When it comes to getting the government out of our lives, the anti-choice crowd exercises a double standard.  Senate Bill 417 introduced by Senator Jean Leising of Indianapolis mandates a woman considering an abortion shall obtain an ultrasound at least 18 hours before the abortion. To top it off, the woman would be responsible for the cost of the ultrasound.

The statute being amended already provided an option for the woman if she wanted to have an ultrasound.  Apparently, allowing the woman a choice just doesn’t sit well with the anti-choice crowd.  Of course this goes hand in hand with the notion that women aren’t capable of making a decision with their doctors about whether or not to have an abortion in the first place.


Ultrasound before an abortion. Requires that at least 18 hours before an abortion that a pregnant woman seeking an abortion must obtain fetal ultrasound imaging, hear the auscultation of the fetal heart tone if audible, and view and receive a copy of the fetal ultrasound imaging. Specifies that the pregnant woman is responsible for the cost of the fetal ultrasound imaging.

What will they think of next?  Well, here is another bill that has been introduced.


Adoption of abandoned embryo. Allows an abandoned embryo to be adopted for implantation by another individual under specified circumstances. States that a person who knowingly or intentionally destroys or discards an abandoned human embryo commits unlawful destruction of an embryo, a Class A misdemeanor.

Honest to pete, how will the anti-choice crowd enforce these invasive tactics?  Will they be camped outside the women’s clinics demanding to see the ultrasound image when the women exit the clinic?  Will they visit fertility clinics to ensure that the embryos are kept safe until the adoptive parents arrive?  Does a termination of parental rights hearing need to be held to sever the ties between the biological parents of the embryo and the embryo?

Enough is enough.  The sad thing is that while many in the anti-choice movement chafe and rant against government interference, they turn around and haul in the government whenever they deem necessary to suit their own purposes, and they don’t even see the double standard created by their actions.


About Charlotte A. Weybright

I own a home in the historical West Central Neighborhood of Fort Wayne, Indiana. I have four grown sons and nine grandchildren - four grandsons and five granddaughters. I love to work on my home, and I enjoy crafts of all types. But, most of all, I enjoy being involved in political and community issues.
This entry was posted in Indiana, Republican Party, Republicans, Rights and Liberties, Women's Interests and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. lastpersonleft says:

    Wow… This legislation is outrageous! This has to be one of the most cynical attempts to restrict the right to choose.
    I find it ironic that this so-called protector of life has also co-authored a bill (SB 0012)that prohibits a state college or university from regulating in any manner the ownership, possession, carrying, or transportation of firearms or ammunition.
    Am I missing some thing here or is this Senator nuts? Oh, that’s right, there is an (R) after her name!
    Alarming post indeed…

  2. Chris Hedges says:

    I’m wondering if a compromise between pro-life and pro-choice can be made in some sort of economic plan that assists women with their needs during pregnancy and protects their employment and income while they are off from work. Also, social services could be provided to assist women in need, i.e. who need help escaping from abusive boyfriends and spouses.

    It would reduce the economic aspect of the choice decision.

  3. Iceironman says:

    Chris, there is already a system set up to aid any woman pregnant with neo natal, birth, and child care after birth takes place. It used to be called a husband and family. Now it goes under the heading of
    1)Planned Parenthood
    4)Natal leave(employers must do this)
    6)Food Stamps
    7)Social Security
    8)Reduced/No fee lunch for schools
    9)Govt substidised eductation loans
    10)Tax breaks for child care
    11)Unemployment benefits
    12)I could go on but you get it

    The womans common sence must kick in on the abusive boyfriend thing. The govt cant tell people who to sleep with and get knocked up. As Anne Coulter stated maybe the lady should see the tatoos, skinhead, no job, drinking and drug problem and run before deciding to sleep around. But there are laws to help, and if she acts quick, she could purchase a firearm and protect herself that way if need be. Personal resposibilty is pretty big in this case.

    As I read your post again, I begin to think you were being sarcastic

  4. Norma says:

    Where has Chris been the last 30 years?

  5. Chris:

    I have to agree with Iceironman – which he knows doesn’t happen often 🙂 – I think you are being facetious with your comments.

    But let’s look at the list Iceironman provided.

