Jackson Jambalaya

Don't they have something else to do?

Hypervirtuous Andy Gipson will not rest until Mississippi most closely resembles one of the more tedious episodes of "Ozzie and Harriet." One wonders what his private vices are.

I love it.

So now the legislature feels it has medical training to tell a physician how to practice? Give me a break. What a poorly written piece of crap.

Rep. Andy Gipson al-Zarqawi. It's not his fault. Yahweh told him to do it.

I think Andy Gipson himself could benefit from one of those transvaginal ultrasounds.

Ugh. When are they going to realize these type of social issues are best left to doctors and not lawyers?

So, that just about covers the author. On to the ad hominem attacks on the other seventy and seven.

And don't say it's not the legislature's business to get into the specifics of medicine when your excuse on the personhood amendment was that it was "too vague."

Abortion: You're for it or against it. Be honest and don't hide your support for it by pretending there is some mythical restriction that would be okay in your mind, just not the particular one being discussed (whatever it happens to be).

I love the women who are proposing legislature to make rectal exams a prerequisite to getting Viagra, vasectomies, etc. If women have to have a magic wand shoved up our vaginas in order to have an abortion; men should have something shoved up whatever hole they can find then tell me if they think it's still ok. (GA HB1116)

I am against abortion, but this type of legislature just pisses me off. It is not up to the government to tell me what I can and can't do with MY body. Plus, isn't the whole point of having elected officials to REPRESENT the opinions of those who elected them? If Initiative 26 got voted down by the general public, why is this even an issue? Surely there are more important things to worry about.

I'm not for abortion. I'm for legalized abortion. Puritans of all stripes want only for state laws to sanction their paticular morality. Whether the laws are obeyed or not is of little consequence to them. Effectively, they have no problem with illegal abortions, just like the Mississippi Puritans had no problem with illegal whiskey. There's a sickening level of hypocrisy involved, and pukeworthy smugness.

I do not believe there is a federal constitutional right to abortion, and, on a state level, I would vote to ban abortion. However, that is not the law that exists today, and our courts say that women do have a protected right to this procedure. And as someone who does not support abortion rights, but recognizes that I don't get to have my way just because that is my moral perspective on the world, it just pisses me off to no end that legislators try this sort of manipulative bullsh@t to harass, bully, and guilt trip people who are exercising their legal rights. No one, including the ever self righteous Mr. Gipson, has cited ANY medical necessity for this. In fact, I believe Gipson has been quoted as saying the purpose of the law is to decrease the number of abortions, period.

I hope someone challenges this law when it is signed by our equally pandering Guv, because it will be struck down in a heartbeat - no pun intended.. And I wish we had a law that says if a legislator introduced something so patently unconstitutional and frivolous as this law, then he gets to pay the attorneys' fees generated by all parties in having to litigate this BS. How's that for some effective tort reform? It's about the only way you are going to get meddlesome do-gooders like Mr. Gipson to shut up.

2:46, it is not the Legislature's place to substitute its judgment for physicians. Rep. Andy Gipson al Zarqawi is a lawyer and part-time Talibaptist preacher, not a doctor.

Absent an express invitation, these Talibaptist Mullahs have no damn business sticking their God-fearin' noses into someone else's vagina.

Andy Gipson is a better man than any of you punks will ever be.

To Anonymous at 6:16pm...I sincerely doubt that. It's easy to call someone a punk from a dark and lonely basement.

I don't know how many of you are physicians, as I am, but there are many loopholes in this, as you might imagine from such an ill-conceived attempt.

The bill title states "...WITH A DETECTABLE FETAL HEARTBEAT WITHOUT THE INFORMED WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE PREGNANT WOMAN..." The key is the issue of informed consent. The bill does have language mandating informed written consent. At least they provided an out.

Then the question of fetal heart beat detection is raised. How does one do this? The fetal heart starts contracting around 5 weeks post-conception. The only to detect this is with doppler ultrasound. Traditional transvaginal ultrasound can usually demonstrate visible heart muscle contractions at 10-12 weeks. You can actually hear the heartbeats with a stethoscope at 17 weeks or so. So his definition of standard medical practices is vague and subject to substantial leeway amongst physicians.

Now, as a doctor, I wish that just for once, the legislature of Mississippi and the Congress would do something that actually makes practicing medicine easier and less restrictive.

Is that you Andy? Or his mother?

Then why won't he leave people alone? If he's such a good man, why can't he live his life the way he thinks he should, and let everyone else do the same?

