this way: be informed about any procedure you do. Treat an abortion the same way you would treat, for example, a procedure to remove your appendix. You and your doctor decide what's needed. Do you need an x-ray? an MRI? an ultrasound? Is there a medical need to do the ultrasound? Or is the government mandating it to just intimidate you and prevent you (or discourage you!) from having the procedure? I'm sorry your wife has nightmares. Maybe she wasn't well informed. Maybe she shouldn't have chosen to have an abortion. When I was 18 my girlfriend had an abortion because we had an accident. We were well informed. We did everything we needed to do, And she had an abortion. To this day, no regrets. THANK GOD she had the abortion and we both got on with our lives. We both finished college, we are both married with families and kids, and we couldn't be happier. SHE DID NOT NEED AN ULTRASOUND!!

        March 25, 2012 at 3:04 pm | Report abuse |
  58. Doc

    These types of ultrasounds are performed all the time and are not any more risky than any other ultrasound be it for a pregnancy, your gall bladder, your kidneys, breast cysts, whatever. So, that whole argument is horse hockey. Secondly, the actual abortion is VERY invasive, so the argument that the law forces a woman to have an invasive procedure as if that's something she won't experience in the abortion is also horse hockey – the abortion will be more invasive than the ultrasound which will NOT go up into the uterus like the abortion will require.

    Truth be told, women getting breast augmentation probably get more information to think over than women having a baby sucked into a sink, so I personally don't think a law aimed at making sure they know what they're doing is such a bad thing.

    And we do have laws that force people to undergo medical procedures. Drunks can be forced to undergo a blood test. People involved in paternity suits can be forced to undergo DNA test, etc. So, this isn't "the first of it's kind" by any stretch.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kita

      But the difference is a woman seeking an abortion is CHOOSING to have that procedure done. The sonogram in this case is someone ELSE saying "Here, we're shoving this in you whether you like it or not". The Abortion is at least voluntary.

      Information's good, but the way everything about this law is structured causes it to come across more as intimidation than information.

      The tests you mentioned. are different. Blood tests are a legal necessity for determining how drunk someone is. It's a necessity for the benefit of others who may have been harmed by said drunk person's actions (for example; driving). DNA tests are a similar case. There's information that needs to be gained to continue with a suit.

      The problem I have with this abortion law is that it seems structured on the assumption that all women who seek abortions do so wildly without considering or thinking about what they're doing. I know people who have had abortions. They knew PAINFULLY well what they were having done ahead of time.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bobbie Smithson

      Doc, you seem to be pretty clueless and just repeating something you heard without giving much thought to it. The difference here is that you are forcing this invasive procedure on someone. In case of the abortion, the individual is making a choice. Dumb and clueless.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:37 pm | Report abuse |
  59. drk

    Amazing that this woman can't distinguish between having the RIGHT to something and being FORCED to do it.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • elsie

      Agreed. I have the right to choose to get married, but being forced into a marriage I don't want is a different thing altogether.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:31 pm | Report abuse |
  60. Glenn Lemke

    Maybe Texas military recruiters should be made to show potential enlistees the seriously wounded veterans the "great care"they'll receive on returning from the "war" in Afghanistan or the thousands of homeless vets the VA is taking care of. They're the ones getting raped.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:02 pm | Report abuse |
  61. MikeSaneJose

    This is more attempts by the self assumed high moral ground of the radical right. While I agree physicians MUST offer them proper information, patients have ZERO reason to be forced to listen to it. Its a law that attempts to force religous morality on ppl who do not view religion the same way as the overly religious Texans. I WILL NEVER EVER LIVE IN THIS GOD FORSAKEN STATE. PLZ fulfill your State's legacy and leave the union.

    March 15, 2012 at 9:01 pm | Report abuse |
  62. Patrick

    Misstatement of the year:
    "The Texas Sonogram Law simply ensures that physicians offer women undergoing abortion a similar level of informed consent already being provided for other medical procedures in Texas."

    and a level of informed consent that was possible before this law and without invasive procedures.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • longshot

      then again, isn't the "true religious conservative" arguing against medical procedures like prenatal testing? which is it?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • HexagonalPeg

      Yet Texas doesn't provide informed consent to the prisoners who are executed each year by lethal injection – a particulary painful and slow form of torture.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Report abuse |
  63. Uncle_Ray

    How soon before we can get Texas to secede from the Union? Is there any way we can force that to happen? This is the state of Rick Perry, George W Bush, Ron Paul, Oliver North, Chuck Norris, Bonnie and Clyde and Anna Nicole Smith. And now this absolute genius, Melinda Fredricks.

