Georgia Democrats Propose Vasectomy Ban In Response To Republican Attacks Against Abortion

good for the Dems in the old days that was called tit for tat meaning you do something we don't like we return the favor. the Rep need as they said in the article to get out from under our skirts and quit trying to regulate our bodies while they give themselves all the priveledges of doing what they want to theirs.

I love both the Arizona rectal exam ammendment (MY PERSONAL fav of the two) and the Georgia vasectomy ammendment… AWESOME! If all those old men want up our skirts, we should be able to go trodding down their pants. #IJS

Are you kidding with your last line? One side that removes women's rights? Prolife are all about women having the right to keep themselves from having babies, I mean, WE don't think any woman should have to have sex when she's not married, when she's not ready to procreate! Some of the people who are against murdering children inside what should be considered the safety of their mother's womb, we even think its alright to use condoms and birth control, when youre married and don't want children yet! The only way its one sided is that the consideration prochoice believers preach is the woman's right to murder, you never take the side for a humans right to survive! If they should mandate something to kind of even the field its that no one should be allowed multple abortions. Then you can make the "don't want to live with a mistake"excuse. But killing over and over and over just because you can figure out that a condom slides right on and that you can get a shot of birth control every few months so you don't even have to have your brain function enough to take it everyday, that's just ridiculous.

Instead of worrying about the homeless , the sick , and the hungry these people are worried about who's knocked up and who isn't and and are they going to have an abortion or did the guy who is responsible take viagra.

get your heads and your hands out of your underwear and start paying attention to what's important in this country.

I never had an abortion, but I do agree a woman has a right to choose…its too many unwanted children in this country, I also agree there should be strict admendments against men..it take two to make one..never forget that!

set it up for adoption in JESUS NAME CAUSE NOBODY DIES WE JUST MULTIPLY JESUS DIED FOR ALL AND GAVE FREEWILL TO ALL HUMANS THANK GREAT JEHOVAH JIRAH IN JESUS NAME UNLIMITED GREAT JEHOVAH JIRAH CREATOR OF ALL FOREVER AMEN

God bless this woman! finally, someone is addressing the assault on women's reproductive rights. I actually find post-second trimester abortions that occur for reasons other than the mother or baby's health disturbing. I think, as a society, such practices should be discouraged. however, legislating what I am allowed to do with my body is a violation of my own right to self-determination and privacy. I applaud these Dems and sincerely hope it's passed into law…let men get a little taste of what it's like to have legislators mandating what one does with their body!

I am a nurse, and I have SEEN a baby SURVIVE AND THRIVE when born at 20 weeks! The difference is that an abortion is MURDER! An abortion takes away an innocent child's right to live. Murder is not a "right"; when will you people WAKE UP & realize what you're thinking? A vasectomy causes no harm to an innocent being. If you want to take away a man's right to have a vasectomy to PREVENT pregnancy, then you also have to take away the woman's right to have a tubal ligation and to use any sort of contraceptive. It is NOT the same, and anyone who thinks it is close to comparison is just about as out of their mind as a Democrat! Oh, wait… Nevermind…..

I'm with you on this one Jimmie!

I'm a nurse, and I sincerely doubt it. There are hosts of terrible problems that babies that early would encounter. I personally think abortion should be limited to the first trimester ideally, and beyond that in cases of medical necessity.

I agree. They shouldn't be so happy to make laws over women's bodies without any consequence to their own.

Elisabeth Moore Dsouza Yes, there are many problems that can occur, but I HAVE seen it; just because YOU personally haven't, doesn't mean it isn't possible. I find almost everyday in nursing brings something new… Something that I've never seen or heard of. Anything is possible when the good Lord is behind it!

Well send me a link to the news article, because a baby born that early without problems would make headlines.

This isn't the 1920's, 30's, 40's, 50's..this is 2012 and we still have old men trying to make decision..time to vote them out!