Good men don't inject themselves uninvited into a woman's reproductive system. Andy Gipson al Zarqawi is nothing more than a high-tech rapist.

" Legislation to make rectal exams a prerequisite to getting Viagra, etc "

Thats funny 3: 07. I predict a new play in the making at the Fondren Theatre Workshop:

" The Rectal Monologues"

Any Suggestions on the cast ?

Punk. Hmmm. Interesting choice of words. Join the modern day friend. Read more and realize you are on your way out. Stop hatin'. Geesh, if you honestly believe there is a personal attack on Mr. Gibson, you obviously just found this blog. We treat all the same. A fool is a fool, someone with half a brain - you guessed it - has half a brain. In your case I think many are willing to overlook you. Period. But I had to give you my opine, because, frankly, my friend you sound like a dolt.

Let me ask anyone supporting or opposing abortion. When a woman miscarriages, do you rush to them? Do you vomit vile comments of baby killer?

Get the f(*&^ out of peoples lives and live your own. Concentrate on making this place a better place for those who are conceived, birthed, whatever.

Frankly, I can't stand this debate and find it to be, well, um, TOO FREAGIN' PERSONAL.

Until you are able to walk into the birthing room, the ultrasound, the room where two people congress and state you want to tell them what/how/when/where to procreate; please, please, please - give us a break from your rhetoric in the political space. It does not belong there and to think so presumes a measure of invasion of privacy that the United States should never tread.

Besides that, the argument, given the political fundamentals of liberalism and conservatism are turned on their heads. If you take the core of each philosophical thought, each is supporting a fallacy.

For those who think I'm full of it:

Modern day liberalism agrees that every one should have a chance, have the same protections. Sounds a bit like pro-life to me.

This will be the last I speak of this because as I've stated before, this is not a political issue.

Besides that, it doesn't square well with all the women in my life.

Applause @ 7:43

I'm for people minding their own business. What a woman decides to do with her body and her life is between her, her family and her doctor. These stupid men need to butt out of people's personal business. This whole thing makes the women in my family both old and young very, very mad.

Thank you Darryl. I doubt many of the MEN voting for this bill have ANY idea of when a fetal heartbeat can be detected or by what means.

Quite a few were probably too " busy" to go with their wives to the ob-gyn appointment when their child's heartbeat could be detected. If they did, they probably said, " sounds like the washing machine".

LOVE the idea of requiring a rectal doppler prior to getting Viagra! Of course, women confusing the salt with the arsenic is another alternative...since we are SO dumb.

It is a ridiculous assumption to believe that any female capable of getting pregnant and understanding the significance of a fetal heartbeat doesn't understand that a BABY is the end result.

It is insulting to women to believe that they don't know what they are doing when they get an abortion. Yes, many will have later regrets and make excuses to have that painful decision seem less terrible, but they knew at the time.

I lived during a time when abortions were illegal. Women that could afford it went to Sweden. Others went the illegal route and some are infertile as a result. Some died. I only know for certain about the cheerleader in my high school who almost died after an illegal abortion and who is now a big pro-life advocate. ALL of her friends tried to talk her out of this as her family could have " sent her away" and would have supported her. She's barren, unmarried and blames the abortion rather than HERSELF. Now, she's claiming she didn't know and this nonsense would have persuaded her? BS

And, this is , no matter how one tries to dress it up, imposing one's moral and religious beliefs on another. It's not only not consistent with conversatism, it's downright un American.

If you are against abortion, make it easier for women to raise children on their own. Make sure every child born has a real shot at realizing their potential. Protect women from abusers and sexual predators more effectively.

And, be sure that if you had cancer or your wife or daughter had cancer and you were informed that estrogen speeds the growth and the child would be at risk, you'd opt to take that chance. Be SURE that if you or your wife or daughter was raped or subject to spousal abuse, the decision would be easy. Be SURE that if you knew the child would not live but a short time after birth, you'd go through with the pregnancy.

Be sure that if you found yourself pregnant at 40 and had kids in college who could continue only if you could work and knew the health risk had increased, you'd make the decision to go to term.

THAT'S the problem. The self-righteous THINK they know what they'd do.


And, please get the smotes out of your own eyes first!

Dr. Hamilton, I applaud your authoritative way of pointing out the ambiguities of a fetal's heartbeat. Perhaps your notation should be penned to Alan Gibson's forehead.

If Alan Gibson wishes to live in a state where no abortions are performed, I will gladly max out my Visa to move his body and his bodily fluids to the place of his choice.

