Arizona Bans Funding to Planned Parenthood

[Cantih]

UPDATE!
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archive....php?ref=fpblg

Before you write off Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett as another one of those fringy state officials diving deep into the birther waters of Hawaii, consider this: He is one of the co-chairs of the Romney campaign in Arizona.
Then again, that honorary position already comes with a few smudge marks. Another of Romney’s co-chairs was Paul Babeu, the virulently anti-immigrant Arizona sheriff who resigned as co-chair in February when he was forced out of the closet by allegations of an affair with … an illegal Mexican immigrant.



One more note about Bennett. Serving as Romney co-chair is a reversal of Bennett’s campaign pledge when he was running in 2010 not to endorse other candidates while secretary of state. It was “not appropriate” for the the state’s chief elections official to make endorsements, Bennett reportedly said at the time. Acknowledging his reversal Monday, Bennett told the East Valley Tribune, “I am allowed like everyone else to have my personal opinions.”

[Plow]

It's a different kind of "right".

The only thing he's really even different on, other than being even more extreme, is the wars.

Pretty much every other single thing the left "stands for" he's completely against, he just somehow fools people into believing he's somehow different by saying everything should be up to the states.

He's not ok with abortion. He's not ok with gay marriage. He's not ok with civil rights in general, he just wants the states to be the ones to declare black people 2/5 of a person instead of the federal government.

[archibaldcrane]

Yep, hence a "different kind of 'right'".

[zoobernut]

The only thing he's really even different on, other than being even more extreme, is the wars.

Pretty much every other single thing the left "stands for" he's completely against, he just somehow fools people into believing he's somehow different by saying everything should be up to the states.

He's not ok with abortion. He's not ok with gay marriage. He's not ok with civil rights in general, he just wants the states to be the ones to declare black people 2/5 of a person instead of the federal government.

This is the crux of the issue with Ron Paul (if you get past all the crazy) is that he doesn't want to take responsibility for anything and he takes that position under the pretense of states rights.

[Eurell]

The issue is not with medical consideration, it's with legal consideration. The declaration that you are pregnant any time you're not on your period means birth control is, in legal terms, a form of abortion directly. In other words, that bill is directly aimed at eventually getting birth control banned along with abortion, and if they can't get/keep them banned, at least apply the same pure shame tactics as they're currently only able to pull off with abortion.

It's not declaring you are pregnant any time you're not on your period. It is just stating that it is being counted the same as it has always been counted medically. Unless you think that you are medically considered pregnant anytime you are not on your period? I'm not doubting that they want to eventually outlaw abortion and birth control and w/e else they want, I just don't think that the statement of pregnancy week 1 starting when you end your period as opposed to at conception, is going to help their case at all. Because again, this is how it has always been.

[MaachaQ]

It's not declaring you are pregnant any time you're not on your period. It is just stating that it is being counted the same as it has always been counted medically. Unless you think that you are medically considered pregnant anytime you are not on your period? I'm not doubting that they want to eventually outlaw abortion and birth control and w/e else they want, I just don't think that the statement of pregnancy week 1 starting when you end your period as opposed to at conception, is going to help their case at all. Because again, this is how it has always been.

Unless you actually know for certain when you got pregnant, then you doctor will set that date as the conception date. Extreme example, but say you were a virgin who got raped; you know exactly when it happened, and if you didn't have sex again then that is most definitely when you got pregnant. Having the law set an arbitrary date when there are other ways to prove the conception date and age of the fetus are stupid. Ultrasound at ~2 months pregnancy, which most US women get nowadays, is far more accurate than it has ever been and should be able to reliably set a conception date and due date for most women.

Even outright bans on abortion and/or birth control will never work, there will always be an underground market for these services, so women will be forced into much worse situations if forced to choose these "other options." There's a rather big deal going on right now in South Korea about abortion. It is illegal to abort unless for medical purposes, and never allowed past the magic 24 weeks. Women still get abortions though, many times from their own gynecologist/obstetrician, since abortion services will be paid in cash and under universal health care the doctors can always use the extra cash. The government wants women to have more babies (Korea's birthrate is among the lowest in the world), but even with what should be strict controls women do find a way to abort if they so choose.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/wo...pagewanted=all

[Eurell]

Unless you actually know for certain when you got pregnant, then you doctor will set that date as the conception date. Extreme example, but say you were a virgin who got raped; you know exactly when it happened, and if you didn't have sex again then that is most definitely when you got pregnant. Having the law set an arbitrary date when there are other ways to prove the conception date and age of the fetus are stupid. Ultrasound at ~2 months pregnancy, which most US women get nowadays, is far more accurate than it has ever been and should be able to reliably set a conception date and due date for most women.

Hmm, weird. I never heard that rape victims count their pregnancy different by the weeks. It makes sense, I just couldnt find anything for it.

Even after an ultrasound though, that doesn't change how many weeks pregnant you are. It can give a more accurate due date, but it won't change what week you're in.

[zoobernut]

Hmm, weird. I never heard that rape victims count their pregnancy different by the weeks. It makes sense, I just couldnt find anything for it.

Even after an ultrasound though, that doesn't change how many weeks pregnant you are. It can give a more accurate due date, but it won't change what week you're in.

What? No this is not right. The information from the first ultrasound put together with the second ultrasound allows the doctor to give a very accurate date of conception based on the rate of growth. The due date is always set at 40 weeks which is more of a guideline the doctor says that the "due date" without complication or considering a baby premature is a 4 week range starting at 38 weeks and going to 42 weeks. However knowing the growth rate with a more accurate date of conception does give a more accurate due date range because the average length of gestation for humans is 40 weeks. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...iagram.svg.png

But if you look at the standard curve of birth dates from point of conception the range of dates that are within 1 standard deviation are 38-42 weeks.

Edit: Though you are right in the sense that common convention dictates that how many weeks pregnant you are is not connected to date of conception but rather is based on the end of your last menstrual cycle.

[Eurell]

What? No this is not right. The information from the first ultrasound put together with the second ultrasound allows the doctor to give a very accurate date of conception based on the rate of growth. The due date is always set at 40 weeks which is more of a guideline the doctor says that the "due date" without complication or considering a baby premature is a 4 week range starting at 38 weeks and going to 42 weeks. However knowing the growth rate with a more accurate date of conception does give a more accurate due date range because the average length of gestation for humans is 40 weeks. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...iagram.svg.png

But if you look at the standard curve of birth dates from point of conception the range of dates that are within 1 standard deviation are 38-42 weeks.

Edit: Though you are right in the sense that common convention dictates that how many weeks pregnant you are is not connected to date of conception but rather is based on the end of your last menstrual cycle.

I may have worded it poorly, but your edit is the only point I was trying to make.