    All are programs which assist women with families with needs arising from family obligations – generally with no father figure present. And if you look at each of the programs, you will notice who is bearing the primary responsibilities. Where are the fathers in these programs? So, it’s let’s pick on women again for not managing themselves properly and allow the men to escape oversight. It takes two to make that baby, and the fathers need to be held accountable just like the mothers.

    You make the statement about protecting woman’s employment and income while she is off work. The only protection that the beloved male-dominated Congress managed to provide in that area is to allow a worker (usually a woman) to take 12 weeks of UNPAID leave and then return to the same job. Or if that job isn’t available, the employee must be given a similar job.

    Whoopi – how many women can afford to take 12 weeks of UPAID leave time unless they are married or have a significant other in the picture? And, if that is the case, they won’t qualify for many of the programs listed in Iceironman’s list.

  6. Iceironman says:

    Agreeing with Chuck, BO has brought us all together!

    The courts cause alot of the fathers to not have the baby. The straight dope whether PC or not is that women need to pick their men better(dont get pregnant on the second date). Men need to grow up and be men,

    If sociaty hadnt said it was ok for children to be concieved out of wedlock we would probably be better off. When Dan Quail said what he said I was young, I remember the outrage. I think he was right. Now my children hear about JL Spears being pregnant, and the show doesnt cancel, what does that say about our sociaty.
    I think the general welfare system has cause a faulse sence of security for the woman, and allowed the men to let the govt raise their kids. Either way, women know what causes pregnacy and men know they can leave and uncle sam will take over.

  7. Iceironman:

    Society can rale all it wants at out-of-wedlock births, but they won’t stop. The percentages may decrease if conditions are made tougher, but do you want children penalized for the parents’ actions?

    As to a false sense of security for women – welfare pays very little. I get so tired of hearing people regurgitate the “women have more babies so they can get more welfare.” Good Lord, if you ever worked around the child support and welfare system, you would see the untruth in that myth.

    Here is an interesting article from some time ago – a Right to Life position that argues against welfare caps:

    Here is another study about the myths surrounding welfare, mothers, and their children:

    While both of these are late 1990s studies, I doubt highly that the figures have changed much.

  8. Iceironman says:

    I will respond back after I finish chapter two of Ann Coulters new book. The title of chapter two is—————- “Victim of a Crime? Thank a Single Mother.” She has more stats than one could shake a stick at.

  9. Iceironman:

    Ann Coulter is a raging right-wing conservative. I am sure she can find the stats she wants to blame even the birth of Christ on Liberals. 🙂 After all, he would have been considered a liberal had he been around today. That is unless Coulter and her ilk would like to re-write Christ’s positions – see Matthew 25 among other admonitions from Jesus.

    You know as well as I do that stats can be manipulated to support the viewpoint that one is espousing. So as soon as you finish that chapter and give me stats, I will shoot some back from my liberal perspective.

  10. Iceironman says:

    Have you been hanging out with Michael Phelps?

  11. lastpersonleft says:

    I, for one, do not consider Ms. Coulter’s writing scholarly. The one issue that is clear in this thread is that there is a fundamental difference in the liberal/progressive and conservatives ideology. And though I am diametrically opposed to Mr. Iceironman views, I do appreciate where he is coming from. There is a major disconnect, in my opinion, with the modern conservatives’ embrace of fundamental Christianity and their rejection of liberal values as it relates to social justice.
    Enjoying the thread though… LPL

  12. Iceironman:

    Sorry – I am missing your point. What does my comment have to do with Michael Phelps?

    Ann Coulter is what she is – apparently she also hates her own gender if she actually titles a chapter “Victim of A Crime – Thank A Single Mother.”

    Hmm – on the other hand – how would she even know what it’s like to be a mother? She is now 47, isn’t married, and I doubt she has any out-of-wedlock children, so she really is speaking without any actual knowledge – just inflammatory vitriol as usual.

    Too bad she can’t dress a little more conservatively on the cover of her books – but maybe that’s what sells to her male audience.

  13. Iceironman says:

    You said Jesus would be considered liberal,,a statement that someone may make if influenced by pot,,which Michael Phelps got caught smoking.

    Soo, only single mothers can speak to what is wrong with children out of wedlock and the ills on sociaty. Just like only military vets could speak on war.