@Darryl Hamilton, make sure you're looking at the current version of the bill -- there were important changes in committee

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2012/pdf/HB/1100-1199/HB1196CS.pdf

The version that was passed by the House is an outright ban on abortion when there's a detectable heartbeat. That happens at 3-4 weeks post-fertilization. You can only get a positive pregnancy test at 4 weeks LMP at the very earliest, so that gives you literally about 10-14 days to terminate the pregnancy.

Most women don't even know they're pregnant at that point -- your period is only a week or so late.

HB-1196 will basically eliminate elective abortion, and it will launch a Roe v Wade lawsuit that will cost Mississippi millions of dollars. Many pro-life groups in other states like Ohio oppose heartbeat legislation on the grounds that it is likely to get struck down and wind up reinforcing Roe rather than overturning it.

So if this is all because it's a "baby" at 4 weeks or 10 weeks, or whatever, then why not just do a C-section instead of an abortion? What? You can't deliver a "baby" at 10 weeks? Hmmmm....maybe that argument needs a little more thought.

Having been subjected to a TV- ultrasound prior to a hysterectomy, I can tell you it is NOT something I would ever wish on anyone unnecessarily, even the idiot men who think it's a good enough idea to make into law.

Delta

Same here Delta only to make matters worse, I had an allergic reaction to either the plastic or the ointment. Misery.

These men have never even SEEN this machine! And, they know NOTHING about how a woman's body works, NOTHING about how birth control works. Guys, at the risk of turning the creeps on, it's a big dildo like object and trying to call it a " wand" helps no woman with the discomfort. Only a man would think that euphemism would be useful.

And, they want to subject a raped pre-teen to this? Oh, the supporters will argue, " that's a small percentage". It doesn't matter if it's ONE. ONE is too many and particularly if it's YOUR daughter!

Worse, supporters are deliberately ignorant and I suspect stay ignorant for a reason.

Do they REALLY believe that any woman with whom a man has sex cannot be persuaded to have their child if they stand by her, support and love her? How do they REALLY ignore the fact that the fathers are often the ones pressuring the woman to have an abortion?

Do they even consider that women can't get pregnant by themselves?

Why not just require that every man who has abused his spouse/children or committed adultery or has a child he doesn't support and every rapist and child molester be neutered? That'd reduce the number of abortions. We could require all boys to be " clipped" and do reversal surgery a few weeks before their wedding or how about developing a birth control pill for males since no egg could be fertilized without sperm?

Those who support this are either dumber than posts, closet perverts, " wham,bam,thank you , m'ams", neo-nazis or share the Taliban's view of that religion dictates that a woman must submit to the will of men and exist only to procreate and that everyone must adhere to their religious beliefs!

Curt...your analogies to the Taliban and Al Quaeda members are well taken. I cannot see one whit of difference in extremist Muslims imposing their narrow beliefs on all Muslims and non-Muslims and extremist Christians imposing their narrow beliefs on all Christians and non-Christians. At least 49% of Americans identify themselves as Pro-Choice. Over 70% of Americans think abortions should be legal to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. 98% of Catholic women support the use of birth control.

These people are fanatics and how they've taken over our legislature and why the GOP is pandering to them should cause us ALL concern!!!

Makes you wish for the good old days of divided government.

A conservative friend of mine claims actually to prefer when Dems and Repubs split the Legislature, because there are fewer laws passed that way, and the less gov't the better, he thinks.

The current GOP Legislature is lending support to his theory.

I know, let's have a vote! Oh wait, we did and it came out 78-36.

I'd like to think that some of you are being intentionally dense in an effort to make some point, but I fear that is not the case. That goes double for those of you drama queens comparing Christianity with Islam.

Be upset. Argue your point. Vote in new legislators. Gnash your teeth and tear your robes. But be adults. The government legislates morality every day. And somebody's morals are going to be reflected in the law. I cannot have multiple wives. You cannot defile a corpse (even though a corpse is deader than an embryo). I can send my child to private school. You can hold a spoon-wielding burglar at gunpoint.

But somewhere along the way, a bunch of y'all got the idea that the constitution prohibits all laws that have some degree of religious influence. I get it -- you want a country and/or state in which laws must be agnostic and are invalid if they coincide with religious tenets. I don't and neither do most Mississippians. That kind of thing goes really well in California. (And Massachusetts in case you're into the whole New England thing.)

The beauty of our system, as originally constructed, is that people can decide issues for themselves. They can decide based on Christianity, Islam, science, science fiction, a coin toss, or any other basis they choose. You huddle with your "peeps," count noses, and the one with the most noses wins. If you don't like it, we've got 49 other states, one District and a few territories to choose from.

