Some questions for you ..
When will YOUR medical records be made available to the general public?
Who will pay for the administration and upkeep of these records?
What is the point? It is NOT for the purpose of knowing how many abortions are performed in the state. That is already known.
How will spontaneous abortions be dealt with under this new legislation?
I supposed there would be some sort of consequence for not filing these certificates. What about all the abortions that happen without anyone's knowledge? That occurs in about half of all pregnancies.
No one is pro-abortion, sir. Your "Scarlet Letter" legislation is merely for the purpose of moralistic grandstanding and pandering to the ultra-conservative religious right. Your porn bill was laughable. This is just disgusting.
Enjoy what's left of your term, sir. You have just committed political career suicide.
Why you are ignoring all of the questions about the untruths and shallowness of your proposed death certificate? Why would you ignore your constituents and others' concerns with this post full of questions for them? Do you think answering your constituents' questions with your own questions is a good way to communicate?
You have complete lies in your bill. Do you plan on addressing them? You also have concerned women who've told you extremely personal things about their miscarriages in response to your bill. Do you plan to continue to ignore them?
If this blog is what you and others' claim it is--one of the few legislator blogs that serves the public with information straight from the man's mouth--then you should, at the very lest, not ignore your concerned commenters and constituents. Or else people might think you were doing this just for the attention.
1.If it's not a life, how can it die. Seems like a death certificate carries the assumption of life. Isn't that why you are pursuing it? Aren't you trying to go down a road that will lead us to unborn babies having legal rights over the women that carry them? You haven't detailed any other benefits of the legislation, though I've asked.
2.No, but you didn't propose legislation to require licenses for doctors performing abortions in Tennessee. Is your argument that it is not the most controversial legislation imaginable, so it must be a good idea? How does a 'bill about paperwork' mesh with your conservative ideals?
3. Both will have a profound affect. I care to know how much time you plan to spend on it because I disagree with it and want to know what portion of your term will serve me poorly.
4. Don't think it is a waste of time and have told my congress person.
5.Don't work for the state. You should expect my honest opinion shaded with my biases and consider all arguments on their merits regardless of bias. I don't think I am guilty of an ethical lapse, my civic duty is important and this is a small part. Thanks for the opportunity, by the way. I am not overworked. I have a real job. I assume this is directed at someone you know and that you know their work schedule.
6.Why is a worse law an argument for a bad law? I don't think specifics of the procedure should be legislated. The situation should make an abortion legal or illegal and medical procedure should be left to a medical professional.
7.There is an element of fear here. Clinic protests that can be really cruel and in the extreme clinic bombings. Prosecuting these pro-lifers isn't sufficient to make a woman feel safe with people knowing she had an abortion. Beyond the fear of injury.
8.Are you asserting these hypotheticals as fact? You are my legislator. How did you vote? I did vote for at least one democrat this year.
And are you threatening a specific person's job?
Because, I have to say, number five looks like a threat against a specific person's job (and I think you and I both know exactly who you are referring to here).
Seriously, you're here trying to talk about how you want to have a discussion about abortion and when someone makes a point against you, you obliquely threaten his job?
So, please, tell us more about how you want to have some sort of reasonable discussion about abortion while you're also busy threatening the livelihoods of the people who disagree with you.
Unbelievable!
It may not be a reasonable expectation that you respond to every question posed to you on your blog. However, to respond to questions using questions looks more like someone who is afraid to answer tough questions. From my perspective, that is disrectpectful behavior and most unbecoming of any elected representative.
I am pretty sure that you can do better.
Can you succinctly explain what problem this piece of proposed legislation will resolve?
Number 5 is a little hypocritical considering that people can only "author long posts and comments on blogs" because you authored the blog in the first place. Why else would you post a blog besides to have people comment on it? Perhaps, as said above, this is directed at someone in particular. If that is the case, it probably should have been left out of your list of questions. Number 7 is equally as outlandish. An abortion is a medical procedure and just like any other medical procedure, the personal details of it should not be public information. You don't list SS#'s of all the people who have, say, had cancer and recieved chemotherapy. And then you most certainly don't tell them their information should be public because they should be proud of it! Personal medical records are not and should not be public information. I can't believe anyone, regardless of their stance on the abortion debate, would support this invasion of privacy.
Wow Stacey, you sure have sent the left into a meltdown. LOL. Their just scared and in a panic because they know that their hero Boss Hogg Naifeh is just about finished. I cant wait to see their reaction two years from now when your the new MAJORITY LEADER in the State House! ER's in Tennessee will be flooded with liberal women when that happens. LOL.
ER's in Tennessee will be flooded with liberal women when that happens. LOL.
I'm a humorless feminist and all, but what does this mean?
Yeah, the left is freaking out. You need to rethink that statement a la election time 2004. You know what's going to happen if Kerry wins? Gays are going to get married! People will carry out abortions! The Devil will take over all of us! That was a freak out and it worked.
This "answering questions with questions" thing is dismissive to your constituents and will only win you hostility. (Think Donald Rumsfeld. We all know how that has wound up.)
1. If it's not a life, it doesn't need a death certificate. That's what the commentators have been telling you all along. To issue bogus certificates is an expensive bureaucratic waste of time.
2. This is yet to be demonstrated by my review of Tennessee state law. Since it's your claim, I'd like to see evidence for it.
3. Yes, I think you are wasting your time. I am ok with that, as you have been completely ineffective at getting your own legislation through and this act continues to alienate and marginalize you as a legislator. Thus, the more time you waste with this pointless but highly visible boondoggle, the better I like it.
4. I have no objections to wasting time on dead-end legislation. It's the resolutions that go somewhere (like authorizing the war in the first place) that worry me.
5. Petty. Creepy. Insulting to all state workers. The whole "informed citizenry as a bulwark of democracy" memo must not have reached you.
6. What? I thought you were talking about miscarriages. You mean all this is really about abortion? Man, I'm shocked. Shocked.
7. My medical care -- like yours -- is and should be a private matter. I do not need to hear about your prostate problems (hypothetically speaking) and you don't need to know about my gynecological care.
8. Again, I don't have any evidence for these claims nor have you provided any.
Say what you will, Campfield has a funny way of making people talk about Campfield. Apparently on an international level.
Having said that, #5 is a shot across the bow. An unnecessarily hardball move in my opinion.
But God bless the Hypocrites here. Some of the very complainers in this thread routinely want to start tracing other people's IP addresses to threaten them for disagreeing with them. Even for stuff not posted on their sites.
Imagine a state employee popping off "anti-choice" rhetoric all day at a certain local news blog.
Think a threat wouldn't be coming their way?
Commenting by HaloScan