    Ann Coulters “knowledge” comes from not the “feelings” of being a single mother, but rather the consequences on the lady, children, and sociaty. A hermephredite could see these things and write on them. She does not attack single woman, she is writing to let those cocky 15/16 year old girls know that when they chose to have children there are consequences. I think it follows the stereotype of a conservitive–write about something/someone= you hate them, you actual think she hates her own gender? If only single woman are allowed to write about how great not having a man is we are in alot of trouble.

    LPL, Her writings are scholarly. The problem is Americans are believing that if you dont come from harvard or yale your opinion does not count. I will say it now and defend it…Harvard and Yale have cause more anguish to this country than good.

  14. lastpersonleft says:

    You have got to e kidding???
    Though Ms. Coulter is a Cornell & U Michigan grad, her writing is anything but scholarly. Much like O’Reilly, her books are well articulated yet amount to little more than easy-to-read ideological propaganda.

  15. Iceironman says:

    LPL, you are right. I dont like to use the word scholarly with those who put out good works. The word scholarly was probably used to define the brilliance behind Fanny and Freddie, big bank ceos, the person who gave us social security, those who stole it, govt schools, etc. I would bet at one time they were all called scholarly. So I retract calling her a scholar, I will instead refer to her as having common sence.

    Which book of hers do you like most?

  16. Andy says:

    So, Ann Coulter who described herself in her own words as:

    “a mean-spirited, bigoted conservative”

    And: “Christianity fuels everything I write”

    She even insulted people of the Jewish faith, by answering “yes” when asked if it would be better if they were all Christian. “We just want Jews to be perfected”, she went on to state.

    Or how about referring to Arabs with such derogatory, inflammatory names such as: “camel jockeys”, “ragheads” and “monkeys” ? That compassionate conservatism was really coming out that day.

    And to top it off, I believe it was Ann Coulter who also recommended the United States should invade Muslim countries, kill all of their leaders and then convert them all to Christianity.

    This is someone we should look up to, aspire to be like, reward for her contributions to humanity ???

    I’m sorry but I recognize hate and trash for what it is.

  17. Iceironman:

    Okay – I will bite on this one. Tell me, how on earth did you jump from my statement about Jesus to somehow connecting it to smoking pot? Quite an imagination, I say.

    No where did I say Coulter couldn’t write about anything – I said I didn’t see how she could understand what it was like to be a mother.

    Certainly, military vets can speak on war and so can the rest of the public. What I said was that she couldn’t understand, and she was speaking without any actual knowledge. Kind of like the Pope trying to tell parents how to raise children and to forget birth control and multiply, and never mind the cost of raising children in today’s world.

    Just as I speak on war – I oppose war, but I have never been in war and never served in a war zone. So I don’t know what it is like to fear that every step in a jungle may be my last. Or that every corner I turn in a hot, dry Baghdad street may be my last.

    What does that have to do with her manipulation of statistics and her degrading single mothers? I have to ask – have you finished the second chapter? Does she blame the ills of society on single mothers? Pretty heavy-duty blame, if you ask me.

    Does she not hold the disappearing fathers accountable? Or is it again, blame the women for having the babies – well, gee, because men will be men and they are animals (according to some) who just can’t control their urges. Thus, it is up to the women to make sure they don’t get out of hand.

    Where is your support for responsibility when it comes to the fathers? Does she have a chapter chastising fathers for their irresponsible actions?

  18. Iceironman says:

    Andy, You paint Ann Coulter as a bad person. So I would assume you are totaly turned off by SCHOLARS like William Aryes, he doesnt have alot of sound bytes, just actions. But you would put Ann Coulter lower on the food chain.

    Remember, context does matter when refering to Coulter.
    Bombs from Ayers the SCHOLAR dont realy need context.

  19. Iceironman says:

    Chuck, the reference to smoking pot derives from you saying Jesus would be considered a liberal…………………a statement many pot heads on college campuses have come to realize.

  20. Iceironman:

    Sorry to disappoint you. My statement wasn’t derived from a self-induced stoned state of mind. It was the result of reading about Jesus and reading the New Testament – you know verses like Matthew 25, to which I referred earlier.

  21. Andy says:


    “Andy, You paint Ann Coulter as a bad person.”

    No need to paint, she does it to herself by using her own words.

Comments are closed.