The War On Women Rages On

Filed in National by on March 8, 2012

Remember that mandated ultrasound bill Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell ran away from?  It’s back, in revised form, and signed into law.

Amid continued protests from Democrats, Republican Governor Bob McDonnell on Wednesday signed into law a controversial bill requiring Virginia women to undergo an ultrasound procedure prior to having an abortion.

The bill sparked national debate this month over a provision that would have required many women to undergo transvaginal ultrasounds, which opponents decried as medically unnecessary and physically invasive. McDonnell, a conservative who opposes abortion rights, ultimately requested that mandate be stripped. The Virginia House of Delegates passed a revised version last week that allows women to “reject” a transvaginal ultrasound and instead opt for an abdominal ultrasound, which generally yields less information in the early stages of a pregnancy.

In a statement Wednesday, McDonnell reiterated his support for the bill, which he argues will provide additional information that “can help the mother make a fully informed decision” about having an abortion.

Help the mother make a fully informed decision.  Hmm… Help the woman feel shame by forcing her to undergo an unnecessary medical procedure.  There.  Fixed that for you.

And speaking of “informing” women…  The Arizona Senate has just passed the “what you don’t know could hurt you, but you won’t be able to sue me” bill.

It’s called a “wrongful birth” bill and it’s all about preventing women from having an abortion, even if it kills them. The Arizona Senate passed a bill this week that gives doctors a free pass to not inform pregnant women of prenatal problems because such information could lead to an abortion.

In other words, doctors can intentionally keep critical health information from pregnant women and can’t be sued for it. According to the Arizona Capitol Times, “the bill’s sponsor is Republican Nancy Barto of Phoenix. She says allowing the medical malpractice lawsuits endorses the idea that if a child is born with a disability, someone is to blame.” So Republicans are banning lawsuits against doctors who keep information from pregnant women so as to prevent them from choosing to have an abortion.

Hey, if your doctor is “pro-life” and he decides not to tell you about certain conditions concerning your pregnancy for fear that you’d choose an abortion, well… that’s his/her right.  And if there’s a problem with your baby, or if you end up dying?  You, or your loved ones, can’t sue the doctor.  But… but… what are your rights?  Stop being silly, you silly women.  Everyone knows that rights are reserved for men and fetuses.  You are merely a vessel.

If I was going to have a baby I’d make damn sure I knew my doctor’s politics.


About the Author ()

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Comments (34)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. V says:


    There have been “wrongful pregnancy” (ex. failed vasectomy) lawsuits and “wrongful birth” (the one i read was a disabled adult who sued the doctor that delivered them) lawsuits before. They’re pretty rare and not usually successful, so again Repubs are creating a issue to fix that doesn’t exist to restrict something else on their agenda (like the voter fraud shenans).

  2. V says:

    also, this is fascinating. We’ve been emphasizing on the non-sexual reasons to provide birth control, but women should be able to do what they want with their bodies no matter what. Even if that is slutty things. We should consider reframing our argument.

  3. pandora says:

    This is nuts. Any women (D,R or I) would be crazy (or self-loathing) to vote Republican.

  4. cassandra m says:

    There was a legislator in Ohio who put forth a bill that would require any man looking for Viagra to have psychological counselling and a briefing on alternatives to viagra (abstinence!) before getting his prescription.

    While the ladies are putting forth this legislation to make fun of the rest, it might be time to get serious.

  5. Liberal Elite says:

    There is a sad article in today’s NYTimes about the effect of women’s health cutbacks in Texas.

    The odd thing is that they apparently aren’t intentionally targeting poor women, but they’re more than willing to destroy them as collateral damage in their war on abortion.

    It’s a new low for the GOP. They should be totally ashamed… The women of America need to rise up and slap down these misogynistic reprobates before they do any more damage.

  6. cassandra m says:

    The other thing that this *should* do in Arizona is to raise insurance rates for women. Don’t know by how much, but certainly insurance companies are looking at this as increased costs for them.

  7. 12 says:

    You people need to grow up and start acting like adults.

  8. TC says:

    I’m aghast at the idea that they could pass a law that would allow a doctor to withhold information regarding a patients’ health. What the hell?

  9. Rustydils says:

    There is no war on women. That is just a hyped up statement. All men know that women can live without men, but there is no way men can live without women. I defy you to find one statement in any media what so ever where any man says he is declaring war on women.
    This is just your own made up hype

  10. Liberal Elite says:

    @Rd “I defy you to find one statement in any media what so ever where any man says he is declaring war on women.”

    The war is based on what they are doing, not what they are saying. All across America, and especially in red states, there is a concerted effort to restrict what women can do. It’s a real attack on freedoms that are dearly held. Thus, open war is upon them whether declared or not.

    I truly hope the GOP awakens the most apathetic women who have never voted and they all rise up and send the GOP to oblivion. 2012 will be the year of the woman. Dinosaurs like you will become extinct.

  11. V says:

    I like that the only way there can be a war on women in Rustydils mind is if they actually try to get rid of us. Also “All men know that women can live without men, but there is no way men can live without women” presumably because you need us to take care of you? like servants?

    Meanwhile some email forwarded to me by an older relative full of untruths about fictitious “holiday trees” is more than enough evidence to show a war on christmas.

  12. fightingbluehen says:

    Has the Arab Spring resulted in a ‘war on woman”?

  13. fightingbluehen says:

    Every election cycle the liberals cry from the hill tops about a woman’s right to chose, or woman’s freedom. Now it’s a “war on woman”. Really?
    Since Roe v Wade there has been five Republican presidents and thousands of other state and local elections where Republicans have won and abortion is still alive and well in the US.
    This is all a bunch of bull shit partisan gamesmanship.