    Why is it that Republicans claim to always want LESS government, except when it comes to invading our bedrooms and our morality?

    March 15, 2012 at 8:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patrick

      It is a misnomer. Republicans do not want smaller government any more than Democrats do. Technically, Libertarian is the small-government platform.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • tateman

      Texas did give us Ann Richards who was one of the bravest and outspoken women I have known and who also came to the defense of the most vulnerable of us. She was the opposite of this Republican shill who doesn't get Gary Trudeau and who probably loves Rush Limbag of hot air.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:13 pm | Report abuse |
  64. longshot

    Bottom line, this is right wing politicians forcing a medically unnecessary procedure on women, based solely on their religious beliefs. If Obama was doing this they'd be rioting in the streets complaining about raping women, big gov't, losing our freedoms, socialist medicine. What a joke.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:58 pm | Report abuse |
  65. Danno

    Government mandated unnecessary medical procedures WILDLY trample women's rights. It may be a simple ultrasound, but for the government to DEMAND that you undergo it based on your choice in medical care is a massive overreach in governmental power and creates an extremely bad precedent. If you do not see this, then you deserve the government we have.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:58 pm | Report abuse |
  66. cheapo

    Wow this is a first, the article itself is the troll! Next CNN is going to start rickrolling people.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • longshot

      good point

      March 15, 2012 at 8:59 pm | Report abuse |
  67. Dexter

    Ah, so it's all about information. A woman needs information to make an informed decision about getting an abortion. So what information does this sonogram provide? The fetal heartbeat. So.. um, what does a fetal heartbeat have to do with deciding whether to get an abortion? What medically essential knowledge does it provide? None. The legislators clearly want these women to hear the heartbeat and be struck with some kind of moral epiphany to not get an abortion.

    Get that? Not to make a medical decision, but to influence the emotion behind that decision. All this bill does is take those fetus images from the placards that the abortion protesters wave around, and put them in the doctor's office. Nothing more. No medical reason. No medical value. This clarion call for "information" to make an informed decision is a catchphrase that is ultimately empty.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • MikeinMN

      Yup, religious freedom. They're trying to force on others their morals. The same reason that our Founding Fathers created this great Nation, to oppose Religious Tyranny. Maybe all those that believe that everyone should be a bible banging Evangelical Christian should consider moving back to the Old Country. Unfortunately they probably wouldn't be accepted there anymore either.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:34 pm | Report abuse |
  68. Patrick

    I've read this article twice now and I am still looking for a viable point or non-fallacious reasoning.
    Does the author think that adding another invasive procedure should be shrugged off? Ridiculous. The point is why bother with the procedure? That is what no one seems to have a viable answer for.

    If not viewing or seeing the information provided by the government-mandated procedure is an option, what is the point? The doctors need the information?

    What a joke. Some people really missed out on college.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:56 pm | Report abuse |
  69. Bianca

    There are 5 types of ultrasound available to create sonograms for women if they decide to make use of them. They and their husbands should decide, not big brother.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:56 pm | Report abuse |
  70. John

    Not a surprise that she doesn't know what 'begs the question' means or how to use that phrase. It's clearly something one only learns in those liberal brain-washing centers of higher education.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • eliud thorn

      Are you not aware, John, that many highly educated and intelligent humans that would argue that her usage is now acceptable (I am not one of them, though I am human)? Why don't you use that presumably educated mind to come up with a post of substance. I would, but I am not that educated.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • MikeinMN

      Make it through high school?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:35 pm | Report abuse |
  71. Walker

    At least during the abortion, the instruments are inserted with the woman's consent.

