Quantcast
U.S. & World

House takes up far-reaching anti-abortion bill

Comments

Return To Article
  • rogerdpack2 Orem, UT
    June 18, 2013 11:19 a.m.

    Hmm...I hope President Obama realizes he'll be responsible for these things at some point...

  • The Skeptical Chymist SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    June 18, 2013 11:46 a.m.

    What grandstanding! This bill stands no chance of passage in the Senate, would not get President Obama's signature, and the Congress could not override a veto. This is pure and simple a waste of everyone's time. There is a lot of positive things the House could do. This is not one of them. Why not spend the time voting to repeal Obamacare one more time?

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    June 18, 2013 12:05 p.m.

    Awe message bills, what a wonderful waste of time, but then again what else has the republican party got to do, when you've pledged to do nothing?

    Perhaps they could pass a bill giving a legal definition for "legitimate rape."

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    June 18, 2013 12:43 p.m.

    Can we have, you know... a jobs bill? The height of absurdity in this debate was the incredibly creepy argument made by Rep. Burgess about 15 week old fetuses.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    June 18, 2013 12:48 p.m.

    @The Skeptical Chymist

    Yep, this "grandstanding" bill is no different than the last 5 Democrat-written bills to raise income taxes on the middle class: They wouldn't get through the House nor would they get the president's signature.

    Oh wait, there is one difference - you weren't whining about the Democrats' bills.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    June 18, 2013 1:19 p.m.

    "..."Jobs continue to be our number one concern," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio"....

    Yeah...right after daily data mining Conspiracy Central...

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    June 18, 2013 1:47 p.m.

    one more example of the fact that the GOP just does not get it.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    June 18, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    Skeptical, news flash, that is how politics is played in D.C. They know it won't pass to law just as Democrats also run legislation by that will be voted down by Republicans. The current immigration law is likely an example. You see, these things will be used next year in the 2014 elections as issues. I don't necessarily agree with this stuff, but that's what our politicians do when avoiding solving problems.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    June 18, 2013 2:48 p.m.

    I guess the "jobs" in question turn out to be jobs as "abortion detectives" charged with finding and convicting those who break this new law. Then there's also the need for more prison guards. You can probably be certified for both of these professions at your local for-profit college. Now that's what I call "economic stimulation".

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    June 18, 2013 3:14 p.m.

    @m.g.scott
    "They know it won't pass to law just as Democrats also run legislation by that will be voted down by Republicans. The current immigration law is likely an example. "

    Legislation voted down by Republicans typically gets filibustered in the senate. This is unlikely for the current immigration bill. The House is a different matter but even Speaker Boehner thought it was important to get an immigration bill done by the end of this year.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    June 18, 2013 5:11 p.m.

    IF a woman can not decide within 20 weeks (that's over 4 months) whether to carry her baby to term or get an abortion, there is something seriously wrong with that woman.

    A woman should know.

    Aborting or murdering a viable baby, a human life, should not ever be an option except to save the mother's life..

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    June 18, 2013 7:17 p.m.

    @the truth

    It is so nice to know we have you to tell us what we should and should not know, what time frame we should know it in and what we should and should not be lowed to do. I would hate to thing of a world were we would have to decide or heaven forbid have the freedom to make our own choices.

  • twells Ogden, UT
    June 19, 2013 8:07 a.m.

    Can someone explain to me why any women would wait 5-6 months to terminate an unwanted pregnancy? Why would you not get an abortion immediately? Why would you wait? Roe v Wade was passed almost 20 years ago. There has been a lot of new medical technology. This technology has been saving saving babies born at 20 weeks. Why is the Democratic Party for late term abortions? How does not being able to have a late term abortion infringe upon women's rights? Get it taken care of in the beginning. Why wait until there is a good medical chance the baby can survive? The conviction of Dr. Gosnell is very disturbing. There were babies that did and could survive. Why are we arguing about late term abortions in this day and age? It would be interesting to know who is waiting 5-6 months and is there any state assistance given to women who wait? What is the upside of a late term abortion? Give the unwanted child up for adoption. Why wait to get an abortion for an unwanted pregnancy?

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    June 19, 2013 11:22 a.m.

    @twells
    two simple examples
    first a women that may have ben the victim of a crime resulting in pregnancy or who has had past traumas related to abuse may have difficulty even beginning to face such a trauma let alone be able to make decisions on how to handle the pregnancy that resulted from it.
    Secondly there are a myriad of medical issues that can result after the time period you specify.
    I would love to see abortion become extremely rare but I do not think that the force of law should always be the first solution to our social concerns.