  14. Jason330 says:

    Which part? The part where Republicans are passing laws aimed at humiliating and hassling women who have the nerve to have sex, or the reaction to it? Which part is partisan gamesmanship?

  15. fightingbluehen says:

    Here is an example of a REAL “war on woman”: – Cached – Similar

  16. pandora says:

    When the Republican party wins elections running on jobs and then submits bill after bill, not on jobs, but on transvaginal ultrasounds, personhood, allowing Catholic hospitals to not perform emergency abortions to save a woman’s life, remain silent on or defend Rush Limbaugh, laugh off a comment about women holding an aspirin between their knees as birth control, try to redefine rape as “forcible” rape, propose a bill that would make killing a doctor who performs abortion a-okay, cutting funding to Planned Parenthood, put forth a bill that would allow any employer to deny contraception coverage, etc., it is what it is.

    Know what’s funny. My list is woefully incomplete. But, I guess by FBH’s standard, a war on women only counts if you “forcibly” rape or kill women. Everything else… not so much.

  17. fightingbluehen says:

    I’m just saying that it is all political. The reality is that abortion will be legal no matter who is elected president. Scaring woman every election cycle just seems so unnecessary.

    As far as the attempt by a state legislature to pass bills that would force woman to undergo an invasive procedure, I can only say that there are extreme views in each party and thankfully the system works to moderate the execution of extreme ambitions from both ends of the political spectrum.

  18. Geezer says:

    FBH: If it’s all gamesmanship, explain the rash of abortion bills and attempts to defund Planned Parenthood in red states throughout the country, and especially non-red states that elected Republican governors and majorities in 2010. Do you need a list, or do you think you can find it on the intertoobz yourself?

  19. pandora says:

    It becomes political, ya know, when Republican politicians keep submitting these political things called bills.

    Don’t blame people for reacting to the Republican Party’s actions.

  20. socialistic ben says:

    yeah. there is a difference between stump speeches and actually trying to pass laws…. and if people are wasting time and tax payer money by trying to pass bills they know wont happen just to make a point, they need to lose their job…. ANYONE who does that. Not just Rs.

  21. V says:

    the problem with FBH’s arguement is that these laws ARE PASSING. it’s not just empty words to scare women (we’re so delicate you know). women are freaking out this cycle because things are actually HAPPENING. and choice and women’s groups are afraid to challenge them in court because there’s a legitimate fear that the supreme court’s current makeup is such that it would roll back provisions for women even further. That’s why they’re pushing these bills, they WANT a court showdown right now.

    That transvaginal ultrasound bill passed. It was ALTERED to take out the transvaginal part (only after national outcry), but it still passed.

  22. Jason330 says:

    Yeah. That struck me about the comment. The utter cluelessness of it.

    He also worked in the “there are extreme views in each party” false equivalency for good measure.

    If pressed I’m sure he’d say something to the effect that Michael Moore and Saul Alinsky means it is okay to pass invasive ultra sound bills.

  23. socialistic ben says:

    more likely he’ll use all the (hilarious and apt, yet ultimately useless) “men’s equivalent” bills being proposed as a counter to the vagina leash laws. “they KNEW democrat women would propose laws requiring impotency tests for viagra, so we just got ahead of the game and did these”

  24. fightingbluehen says:

    “That transvaginal ultrasound bill passed. It was ALTERED to take out the transvaginal part (only after national outcry), but it still passed.”

    My point exactly. Get back to me when something actually happens.

    In the unlikely event that the far right crazies ever are successful in what you fear, you can always move to another state. That’s the beauty of having states and states’ rights.

  25. Jason330 says:

    This guy puts the nut in wingnut. I think that he honestly doesn’t think anything has “actually happened” in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.

    Not grasping the implications of plain facts is a vital skill for wingnguts because reality has a well know liberal bias.

  26. V says:

    FBH – it was altered so nothing has to be shoved INSIDE a Virginia woman, she still has to have a needless, insulting, and possibly upsetting ultrasounds. That doesn’t sound like a victory for the left to me.

    also I can move to another state. you are correct. I also have the means to see a private OBGYN on my own health insurance. I’m not angry for me. I’m angry for the girl with no reasources and no support system in the dead center of Kansas. You don’t get it.

  27. V says:

    also the transvaginal bill originally did pass, and the governor was going to sign it. only when the rest of the country took notice did they change it. the government solutions you are counting on failed the women of virginia, the national media (which isn’t the most reliable of saviors) was the only reason the bill (passed by both state bodies and about to become law) was changed.

  28. pandora says:

    FBH gives us Mitt Rmoney’s new campaign slogan:

    You can always move to another state. That’s the beauty of having states and states’ rights.

    FBH is being deliberately stupid.

  29. fightingbluehen says:

    In my experience, men discussing woman’s issues has never been a winning move, so I’ll leave it like this.
    I don’t think abortion will be illegal in the foreseeable future, no matter who is elected.

  30. fightingbluehen says:

    Comment by V

    “FBH – it was altered so nothing has to be shoved INSIDE a Virginia woman, she still has to have a needless, insulting, and possibly upsetting ultrasounds. That doesn’t sound like a victory for the left to me.”

    I believe the ultrasound is pretty much standard issue anyway V.

  31. V says:

    Agreed FBH, but I don’t think that means we should ignore the gradual chipping away of women’s health resources that’s been going on in this country.