    GOP, make up your mind! You say you want less government intrusion, yet you consistently force it upon us. Since the majority of the U.S. population is female, it would only make sense that it would be impossible for a Republican to be elected, unless the women think so little of thenselves as to allow a man to dictate what she can or cannot do.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • JERRY

      I know this may surprise you Walker, but there are women who think it's immoral to kill their unborn children. They're the ones who haven't been brainwashed into believing an unborn child is just a lump of flesh and somehow it's their duty to kill them.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • Emcee

        There is no one forcing a woman who feels that abortion is immoral to have one. However, the radical religious right has no problem in trying to force THEIR version of morality upon everyone in the country, whether they believe it the same things or not.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:54 pm | Report abuse |
  72. Bruce

    This has nothing to do about "the right to know" as Mz Fredricks put it. It's all about shaming and embarrassing a woman so that she won't have an abortion. It's an end run on Roe vs Wade. The religious right won't stay out of peoples bedrooms or bodies. American Taliban.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:53 pm | Report abuse |
  73. Beth

    I like my medical decisions to be between me and my doctor, based on the doctor's medical training and SCIENCE, not made by politicians.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • MDCambridge

      This is the bottom line. Since this procedure is mandated by politicians, it is a "Political" procedure, plain and simple, not a medical procedure. Republicans would rather regulate choice instead of banks.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Report abuse |
  74. j

    So much rationalizing going on in this opinion piece.

    Please, tell me what else I should change in my life to make it acceptable to your standards, Herr Fredricks.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:50 pm | Report abuse |
  75. ItsAChadling

    What sort of important medically important information could the ultrasound give to the patient? "Oh, yes, a normal heartbeat, ten fingers, ten toes, and you should feel ashamed of yourself for murdering your baby. Now go home and feel ashamed until you change your mind"

    March 15, 2012 at 8:50 pm | Report abuse |
  76. Elbe

    Another example of radical conservatives attempting to enforce Evangelical Sharia law.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:49 pm | Report abuse |
  77. Mattand

    Here's a story that a Texas Republican like Ms. Fredricks doesn't want you to hear, mainly because it shows how their monstrous laws affect real people: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2012/03/a-triumph-for-the-texas-taliban/

    March 15, 2012 at 8:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Patriarchae

      Wow, absolutely disgusting. It is actually a crime for one to excessively inflict emotional distress on another. The politicians responsible for this law should be tried in a civil court and forced to pay reparation for the permanent emotional damage they are causing to thousands of women.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:00 pm | Report abuse |
  78. HexagonalPeg

    Standard conservative rhetoric. It only tells partial truths and is intended to only support conserviative ideology and bias. The point is that the legislators in Texas are deliberately interfering with what should be a private matter because they do not belived in human rights or human dignity. They merely want to enforce their platform – nothing else. Not an ounce of compassion. Not an ounce of human concern. Merely rigidity and the desire to control all aspects of life for far less than honorable purposes.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:48 pm | Report abuse |
  79. tecjug

    Funny how Ms. Fredricks expresses concern "that it took an act of the legislature to give women considering an abortion the information they deserve about this medical procedure," but then proceeds to tell us how she found all of the information on Planned Parenthood's website. She must think she's the only woman in Texas with internet access.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Billy

      The point of her saying she got it of the NAF and PP sites was to show it is standard practice to do ultrasounds.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        Maybe, but standard means, sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't. Mandated means ALWAYS it is, even if it isn't necessary.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:54 pm | Report abuse |
      • Steve

        Prostate exams are approved by the FDA and performed routinely. Doesn't mean I want one.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        DOesn't matter Steve. The government says you MUST have one, even if you just want a prescription for erectile dysfunction. Oh wait, it doesn't? It only commands worthless procedures for women and not for men too? I guess that counts as smaller government.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • Billy

        But if you were going in for a Prostate removal, would you want to be told your Mr. Happy may cease to function properly and that you'd lose bladder control?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        Are you suggesting, Billy, that your doctor is so incompetent that you need a state law to tell the doctor what to do? Gods, you watch Fox don't you?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:26 pm | Report abuse |
  80. Steve

    "We're from the Government, and we know what's best for you." – The Texas Legislature

    March 15, 2012 at 8:46 pm | Report abuse |
  81. Olorinstaff

    Informed decision? Give me a break. This is pure and simple punishment for women who choose to have a legal procedure. This Republican apologist should be ashamed of her self to think we are stupid enough to buy her crap.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:46 pm | Report abuse |
  82. whynenot

    Well written article on the face of it. Simply give women all the information they need to make an informed choice, and the time to come to a decision. It's still their choice, and their right to decide. What's the problem here? Ah, it's the radicals on both sides who hold their ancient positions to the end. No one really cares about the woman or the child.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Todd in DC

      And that information would be? ANd remember neither I, nor you, nor the legislators no jack about medicine or the abortion procedure.

