This is unbelievable.

[shira]

Originally posted by: ayabe
This will get struck down in court.

Fundies need to find a new hobby.

I agree. Forcing a woman to reveal this information could be justified only if there were some "compelling government interest:"

To pass strict scrutiny, the law or policy must satisfy three prongs:

First, it must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. While the Courts have never brightly defined how to determine if an interest is compelling, the concept generally refers to something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. Examples include national security, preserving the lives of multiple individuals, and not violating explicit constitutional protections.

Fewer abortions isn't "necessary or crucial", and Oklahoma will never be able to overcome this hurdle.

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
wtf is the issue with this? there is no name... counties arent exactly small...

1) Date of abortion (no biggie)
2) County in which abortion is performed (oh noes, the people will know what county it was performed in!)
3) Age of mother(oh noes an age!)
4) Marital status of mother(oh noes she could be single! or married!)
5) Race of mother (no dont show the race)
6) Years of education of mother (no dont show the education level)
7) State or foreign country of residence of mother (nooo dont show was state and or COUNTRY she lives in)
8) Total number of previous pregnancies of the mother (oh noes?)

Honestly why are people's panties in a wad?

and need original commentary or lockity lock

In a board full of inane posts, this is a standout - I honestly can't recall ever, in my many years here, seeing a post of this length so lacking in content. It's ironic that it ends with you, well, complaining about a lack of content. What a world!

gtfo.. i have way more input and personal opinion in that post than the OP has throughout the entire post... and i see you put a LOT of content into your post... Pot meet Kettle...

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Oklahoma women undergoing abortion procedures will be legally forced to reveal:

1) Date of abortion
2) County in which abortion is performed
3) Age of mother
4) Marital status of mother
5) Race of mother
6) Years of education of mother
7) State or foreign country of residence of mother
8) Total number of previous pregnancies of the mother

Sounds like great statistical data. What's wrong with it?

Sure it's great. But on what basis can you force a woman to reveal this information about herself?

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: CitizenKain
Imagine the intimidation that would arise from a list like that.

What intimidation?

You know, a bunch of religious nutbags finding out when someone has had an abortion and showing up outside their house.

This bill is typical garbage from the rightwing authoritarians. I'm half surprised they don't require pictures and just post them on billboards.

 

[miketheidiot]

asd

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
wtf is the issue with this? there is no name... counties arent exactly small...

1) Date of abortion (no biggie)
2) County in which abortion is performed (oh noes, the people will know what county it was performed in!)
3) Age of mother(oh noes an age!)
4) Marital status of mother(oh noes she could be single! or married!)
5) Race of mother (no dont show the race)
6) Years of education of mother (no dont show the education level)
7) State or foreign country of residence of mother (nooo dont show was state and or COUNTRY she lives in)
8) Total number of previous pregnancies of the mother (oh noes?)

Honestly why are people's panties in a wad?

and need original commentary or lockity lock

counties in rural areas have a few thousand people

except no where does it ask for "county of abortee" just county where performd... and you are not thinking people already travel outside of their own county to perform the abortion?

sorry i misunderstood your comment

i'll be honest... i misread the stuff to be posted online first... i thought it said "state or county of residence" not "state or foreign country"

damn R

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: shira
Sure it's great. But on what basis can you force a woman to reveal this information about herself?

She is not forced. The procedure and its requirements are optional.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: CitizenKain
Imagine the intimidation that would arise from a list like that.

What intimidation?

You know, a bunch of religious nutbags finding out when someone has had an abortion and showing up outside their house.

This bill is typical garbage from the rightwing authoritarians. I'm half surprised they don't require pictures and just post them on billboards.

Hmmm...I must of missed that part where the women's address was required. Those damn rightwing authoritarians!!!

 

[Mani]

Case # 23045984320593845 of "small government conservatives" favoring big government when it suits their interests.

 

[DealMonkey]

OK it not OK. :thumbsdown:

BTW, it will cost $281,285 to implement, $256,285 each subsequent year to maintain. Where are you wingnuts to bitch about the expense? You bitch about the costs of Obama flying here or there on business, why not this?

 

[MotF Bane]

Retarded.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

It lives again!

"I think collecting information like this is going waay to far. imo"

ROFL. Nice commentary...maybe you'll get next year's Nobel prize.

 

[n yusef]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: shira
Sure it's great. But on what basis can you force a woman to reveal this information about herself?

She is not forced. The procedure and its requirements are optional.

:roll:

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It lives again!

"I think collecting information like this is going waay to far. imo"

ROFL. Nice commentary...maybe you'll get next year's Nobel prize.

I think the article speaks for it's self.If you want a blog go here www.bloglines.com

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It lives again!

"I think collecting information like this is going waay to far. imo"

ROFL. Nice commentary...maybe you'll get next year's Nobel prize.

Sorry if you want a blog go elsewhere.

LOL...is it too much to ask for you to be a tad more specific? I can't believe the crap that goes on here.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It lives again!

"I think collecting information like this is going waay to far. imo"

ROFL. Nice commentary...maybe you'll get next year's Nobel prize.

Sorry if you want a blog go elsewhere.

LOL...is it too much to ask for you to be a tad more specific? I can't believe the crap that goes on here.

If you don't like this forum, i am sure you could find another one to your liking

 

[Genx87]

Is it even legal for the govt to collect data like this? Even if it is anon? I know private organizations can and do and then sell that back to the govt.

 

[Zstream]

When people are using tax dollars to fund abortion it is the choice of the people to inact such laws.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Zstream
When people are using tax dollars to fund abortion it is the choice of the people to inact such laws.

What if the individual pays for their own abortion? Should they be allowed to opt out?

Oh and careful how you use "the people", since there's a fair amount of frowning from both sides on this, I think you're the minority bubba.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: shira
Sure it's great. But on what basis can you force a woman to reveal this information about herself?

She is not forced. The procedure and its requirements are optional.

I guess you didn't take symbolic logic in college. Your use of "and" means that the adjective "optional" applies to both halves of the conjunction. Thus, your post is saying: The procedure is optional and the new requirements are optional. Which is false:

Oklahoma women undergoing abortion procedures will be legally forced to reveal . . ."

But perhaps what you meant was that, because the exercise of the constitutionally-protected right to abortion is optional, any requirements - imposed by government - pursuant to exercising that right are okay. Is that what you're saying? And if so, what does that mean with respect to the optional exercise of other rights, such as speech?

Have you really thought this through, or do you just like to post on impulse?

 

[piasabird]

Nothing wrong with this except the prior abortions information. Similar kind of information is kept on people receiving financial aid or attending a state school.

What about demographic information on the father?

I wonder how the March of Dimes got all its information on Pre-term birth rates state by state?

I wonder how many abortions some of these late nite talk shows like lettermen cause.

I wonder if this is any worse than the questions on the US Census?

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: Zstream
When people are using tax dollars to fund abortion it is the choice of the people to inact such laws.

Nope.

 

[Atreus21]

Frankly, $250,000 a year sounds like a penny-pinching, coupon-clipping old lady compared to the way my city spends money.

 

[novasatori]

curious what happens when its a 13-14yr old girl who got knocked up by her boyfriend

will they still be able to collect/post the data?

 

[imported_inspire]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Nothing wrong with this except the prior abortions information. Similar kind of information is kept on people receiving financial aid or attending a state school.

What about demographic information on the father?

I wonder how the March of Dimes got all its information on Pre-term birth rates state by state?

I wonder how many abortions some of these late nite talk shows like lettermen cause.

I wonder if this is any worse than the questions on the US Census?

This violates the concept of informed consent and HIPAA. The Census is completely different. How are you folks not seeing this?