Does Planned Parenthood Even Know What An Abortion Is?

So, there’s a bit of controversy surrounding the proposed informed consent law in Virginia that would require women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound. Of course, radical abortion advocates find this offensive. Because women can’t be trusted with information about their bodies, I guess. Read more.



  • Team D

    So I must disagree with this (as a pro-life doctor)! First, a transvaginal ultrasound can and does provide a more accurate picture of the baby growing inside the womb (especially before 20 weeks and depending on the body habitus of the woman), and the goal is to provide an accurate exam right?. Second, there has been such outcry about the ultrasound requiring vaginal penetration. I even heard one pro-abort say it is a law that “rapes” women. It is as if opponents of this law are intentionally failing to admit that a surgical abortion will result in a far more invasive, injurious, and quite frankly violent form of “vaginal penetration.” So if it is done to image a baby that is “wanted” it is an appropriate medical exam. If it is done to rip a baby from the safety of the mother’s uterus it is also an “appropriate” medical procedure. But if it is done to image a baby that is “unwanted,” it is inappropriate and violating…just what are the pro-aborts afraid of? Truth perhaps!?


    Pia – It’s not at all clear that a woman looking at a transvaginal ultrasound will be any more disposed not to go through with an abortion than an abdominal one. The purpose of specifying the type was clearly to put another obsticle in the way of a woman who wants to have one. The problem is a) it won’t work and b)insisting on a vaginal penetration for no medical reason “shocks the conscence” of most Americans and is counterproductive to pro-life efforts.

    • Bruce

      Liberal catholycs are a dying breed, Greg. Its best to jump ship before it sinks. ~Pax, Awesomeness.

    • Jason Phillips

      Greg, you sound ridiculous. First and foremost, ultrasounds do, in fact, reduce the incidence of abortion. When women are clearly shown “here’s the heart, here’s the femur, here’s the head” it personifies the so-called blob of tissue. I think that’s common sense. My father routinely gives ultrasounds to women coming to him seeking abortion, and NOT ONE of them has chosen abortion. Furthermore, a transvaginal ultrasound ought not to “shock the conscience” of anyone. It is a regular, often-used procedure for working up many women, pregnant or not. It is simple, easy, and voluntary. The idea that we can equate this to molestation or somehow infringing on a woman’s dignity is absurd on its face. The people who make this argument are trying to feed on the general public’s ignorance of medical procedures. Even if I were pro-abortion, it would be damn near malpractice to perform a surgical abortion without first performing an ultrasound – you have to know where the baby is first if you want to kill it!! And in the beginning of pregnancy transvaginal sono’s are much more accurate than abdominal sonos. Shouldn’t we go with the more accurate imaging techniques? Why don’t you want the best medical care for women? Wake up, man.

  • Marsha

    Pia, isn’t this ultrasound requirement being done to try to get pregnant women to not have an abortion and thus forcing the American public to pay for a procedure that is only being done because of religious beliefs? And if yes, isn’t this exactly the same thing Obama is doing to the American public regarding forcing the American people to pay for contraceptives?

    • Esnofla

      Hardly. I can answer this question and so could a child of five years old. Does the government not run schools at tax payers expense? What is the ultrasound mandate. It’s education. Yeh, that’s right. EDUCATION. Since the abortion mills love to tell people that they are extracting a mass of tissue and not a human being then it is up to the federal government to educate people, to make them more intelligent; to increase their ability to make better decisions since a democracy can only survive if its people are intelligent, correct. Actually, a democracy can only survive if there are people! :-)



Receive our updates via email.