      Do men who want viagra have to watch videos of people suffering from 4 hour erections or men having heart attacks?

      Let me guess, you watch fox news, you are seriously religious, and you are threatened by strong women.

      And you are probably white and male.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • whynenot

        Todd, some legislators are doctors or have experience in the medical field, so I disagree with your first statement. The information concerns the risks of abortion vs the risks of full term delivery (both have risks). Men don't have to watch the videos you describe, but it makes sense to me for them to do so. They should also be aware of the risks. Perhaps they, like we, would all be better off.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • memyself

        @whynenot The risk of death from childbirth is 11 times greater than the risk of death from an abortion procedure during the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.After 20 weeks, the risk of death from childbirth and abortion are about the same. dumba$$

        March 15, 2012 at 11:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Olorinstaff

      Here's the information the woman needs. Do I want a child at this time? Are abortions legal.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • hudson5585

      This is not about information. This is about intimidation.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:12 pm | Report abuse |
  83. Bob

    Hey, Melinda. Are you as sure about the medical implications of the procedure as you Republicans were about Terry Schivo still being conscious and having prospect for a recovery? Politicians (particularly those that have rosaries cutting off the blood flow to their brains) don't mix.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:45 pm | Report abuse |
  84. Karen Vicknair

    Any woman considering an abortion could ask her doctor for an ultrasound. It didn't take an act of the legislature to make this happen. It took an act to make it mandatory. Women do not get abortions on a whim. I

    March 15, 2012 at 8:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Billy

      I think you missed the part about the women not being allowed to see the sonogram they were paying for as part of their abortion procedure.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:47 pm | Report abuse |
      • michaelwg

        I missed the part where she cited her reference.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:51 pm | Report abuse |
  85. Beth

    Somehow I think you are also one who cries out against 'big government'. (ahem)

    March 15, 2012 at 8:43 pm | Report abuse |
  86. derp

    Wow, this is 10 gallons of derp in a 5 gallon derp bucket.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:43 pm | Report abuse |
  87. Chip

    Well I guess she won't find it wrong to force Republicans to undergo mandatory lobotomies when they want to vote, so that they'll understand their vote better since a lobotomy is a normal medical procedure. Who care if it gets forced on them; they're voluntarily wanting to vote so making them have this procedure to do it should be perfectly acceptable using her logic (or more accurately, the lack thereof).

    March 15, 2012 at 8:43 pm | Report abuse |
  88. mason

    real simple. she is a MORON

    March 15, 2012 at 8:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Todd in DC

      All women are. Thats why they need men to tell them what to do, how to think, and what to wear. I think all women should wear burqas. Then they will be free. Or something.

      March 15, 2012 at 9:02 pm | Report abuse |
  89. Kenoscope

    No one has the right to tell an adult woman what she can and cannot do with her own body. The GOP, the Government, the fanatic religious madmen are NOT GODS! They are simply power hungry slavers or women.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chris Synfield

      The Old Guard ( ie Men's Club) does not let power slip from their cold, lifeless fingers. Its a pity that women thought the Women's Movement had achieved its goals and stopped pushing. Oops.
      "To call a sonogram rape is an injustice to women who really have been raped."
      When it's FORCED on you, its different. If you can't see that, then wuff – it's YOUR problem.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:57 pm | Report abuse |
  90. Evan L. Lehman, M.D.

