abortion law wording

[stevo]

What does the following line in the law mean, technically?

"The woman seeking an abortion may elect not to receive these images, sounds, or explanations,"

Does "may elect not to receive" mean she can choose not to be given access to, or mean she can choose to not listen/look at as the doctor is forced to show images/sounds/describe procedures.

I am having an discussion about it elswhere, and I want other opinions.

Stevo

[Tx Redneck]

I understand it to mean she has the choice to refuse disclosure of said info.

[Forever_frost]

I understand it to mean she has the choice to refuse disclosure of said info.

This

[racrguy]

It's horseshit that it is even in the bill with the POSSIBILITY of mandating it. See:Oklahoma abortion law.

[Forever_frost]

It should be mandated. You're going to take a life? You should know all the facts about it. Afterall, don't you liberals want the women to know exactly what is going on?

[racrguy]

It's not life if it can't maintain its own bodily functions, until such time it should be more aptly classified as a parasite.

[VETTKLR]

It's not life if it can't maintain its own bodily functions, until such time it should be more aptly classified as a parasite.

[LiveFreeOrDie]

It's not life if it can't maintain its own bodily functions, until such time it should be more aptly classified as a parasite.

Wow.

[YALE]

It's too touchy a subject, and the wording of the law is just to put a shitty guilt trip on a woman in a potentially sensitive time. That said, the major issue I have with it is, it's a legislated intrusion on Dr./patient confidentiality. It's not my business who gets abortions, if I didn't have a hand in making the kid.

[Vertnut]

It's not life if it can't maintain its own bodily functions, until such time it should be more aptly classified as a parasite.

So a quadraplegic or someome on life support are not "life"? That's a pretty shitty interpretation, don't you think?

[mikec]

I would hope that it means she doesn't have to be 'legally' subjected to what amounts to mental torture.

It's too touchy a subject, and the wording of the law is just to put a shitty guilt trip on a woman in a potentially sensitive time. That said, the major issue I have with it is, it's a legislated intrusion on Dr./patient confidentiality. It's not my business who gets abortions, if I didn't have a hand in making the kid.

This, on all three points.

Were my family member raped and a pregnancy occurred as a result, I personally wouldn't consider that fetus life and it will be terminated with prejudice, and there is absolutely no need to jack with her head by forcing her to view the vitals of an unwanted burden on her body and soul.

That said, government has no business in this, as in so many other facets of our lives in which they continually interject.

[Sean88gt]

So a quadraplegic or someome on life support are not "life"? That's a pretty shitty interpretation, don't you think?

Is that a life? Or a burden?

[Vertnut]

Is that a life? Or a burden?

I guess it depends on if it's your family member or someone elses. My point is that there's a very fine line in defining "life" and his example is horrid.

[Sean88gt]

I don't disagree and his perception would probably change if he had kids. Mine did.

[mikec]

Is that a life? Or a burden?

I would consider it more a burden.

Consider the grandmother that was saddled with the poor little guy dumped by Lake Lavon last year. Little guy was nothing more than a mass of flesh that was able to breath, she lost it, and then dumped him. One of her statements was that she felt like she had been sentenced to hell and was actually relieved that it was over, even if she did have to go to prison for the rest of her life.