You were never guaranteed the right to live wherever you want, do whatever you want, and do it whenever you want, despite what you may have thought you forced the country to accept in the summer of '67. "Your revolution is over, Mr. Lebowski. Condolences. The bums lost."

The beauty of our system, as originally constructed, is that people can decide issues for themselves.

Ah. I had rather thought that the beauty of our system, as originally constructed, is that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, which no government - by majority or otherwise - can take from us.

2:23 pm The citizens voted when we defeated the Parenthood Amendment.

78 jerks decided to substitute THEIR morality for us.

Your argument would have some validity IF there was a consensus on this like there is on murder or drug abuse etc.

This isn't " legislating morality" because there is no consensus. Indeed, polling of our citizens do not support this.

This is legislating YOUR narrow view of morality. This is forcing YOUR RELIGIOUS point of view on those who do not share it.

Worse, you are forcing medical procedures on women. No one forces any woman to have an abortion but YOU are forcing a medical procedure on women.

Did you have the guts to look at the film?

Your entire argument displays a total ,overly simplistic, uneducated lack of understanding of the writings of our Founders and their intentions.

And, jerk, have you ever studied Prohibition?

We had a vote and defeated the Parenthood amendment, remember?

78 gutless wonders and religious nut cases who,by the way, didn't run on this issue decided to ignore the will of the people.

Your lack of knowledge of the law and morality and history and our Constitution is stunning beyond belief if we can assume you actually believe what you wrote. You compare apples to oranges.

You MISS entirely that the comparision is NOT Christianity to Islam, but religious fanatics to religious fanatics.

A religious nutcase is a religious nutcase and since you missed history class apparently, perhaps you didn't learn that Christianity hasn't been immune to the egregious actions and trouble caused by fanatics claiming to be Christian!

YOU aren't a Christian, you are a FANATIC using Christianity as a justification for imposing your will on others.

"Jerk" here. One of them, anyway. ("The new phone books are here! The new phone books are here!") And I actually am a Christian, but not a fanatic. Or a FANATIC. If it helps you get over your religion fixation, pretend I'm an atheist who thinks that life begins at conception. Or pretend I'm Hindu. You can tolerate Hindus, right?

Your (and your Planned Parenthood buddies') justification for voting down Personhood was that it was poorly written because it was too vague. You weren't lying back in November, were you? Just a little? Yeah, I thought so.

As for Prohibition, I guess I'm going to need a refresher. That wasn't the one where we amended the Constitution, changed our minds, and then amended the Constitution again, was it? Because that would seem to indicate that we have a process for adding things to the Constitution other than letting a group of 9 decide what something means on a given day. But maybe I'm thinking of something else.

By the way, y'all can relax a little. No one is asking the state to establish any religion and no one is forcing a religious conversion on you (unlike the Taliban, Curtis).

Your view of morality was the 36 and mine was the 78. Better luck next time. And learn a little more about ultrasounds, specifically the Doppler variety mentioned above. The bill doesn't require anyone to stick a (second?) "magic wand" in anyone else's hoohah.

Let me try to keep this simple 3:40pm since you don't appear to be " smarter than a 5th grader".

Societies evolve over time. The MORES they adopt reflect MANY influences, some merely practical and peculiar to their location in the world, and not just those of one religion. The easiest ones are those upon which all religions agree. A healthy, functioning society reaches a consensus and finds ways to accommodate those moral issues upon which there is no consensus.

In Christianity, the ONLY consensus that exists among the various forms of Christian belief were agreed upon in the two Councils at Nicenea.

You only imagine there is a Judeo Christian consensus because you haven't studied the history of religions.

There is NO consensus in Christianity about when life begins. When a life is protected by law tends to be a secular question because it is a matter of law and NOT a religious one.

I understand you and your ilk have had some success in trying to tell Christians that Christianity is monolithic, but that is not the case. Even mainstream Protestant denominations have split because of conflict in moral questions.

And, here's a real newsflash for you, your pastor and /or your Sunday school teacher are humans and they just might be wrong .

I, for one, do NOT put my immortal soul in the hands of others. And, I certainly will not agree to let YOU dictate what my CHRISTIAN beliefs should be!

Take the SMOTE OUT OF YOUR EYE!

@4:03
You said:
"Your (and your Planned Parenthood buddies') justification for voting down Personhood was that it was poorly written because it was too vague. You weren't lying back in November, were you? Just a little? Yeah, I thought so."