    I think non-doctors should stay out of the fray, regardless of being pro or con. They both get it wrong. BTW, WHO decides what women DESERVE to know? Does that statement mean that if they want an abortion, they are FORCED to know something? Should we be FORCED to know about the harmful effects of ice cream or a cheeseburger? Yes, people do need to know about the risks to their health when they consent to a surgical procedure, but must they be forced to know those risks? Religion has gone too far in trying to regulate people's private lives. Believe as you wish, but do not force others to comply. If you think abortion is wrong, don't have one; but don't prevent others from following their own conscience.
    ELL

    March 15, 2012 at 8:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Allen

      I don't think you are a Doctor. All medical procedures require patient consent. You are no more FORCED to know in this situation than being FORCED to now the consequences of having an appendix removed. This is along the same lines as having an exam to check my prostate before the Doctor cuts me open and takes it. I wouldn't be "raped" in the first situation nor is a woman "raped" in the second. To use the term "rape" in this situation reduces rape to a common medical procedure carried out on an outpatient basis.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:54 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        Penetrative Rape: being forced against your will to have a body part or other object inserted into an orafice for the purpose of causing pain and/or humiliation of the victim.

        Sounds like rape to me bub. WOmen consent to having penises inserted all the time. But that doesn't lessen the magnitude of those who claim they were raped with one.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:04 pm | Report abuse |
      • drk

        Except that the Texas legislature forgot to write the laws that apply to mens' prostates. Must have been an oversight.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Allen

        Todd thank you for proving my point rape is meant to hurt or humiliate. I don't think anyone would think that this procedure is carried out to hurt or humiliate women.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        Boy, you sure missed the point, Allen. You must be a repub. THis test IS LEGISLATED to hurt and humiliate. If it were medically necessary, a doctor would proscribe it, law or no law.

        When a legislator in Austin says a woman must be penetrated with a wand for no medical reason, then it is a rape. Figure it out you hypocritical GOP loser.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • Mike in Houston

        The rape part is the lack of consent. If it is determined by your doctor on firm medical knowledge and agreed to by you (as is the case with examples you give), then it is not rape.

        If there were a law that said you are required to get a prostate exam every time you go to the doctor, even for a sniffle and you did not want, or medically need it... that is coerced or forced insertion of a foreign object. In other words, rape.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:27 pm | Report abuse |
  91. dutch

    The appeal to authority was especially effective. The FDA approves it so it must be fine right? Because republicans are all about putting blind faith in government agencies.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • DumbRepublicans

      Yep. The hypocrisy and stupidity of Republicans like this shriveled up shrew never fail to amuse.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:42 pm | Report abuse |
  92. michael in Des Moines Washington

    This woman and her insipid opinions are another example of the conservative selective reality that rails against government intrusion on individuals on the one hand, then with the other hand passes laws that violate sacrosanct personal liberties and decisions. Gary Trudeau's jibes are spot on with the Shaming Room, the Shaming Wand, and I thee Rape. Heaven help us all if the Republicans keep the House, take back the Senate and take the White House in 2012. It is bad enough that they manage to bring their inspired Fascism to so many state legislatures with arcane laws like this one in teh great lunacy or Texas.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Really?

      Heaven help us if the empty suit gets another 4 years, courtesy of the 'hand out society'. Let the government waste end soon and get us on track so that our grand kids aren't saddled with debt up the whaa-zoo

      March 15, 2012 at 8:44 pm | Report abuse |
      • HexagonalPeg

        That is the response of a sore loser, not someone who stands behind the United States of America.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • Chris Synfield

        It was the Republicans under The Shrub that ran this country's economy off the rails and brought America to its knees, NOT the current administration which has done everything possible ( short of deporting every GOP member of congress to a penal colony in the south seas. Obama has had to fight the Repugnicants every step of the way in an attempt to undo all the damage Bush/Cheney and their buddies have done.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:04 pm | Report abuse |
      • Huh!

        Are you forgeting that the last three rupublicans got us to where we are as far as the national debt goes? And you want another one in the white house? Are you insane? Google "national debt". The national debt started to sky rocket with Reaganomics and continued with bush senior and junior then junior cut corporate taxes and it got worse. Not to mention two credit card wars.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm | Report abuse |
  93. Dana

    You're more than a little confused, Ms. Fredricks. Forcing a woman to undergo a procedure is not a part of any civilized practice of medicine.Shame on you. You're yet another reason Republicans are the laughingstock of women throughout the nation.

    Mittens Romney wants to destroy Planned Parenthood. All the cats are out of the bag now.

