Comments on: Scott Signs Abortion Ultrasound, Parental Notice Bills

By: mother of two

mother of two — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:18:04 +0000

i agree with this bill,because there is alot of young girls having abortions and noone knows, but the young girls are not thinking about what that does to their minds,body. sure at the time it seems to be the right thing to do but later in life you will wonder how that child would be today if you had kept the child. then again there is alot of single and couple parents who want children and cant have any of their own that would be more than happy to adopt a child instread of abortion ,i also understand it is your body and you should be able to do what ever with it but when you get pregnant stop and think of the child,tell your parents you think that want help,your wrong cause thats a part of you and their grandchild

By: billy

billy — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 23:33:09 +0000

Good job Scott. Thanks.

By: Hismae

Hismae — Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:49:03 +0000

I think anything that can get the mother to think about what she is doing before she does it is a step in the right direction. Someone needs to be a voice for the unborn. I think it is great that Governor Scott signed the bill. I just look forward to the day that abortion is altogether illegal. We need to stand up and be a voice for the unborn. The only thing that is going to change anything is our prayers and not being silent. Jesus, I plead your blood over my sins and the sins of my nation. God, End abortion and send revival to America.

By: shelbi

shelbi — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:38:54 +0000

@safe bear:

Wow, way to be harsh? The only safe sex is no sex, but don’t forget it is possible for a woman to still get pregnant using contraceptives! There are women out there who may not can care for a child or doesn’t have the money to care for a child, who get pregnant mistakingly.

OAN: I think cracking down on being notified prior to the abortion is great! And I would hope a women could choose to have the ultrasound. That isn’t just taking our rights away!

By: safebear

safebear — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:58:27 +0000

Planned or not, if you can’t afford the baby, don’t get pregnant. The baby is another mouth taxpayers will have to feed.

I guess the governor had to do something with all the money he’s saving the state (LOL) so now he’ll spend it paying for ultrasounds for the mothers who can’t pay for them.

I think it makes more sense to require the doctors to suggest it and if the mother wants it then do it, if she don’t want it sign the paper and save us a few bucks.

I think it was really chicken the way he signed the bill too…..and I thougth politicians were honest….silly me.

By: D.W.

D.W. — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:46:58 +0000

Puzzled- Not sure if you meant it this way but just because women are Medicaid recipients doesnt mean that they dont want their child. I as a medicaid recipient had a planned pregnancy but am not married, Yet. Medicaid helped out with all of the Dr’s bills I couldnt afford…who has $2,000 laying around to pay out all at once for all of the medical bills associated with a pregnancy.

By: molino jim

molino jim — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 21:05:12 +0000

JTT- As “Dad” said, it was wonderful what your folks did. I have an adopted child so I have strong feelings on the subject. Where I have heart burn is with the “right to Life” people who have not adopted. There are 6,349 kids in foster care in Florida, 113,280 in the U.S. I fail to understand how this law is going to change most minds. I fear there will be more back alley abortions. As “CYNIC” said, the testing companies will make a nice profit from this—along with the drug urine test that Scott mandated just a short time ago. Scott came from a medical field—I have to wonder if he is a heavy stock holder in drug testing companies?

By: Cynic

Cynic — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 18:40:20 +0000

So I wonder what big medical technology company is going to make MILLIONS on these mandatory ultrasounds. I have a hard time believing this is a moral initiative because if that were the case, they would be required to view the ultrasound as well. Someone is going to make money on it under the pretense of moral legislation.

I don’t mind the parental consent — but I worry about children who are abused or neglected by a parent. Suppose the father is molesting the child? What if the mother pimped her kid for a bigger welfare check. It happens. Either way, the young lady is in for some misery.

By: amanda

amanda — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 13:11:50 +0000

@ huh…maybe those women should just keep their legs closed or get their tubes tied!! sounds like a better idea to me than to KILL an innocent baby cause they “just cant take care of it.”

By: Puzzled

Puzzled — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 11:52:05 +0000

While Gov. Scott and the legislature are requiring women to have an ultrasound, would it not make sense to require the mother’s on welfare to have a Norplant until they can support their existing children? Also, men that are deadbeat dad’s should be be required to get a vasectomy.

To the anti-abortion believer’s, I applaud you if you adopt, or foster an unwanted child. However, in seat of Escambia County Alabama, the average is 30 births per month and virtually all of the mother’s are Medicaid receipients.

If an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, wouldn’t some of the time, money, and legislative action be better spent on preventing unwanted pregnancies to begin with?