Wisconsin republican damns women who have been raped...

[Archae]

Like I've said, these people don't give a damn about babies.

They want a return to the good old days, when "da little woman" was kept in the kitchen.

[Ed Suspicious]

1. Children or fetus'? (feti? fetuses) (What the hell is the plural of fetus?)

[Spitfire of ATJ]

3. A litter.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

2. BUSTED!!!!

[Thespian2]

4. As history proves,

the 1% will get abortions whenever they want them...best care in the world, literally...Piss on all other women...

[Ed Suspicious]

6. I guess they prefer this type of abortion. That way they don't have to think about it.

http://pix11.com/2015/06/03/family-members-beat-14-year-old-girl-to-induce-abortion-dallas-police/

[vkkv]

7. A fetus is NOT a BABY or a CHILD. Got that? Things you will NEVER hear:

Coming to our fetus shower?

What are you going to name the fetus?

"Hey there, fetus doll, let's go have a drink".

We're going shopping for a new fetus stroller.

Could you pick up some fetus powder while you're out?

Fetus elephants are the cutest!

He's just now losing his fetus teeth.

(singing) Fetus, Fetus, where did our love go? ooooOOOooo

(singing) OOoo Fetus I love your way.. wanna be you with night and day..

(singing) Fetus come back, any kind of fool could see

(singing) I want my Fetus Back, Fetus Back, Fetus Back Ribs..

[passiveporcupine]

8. You forgot a good one

(singing) Santa fetus, slip a sable under the tree, for me.

[KansDem]

10. It would hinder animal-mating songs

"hey, fee-TEE'...hey, fee-TEE'" --

Doesn't have the same effect.

[happyslug]

9. Back to when the 1960s? The 1860s? the !830s?

Those dates are important in the history of Abortion. From the days of Ancient Greece and Rome, and as set forth by St Augustus in the Fifth Century, till the 1830s, Abortions were performed by Midwives NOT doctors. You had three categories, but generally broke down into two, "Pre-quickening" and "Quickened". The difference was could the mother feel the fetus move in her body? If the answer was no, then she was permitted to abort, if the the answer was yes, she was NOT permitted to abort except under unusual circumstances (i.e. for the first six months, the woman could abort, but NOT in the final three months).

This was further broken down into three month periods, the last as described above for post quickening, the second three month period restrictions were imposed abortions, the first three months no restrictions (See Roe vs Wade, which was based on the Old English Common Law pre 1830s, which in turn was based on Catholic Doctrine of the Middle Ages).

The Catholic Church even embraced this concept and except for a brief two year period in the 1500s, it was the Catholic Rule till 1869.

Starting around 1830s, Doctors wanted to take over birthing from Mid wives and started a campaign that abortions should only be done by qualified Doctors, not Mid wives (most of whom learned from older mid wives, i.e. an apprenticeship type situation, which in many duplicated doctor's training of the time period, except mid wives did not have to know how to read and write). As stated below, many women left the Mid Wife occupation in this period, for better paying opportunities.

Thus the MEDICAL COMMUNITY wanted the law changed from St Augustus rule that it was up to the woman in the first six months of pregnancy, to one that a Doctor has to decide if the women "needed" an abortion (i.e. to force women to go to a Doctor to get the abortion not the few remaining mid wives who had always done them). Notice the thrust was NOT religious but a clear grab for more business...

That was the situation starting around 1830. Abortions were still legal and even the Catholic Church considered them NOT a mortal sin. The Medical Community wanted the birthing and abortion business and slowly campaigned to get it. The first steps was to outlaw various Patent Medicine self abortion kits (which tended to kill the women, AND not abort the fetus). After that success the Medical Community enlisted the Religious community by pointing out "Quickening" was NOT a one time event, but something that developed over time, thus as NOT an event like impregnation or birth and thus should NOT be the test to determine when a WOMAN could decide, it should be a MEDICAL DECISION instead. This enlistment and the attack on Quickening lead to the Catholic Church change on Abortion in 1869 (a change NOT universally agreed to but accepted by the Bishops in The Vatican I council when it was cut short by the defeat of France by Germany in 1870 and the subsequent withdraw of French Troops that had kept Italian Troops out of Rome since 1859).