    Ms. Fredricks and her ilk long for the days of back alley abortions.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
  94. Pablito 65

    Your Kidding right? Your arguing against a comic strip? Didnt the GOP just argue that Rush is just an entertainer and you shouldn't take it seriously?

    March 15, 2012 at 8:32 pm | Report abuse |
  95. GnoP

    Give me a break lady. The cartoon makes the point that this procedure serves no other purpose than to sway a woman from making a decision she is LEGALLY allowed to make.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Allen

      What is wrong with that? All laws by definition are meant to sway a person's behavior. There are people who think abortion is wrong. It is one thing to outlaw abortion and quite another to insist that a person be informed of what an abortion is and does. If you think an abortion is just another procedure like any other surgery shouldn't a women be informed of the consequences like any other procedure?

      March 15, 2012 at 8:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        *sigh*. THis law is trying to dissuade someone from doing a legal procedure. When the government forces you to have a prostate exam in order to get a vasectomy, then we can talk.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • GnoP

        Amen Todd

        March 15, 2012 at 8:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Brandon

        If Texas had not decided to abandon science for magic sky wizard propaganda in their school curriculum, then perhaps the graduates of their schools would have a better grasp of the process of reproduction without having to play the state-mandated fetus video game.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Billy

      It is to give a woman pause before she makes undergoes a procedure that cannot be reversed. It is also in order to dispel all of the "blob of tissue" lies. Can you imagine the trauma of a woman that finds out the true level of development after being told lies?

      March 15, 2012 at 8:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        Do you really think women just blindly choose an abortion as casually as picking out a dress? THey've already gone through the ramifications of their actions.

        I thought you repubs were all for less government intrusion. Or are you simply hypocritical?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • Tony

        I call it religious fanatic brainwashing!

        March 15, 2012 at 9:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • Brandon

        If a tadpole is a frog, then maybe a fetus is a human.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Allen

      Todd this law doesn't add the procedure, but clarifies that the information obtained from it be given to the patient. You are probably right that if this information was given to these women it might change their minds. If you are being honest to the debate we are having here, and it changes their minds what does that say about the procedure?

      March 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        It says its a difficult decision to make that is no one else's business. Are you suggesting that texans would now have to care for the pregnancy and pay for the raising of the child, EVEN IF THE MOTHER IS THE ONE WHO RAISES IT?

        Remember, if the state government is forcing her to have the baby, the state government should be the one to pay for it. And if the state is getting involved with the decision, then it better get involved with the consequences of the child being born.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • drk

        False.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • Mike in Houston

        The law mandates a procedure that is medically unnecessary. That is the only thing I need to know. How a woman comes to her decision and what HER doctor tells her in consultation is none of the business of the government other than to know that the advice is MEDICALLY sound.

        Are you really arguing that women need governmental protection from themselves? In a state without a motorcycle helmet law?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:33 pm | Report abuse |
  96. Howard

    The author of the article has missed the entire point of the issue. Each woman, not the "Collective Heads-Up Their Collective Rear-Ends" Texas legislature, should decide whether she wants this procedure regardless of how safe it may be or what information she may not receive if she elects to forego it.

    Would the Conservative wing of the Republican Party please get to heck out of our bedrooms and our bodies!

    March 15, 2012 at 8:28 pm | Report abuse |
  97. Jeff

    Another stupid cow from Texas!

    March 15, 2012 at 8:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Marcus

      Ahhh, more name-calling from the "enlightened" crowd. Well, we know that those without facts resort to name-calling as a last, desperate measure.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:32 pm | Report abuse |
      • Dan

        @Marcus – in this case, the moniker is accurate. I would have called her yet another hypocritical Republican moron. These are the types who want government out of regulating their vapid, greedheaded little get-rich quick schemes, but just love having government intrude into your bedroom.

        Hypocrites.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • Brandon

        OK, then sheep. You among them.

        March 15, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mark

      Stop insulting cows. :)

      March 15, 2012 at 8:51 pm | Report abuse |
  98. Jay

    Wow, I'm really swayed by the credibility of one of Perry's stooges.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm | Report abuse |
  99. Alan

    It is amazing how liberal Democrats believe they know all. Those women like Carole Simpson and Soledad O'Brien have no business on any network other than MSNBC. That is especially true for the racist O'Brien!