That was actually the argument advanced by the otherwise toe-the-line Repubs and pro-lifers who just REALLY needed an out for supporting a truly bad idea. Pro-choicers needed no such excuse.

Delta

It was too vague, Delta, because that amendment would have eliminated common forms of birth control and created all sorts of problems for in vitro.

What you can't seem to understand, is this language creates a whole different set of problems as you are now requiring a medical procedure.

Conservatives don't like the government dictating our medical care.

The end may justify the means for you, but Christianity demands that the means is everything. HOW we live our lives matters. We are to sacrifice our lives rather than to put our souls at risk.

And, for a conservative the government inserting its authority into my medical decisions is unacceptable. And, frankly, I think the government ought to STOP at my SKIN unless there is sufficient probable cause to think I've committed a crime.

In your ZEAL to stop abortion, you don't consider unintended consequences. Those of us who aren't zealots , do.

This bill is neither consistent with Christian morality or conservative principles.

I understand the waters have been terribly muddied of late, but there is a difference between religion and government . The Bible acknowledges the difference. The Bible consistently instructs Christians to tend to their own sins rather than sit in judgment. Rendering unto Caesar is a recognition in the Bible that government's role is to deal with the human behaviors that adversely affect society and religion instructs us on how to behave in such a way as to be welcomed to Heaven.

And, our Nation, our laws are not JUST influenced by religious beliefs but by the philosophers of the Ages of Reason and Enlightenment, by the Hammurabi Code, by English Common Law, by the Magna Carta, the Napoleonic Code, and centuries of war and strife and the wisdom of great philosophers. Most all of our Founding Fathers were extremely well read. The Bible was not their only book. They read Voltaire as well as Machiavelli and Plato and Socrates.

And, they actually planned a Nation where they imagined well read, well informed people in positions of leadership. They thought surely we would value our INDIVIDUAL freedoms so much that we wouldn't place those freedoms at risk. They thought we'd guard against " the tyranny of the majority".

That's what you are missing as well... INDIVIDUAL freedom. They had suffered from the tyranny of the majority.

I bet 2:23 actually thinks he's a conservative.

Citizens don't have a right to live wherever they want? Really? Which state requires government approval before a citizen can move there? The fact is that a citizen *can* live wherever he or she desires (and with whomever they choose).

As far as doing whatever one wants, a fundamental tenet of conservatism is that a citizen should be able to do whatever he or she desires in the pursuit of happiness, so long as it's not harming someone else, without government interference.

Summer of 67? Seriously? The principles you mock were not the principles of liberals, socialists, hippies, Muslims, Atheists, Red Sox fans or other evildoers.

These principles were championed by conservatives and advanced by Republicans. At least before the Party was co-opted by the political preachers and religious extremists.

@10:43
Speaking of "can't seem to understand"...RIF.

I'm the one with the "Keep your laws off of my body" bumper sticker and I am NOT missing the concept of individual freedom in the least. I think the law is bullshit, demeaning to women, dishonest in its intentions, indicative of the conservative's race to be the most extreme religious faction in the country, and downright abusive to an entire gender.

BTW, I'm female, Catholic, mother of 3, 2 miscarriages, 2 T-V ultrasounds and pretty middle-of-the-road politically and I STILL think the old white guys should keep their Bibles the hell out of my girlie parts.

Delta

Sorry Delta...messed up a pronoun in my haste...was agreeing with you and blew the pronoun in the next paragraph

JERK...would you go to UTube and see the film From conception to birth? You MIGHT become enlightened about the heartbeat test . At that point, frogs and humans look alike.

I consider myself to be "conservative". But my definition of the word conservative is vastly different than that of the elected officials of this state.

In my opinion, true conservatives want LESSER government involvement in our everyday lives..... Why do all these alleged conservatives keep trying to increase government regulations? From now having to get a prescription for sinus medicine, to this? When will it end?

Do I think abortion is a bad thing? Yes. Would I ever have one? No. But, that is MY decision.... If someone else wants to have one, that's between them and whoever they pray to at night. The government needs to stay out of it.

You are either for lesser government or you're not. From voter ID, abortion, etc. I don't see how anyone can call themselves a true conservative and support any legislation that creates more government intrusion into people's personal lives.

Everyone is fine mixing religious beliefs with the law, as long as it's "their" religion. What happens if we set this precedent, and in 20 years from now Christianity isn't the majority religion here? Would these same people be all for other religious beliefs being used as a basis for legislation?

Good comment 9:10 pm