By the late 1800s, the Medical Community had managed to get most states to adopt the Medical necessity test. When State Legislature did looked into abortions (Mostly do to the Churches now opposing all abortions) they found "Medical Necessity" meant "could the patient afford to pay the doctor to get an abortion". This was unacceptable so various states started to make stricter rules. This lasted till the 1960s when it became clear some sort of reform was needed, the existing laws were NOT working. Father Berrigan, lead the Catholic Charge on these laws, demanding no abortion. When that was NOT forthcoming, Father Berrigan lead the charge to end all restrictions on Abortions on the grounds the state regulating abortions meant the State approved of abortion and the better option would be NO regulations on Abortions thus the State did not have to decide when and why an abortion should be done (What do you expect from the Jesuit, highly educated, intelligent and ready to follow logic to its conclusion. In the case of laws on abortion, any regulations had to permit some abortion, thus any regulations is pro abortion, the better option is no regulations and thus no state approval of any abortion, i.e. all abortions are legal, but the state is NOT saying any abortions are right or wrong. You may disagree with the logic but it is solid).

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2012/06/11/daniel-berrigan-americas-street-priest

This was the ongoing debate in the early 1970s. New York legalized abortions, other states followed, but most states had not. The need for change was clear, the real debate was the type of change, then the US Supreme Court Stepped into the Debate with Roe Vs Wade. The problem with Roe vs Wade it prohibited the people of the US to actually decide what should be the limit on abortions (or if any limit should be imposed). Roe has been attacked on that grounds from the left ever since, for the US was heading to a solution on abortion but the Supreme Court cut short that trip. The main political result was the Anti-Abortion forces could complain about Roe and get new recruits without having to deal with what the actual regulations should be. The Anti-Abortion groups could campaign against abortion in many ridiculous ways, but those ways did not turn off supporters, and often brought in to the anti-abortion groups people who disliked the concept of abortion on demand, but would otherwise support something like Roe vs Wade if they had a voice in it.

Just some history of Abortion. Legal, even in the Catholic Church (Abortion was a venial sin prior to 1869, it became "Murder" and thus a "Severe Sin" in 1869, under Catholic Doctrine only Severe Sins keep you out of heaven). Legal if you could afford a doctor to do the abortion in most states prior to the 1940s, illegal in the 1950s but subject to massive changes to permit more abortions in the 1960s.

As one older person told me, she wish these people would return to the days when a woman's place was in the Kitchen, that would be pre 1860s and it was legal to get an abortion in almost every State of the Union. If the woman had the money to pay a doctor, legal till the 1940s, and into the 1970s in some states. What these people advocate is a time period that never was, a time period with no access to abortion at all and if you read the history that was never the law, except in some states (and in those states it was legal to go to a state where all you needed was a Doctor's agreement to do the abortion).

Side note: During the Civil War, you had one of the first Female Doctors to serve in the US Army. She had finished TWO medical schools, something few males did, both schools were almost a year long.... Yes, Medical Training was NOT that intensive prior to the late 1800s. That you actually had to go to school for more then a year was a HUGE improvement, but that was the result of improvements in Science in the late 1800s. One of the concerns of the Medical Community in the early 1800s was Germany was actually teaching ALL of their children how to read and write, and pretty soon, Mid Wives could have as much medical and non -medical training as Doctors of the time period (i.e. Mid Wives could Read and Write as well as the Doctors). This increase in female education actually saw a DECREASE in mid-wives, as women who would have been mid-wives now could read and write and take other more profitable professions. Thus Doctors show the decline in Mid Wives as a way to increase they own income by moving into the birth and abortion areas of medicine.

As to both male and female doctors in the mid 1800s this lack of education in the medical profession, people relied on the reputation of the doctor not his training. This slowly changed after the US Civil War, but then the Medical Community had to start to accept Women into their ranks. By 1900 the Women were 10 % of all students in US Medical Schools of that time period. One of the problem was many of these Students were out of FEMALE only Medical Schools, which had a reputation of concentrating on female and children medical issues (and this considered inferior to Male Medical Schools). Not so surprisingly many of these early female doctors did almost all of the abortions in the US.

After 1920 the number of women in Medical Schools (And other professions like Law) declined so that female doctors in the US was single digits by the 1950s (and declining, the numbers did not reverse til the late 1960s).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_medicine

http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/doctors-wanted-no-women-need-apply-and-the-hidden-malpractice

http://beckerexhibits.wustl.edu/mowihsp/articles/practitioner.htm