tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post56586836932135870..comments2024-03-03T13:55:46.243-08:00Comments on Ambling Along the Aqueduct: Raging Maniacs in Oklahoma Prevail over Governor's VetoTimmi Duchamphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00673465487533328661noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-83911381516903909432010-04-28T18:50:21.157-07:002010-04-28T18:50:21.157-07:00Thanks, Nancy. (I've corrected my post.) I'...Thanks, Nancy. (I've corrected my post.) I'm sorry, though, to hear that there's a chance that the courts might allow this legislation to stand. <br /><br />One of the people commenting on the legislation in the Newsy video I link to at the end of my post notes that the focus of these laws is women rather than embryos or fetuses. Certainly the vaginal ultrasound is nothing more than ordering the use of an unnecessary medical procedure as punishment. In every instance in which the state has mandated the use of medical procedures for punishment, it has done so on the presumption that the individual being tormented with it is not a full, socially autonomous, human being (and perhaps is intended to make certain that the person forced to undergo the unnecessary procedure realizes that that is the state's message to them and everyone else involved). <br /><br />Moreover, although no one is mentioning it, adding an ultrasound (whether vaginal or abdominal) to the requirements adds an enormous additional expense. In this case, I imagine, women living in Oklahoma who need abortions will find themselves weighing the cost of the ultrasound against the cost of traveling to another state for the procedure.Timmi Duchamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00673465487533328661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-65756376231967772902010-04-28T18:15:05.798-07:002010-04-28T18:15:05.798-07:00That second bill (HB 3284, the one requiring all t...That second bill (HB 3284, the one requiring all the reports) has not officially passed the Okla. Legislature yet, though it looks like it has about the same support as the other two. Even if the governor vetoes it, as he did the other two, I suspect the Legislature can override the veto. The first two bills mentioned became law after the Legislature overrode the veto. <br /><br />The Oklahoma Supreme Court has thrown out previous restrictive abortion laws. In fact, they've affirmed the actions of trial courts, which have thrown them out, so the courts have been active. But in the recent cases, all those laws have been found unconstitutional because they were enacted as part of omnibus laws that included several different bills. The Oklahoma constitution prohibits that, according to settled precedent in the state. These new laws have each been adopted separately, so now we will see what the Oklahoma courts have to say about them more directly.Nancy Jane Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01030267999537291250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-27998852358642075432010-04-28T17:11:28.813-07:002010-04-28T17:11:28.813-07:00That's awful. Thanks for reporting on it.That's awful. Thanks for reporting on it.Gretchenhttp://ironed-orchid.dreamwidth.orgnoreply@blogger.com