Oklahoma Abortion law

Normally I don't blogg about this sort of stuff but felt like it today. There is a new law in Oklahoma that requires women that WANT an abortion to understand what is at stake. The Dr. performing the abortion must turn the screen towards the woman and point out things like dimensions of the child, number of fingers and toes and heart activity etc.. I don't know for sure why this has to be done, possibly to educate the woman about what is going to be removed from her body? Possibly (hopefully) to change her mind. I'm sure if she did have a change of heart the child would thank her. Just imagine how the child in the Roe vs. Wade feels today...Or the mother for that matter who is a big time supporter of unborn childrens rights now. Anyway...I was reading on www.drudgereport.com of the new law and reading my favorite part of the stories, the comments. I was surprised by all the womans rights advocates that were berating the new law and calling the supporters the "religous right (Republican bible beaters I suppose)" and MEN? Like Demoncrates have no religous conviction, are godless heathens and are all abortion advocates? And not all MEN are against abortion. I'm sure there are a ton of men out there that are glade to see it legal. They can go out and have sex with who ever they choose and the only consiquence if a "Ooops" happens is pay the fee and "accident" cured.

It seems to me that when some people don't get their way they have to complain start the name calling. What ever happened to commen sense? Commen sense would seem to dictate that if there is a medical procedure that will be done the Dr. should try everything in there power to educate the woman of the consequences of any procedure. Both short term and long term. States have the right to pass laws to protect their citizens. I feel this includes both born AND unborn. Are there medical reasons abortions should be performed? Sure. In cases of molestation, incest, rape or if the mothers health is in jeopardy of course the woman should have the right to choose to abort. But in other cases where the girl has gotten pregnant because she was sexually active and pregnant at a young age and got knocked up or a woman was sleeping around and got knocked up and already has too many kids to take care of or never wanted kids to begin with adoption should NOT be an option. When I have an "accident" I have to pay for my mistakes. This should NOT include killing an innocent person because it would be convenient. Thats not "paying" for a mistake, thats eliminating one.

So, all these "feminists"are leaving comments like one of "endofanerror's" comment stating it is legal and a "REAL" person has more rights than a maybe gonna be person? How sick is that! Are you kidding me? I think the Nazi's and Italian's did something similair in the 30's and 40's. I guess they just called that late term abortion? Well, we stopped that. Maybe she'd be happy with China's one child policy. It's legal too. I don't think Anti abortion commentators were questioning the legality of the issue, just the morality. She also asked who decides what the last resort is and decided herself it should be the woman. What about the men? Where are they in this equation? They don't have a say? If it were MY child I'd welcome the opertunity to keep my child if the woman I was dating didn't want the child. I'd BETTER have a say!

So, let me get this right (correct), anti abortion commentators are religous people who are wanting to give an unborn REAL (thats right endofanerror) person a voice and the womans rights commentators are all Nazi followers who feel it is okay to kill if THEY think it is okay? One side seems to care about the children and the other seems to be selfish. Here is a thought, if your looking to "play around" and have sex and have no intentions of getting pregnant and raising the child then get used to taking it analy.