    March 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Todd in DC

      actually, republicans know it all. THey know what medical procedures we need done, what god we need to worship, what language we can hear on TV, who we can sleep with, who we can marry, how the Earth was created, and which parts of American history need to be corrected.

      Yup, republicans are all geniuses.

      Or not.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sure

      And republicans don't? Give me a break!

      March 15, 2012 at 9:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • michaelwg

      This Liberal Democrat actually read the Bill. have you?

      March 15, 2012 at 10:09 pm | Report abuse |
  100. emmageraln

    Reblogged this on emmageraln and commented:
    Your forcing women to have the procedure... Forcing. That's the point, it's a disgrace.

    March 15, 2012 at 8:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kalessin

      Oddly enough, most states also "force" girls under the age of 18 to get parents permission. You against that as well?

      March 15, 2012 at 8:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • thisissonotimportanttoourcountry

        Actually, all states that "force" minors to get parent permission also are "required" by federal law to have a judicial consent rule whereby a minor can obtain a judges consent in place of the parents (this especially important where the minor was raped by her parent)

        March 15, 2012 at 8:50 pm | Report abuse |
      • Max Powers

        Most states require minors to get consent for a lot of things. That' s different. Of course in Texas, I know y'all don't know the difference between women and little girls!

        March 15, 2012 at 8:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        Hey Kale, what other laws are used to prevent adults to get legal procedures? Yeah, thought so. Small government, right?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • Nuclear_Wynter

        Yes, because of course adult women and children are the same and women need someone to force them to do things like children do

        March 15, 2012 at 9:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Allen

      Actually you are missing the point of the law and this article. This is part of the process of consent. It is not unusual for any operative procedure, and is part of the consent process for an abortion before the law. This law just makes the information that is obtained available for the patient. I say available because the patient can reject the information.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
      • Beth

        Actually, it is medically not necessary and it is NOT standard. If a DOCTOR feels there is a MEDICAL reason for it then that is between the doctor and his or her patient. It isn't for politicians who are not trained in medical science to decide. I want my medical decisions based on science, not politics.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • Billy

        Beth
        While it may not be medically necessary in most situations, most abortionists in Texas did this as part of standard practice before the law was passed because of safety and liability reasons. Nothing like accidentally giving a woman a hysterectomy by pulling on a uterine fibroid, or rupturing a pregnancy you did not realize was ectopic. Even with the sonograms the Southwestern Womans Surgical center in Dallas has managed to send 3 women to the hospital in the last 4 months for lacerated cervix and excessive bleeding.

        This law gave women the right to see the sonogram they were already paying for.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        Wow Bill, family tree fork much? The law adds nothing. It doesn't even pay for the procedure. Patients are forced to pay for it themselves. Many times the procedure is not medically necessary. But a bunch of fat old white men want to exert power over people.

        Again, small government, right?

        March 15, 2012 at 9:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • Billy

        These women are provided with a list of places that will provide the ultrasound service for free.
        I have extreme genetic diversity, thanks for asking.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Billy

      Was it previously considered "rape" when the abortionists routinely did these before the law was passed?
      To call a sonogram rape is an injustice to women who really have been raped.

      March 15, 2012 at 8:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • Kelly Johnson

        Tell you what, the day that the government forces you to have something inserted into your rectum, then we'll talk.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:54 pm | Report abuse |
      • drk

        I've been raped and I find the sonogram law horribly more offensive than using the term rape to describe it.

        March 15, 2012 at 8:59 pm | Report abuse |
      • Billy

        The day a common sense law is needed to tell a doctor he actually has to feel if my prostate is inflamed during a physical in my old age, is the day I start worrying about the quality of doctors in general, not just abortionists.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • Todd in DC

        WOw bill. You really are stupid. You think you need a law to tell a doctor to tell you you need a required medical procedure? You think if women medically need a sonogram, this law is the only thing preventing a licensed physician for deciding not to do a sonogram?

        All doctors provide necessary treatments and tests. Leave the fat men in Austin out of it.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • Billy

        These doctors will do anything to make a sale, and an ultrasound reduces the chances of making a sale. I think providing women with informed consent is a conflict of interest to these doctor's pocketbooks.

        March 15, 2012 at 9:28 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4