Couldn't find an article, but there are documented accounts of 21-weekers who were born, survived, & thrived. Who are you to play God & assume that a difference of 7 days gestation would severely change the prognosis?

And I just found this:
"My sister was born at 20 weeks back in 1961. She was the size of an adult hand. Incubated until she was 16 weeks old and weighing 4lbs 5oz and the size of a milk bottle, but kept on hospital until she was 30 weeks old. On and off she has suffered with low immune level and stunted growth. I also know of another family whose son was born at 19 weeks and very poorly. Although development was slow at first his aptitude for learning was great. He is now a very successful pianist and accomplished musician.

- Jane, Uk, 26/4/2011 13:14

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1380282/Earliest-surviving-premature-baby-goes-home-parents.html#ixzz1n8Ca8HFd"

Well, I'm pretty sure these are two examples out of millions and millions and at what $$? Did u see the stats at the end of the article? I'm pretty sure these babies weren't thriving at birth, tons of $ in a PICU. Hey, I'm no proponent of late term abortions, but your rationale is off. What does your argument say for 18 wks or less?

Damion Lott : don't yell

I'm 100% Pro-Life. How can any one of us assume the authority to take an innocent life? And how could you POSSIBLY put a dollar-amount on a life? Period! Full-term babies are very often born with health issues- serious health issues- that cost a lot of money to resolve, if they are even able to be resolved. How can you justify one being any less important than the other? The entire debate is not WHEN to "cut-off" abortions, it's abortion vs vasectomy, which is pretty much like comparing apples to oranges. I'm not going to sit here & waste my time debating with you any longer, though. We're both entitled to our own opinions. What we are NOT entitled to is the "right" or authority to take an innocent life.

D Lott have you seen the statistics on adoption – not a very comforting. I see first hand what poor parenting does, and it is appauling. People don't value their bodies and so they make poor decisions. Unfortunately, the tax payers of this country are left footing the bill for those poor choiceS. THAT IS NOT OKAY, EVER!!

The government is no place for passive aggressiveness. How much will this "point" cost the taxpayers? Not. Cool.

Damion, how many children have you adopted? You say to give them up for adoption, but most people who say that haven't adopted a single child. And if you're all for adoption, make it easier for gay couples to adopt. Then there would be more children adopted. It

English. Give a try.

Damion Lott Maybe you could ask this "JEHOVAH" fellow for some English lessons? And maybe teach you how to use the caps lock key?

Rebecca Anne Buchwitz Hey, genius… Did you notice that the title of that link you posted was "World's most premature baby, born at 21 weeks and five days" Uhhhmmmm… Doesn't that mean your first two examples were B.S. ? She shares the world record with James Elgin Gill who was also born 128 days early in Ottawa, Canada in 1987.

Get your facts straight.

Tommy Platinüm Wow. Am I really supposed to respond to someone like you? Point blank, it's not even about the "woman's right". It's the innocent child that the bill would be protecting.

I agree. If a woman can't keep her legs closed, there are all kinds of ways to prevent pregnancy and avoid murder!

I agree. If a woman can't keep her legs closed, there are all kinds of ways to prevent pregnancy and avoid murder!

Rebecca Anne Buchwitz – Incorrect. The debate is "at what point does a zygote become a human being protected under the constitution". Nice try, though. The religious right would like to force that down our collective throats. The MAJORITY of the nation as well as every branch or government has decided that a zygote becomes a human being once it can sustain itself outside of the womb. Until then, it is a part of the woman’s body and NOT subject to legislation.

You keep hammering your religion and posting lies, misinformation and rhetoric, though. I’ll be right here to shine a light on you.

What the hell do you mean, “someone like me?” You mean a highly educated American patriot? (I hold multiple degrees including a PhD)? Or do you mean someone who doesn’t buy your BS? Or do you mean someone who will take the time to point out your BS? Or do you mean a man who will stand up for a woman’s rights? PLEASE enlighten me!