El Paso-centric info and commentary from the Center of North America

NPT Capitol: Perry and Dewhurst: Look, listen before you abort

cimg9957Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst spoke out in favor of SB 182 sponsored by Houston Senator Dan Patrick, which would require any woman seeking an abortion, to first have the opportunity to hear the heartbeat and see an ultrasound image of the fetus. The bill is being carried in the House by Frank Corte, R-San Antonio.

The press conference begun with a woman who had had an abortion, but believed she may have changed her mind if given proper access to a sonogram before undergoing the procedure. The press conference also featured a pregnant women undergoing a live sonogram, which was projected on a pull down screen adjacent to the speakers.

Dewhurst, who popped in for five minutes, spoke for two and left, invoked Reagan saying that a fetus must be given the benefit of the doubt when it came to debating it’s humanity. As such, a fetus was entitled to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

“Too often we see abortions that don’t need to happen…I my heart, I believe most people want to see less abortions and more adoptions,” said Dewhurst who thinks the legislation may lead women seeking abortions to a change of heart.

After Dewhurst left, a doctor explained the fetal images on the pull down screen to reporters, “just like you see at home on your LCD screens.” Using a laser pen, he outlined the head, heart and ring of amniotic fluid that allowed the fetus to, “jump around, float around (and) move around.”

““You cant go in and say that is a blob of tissue…we really want to promote the fact that this is a live person,” said the doctor.

If passed, the bill would “give a women the see not a baby but her baby,” said Senator Patrick.

Governor Perry, will also make a speech this morning on the steps of the Capitol building in support of the legislation.


Written by newspapertreeelpaso

February 24, 2009 at 10:37 am

11 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Can she also have the “opportunity” to decline doing this?


    February 24, 2009 at 11:40 am

  2. More importantly, does the baby have an “opportunity” to decline being killed?


    February 24, 2009 at 1:28 pm

  3. Why not allow for a child’s voice, of sorts, to be heard before a mother makes such a difficult choice to end her child’s life? Women should not be afraid or opposed to facing their child’s existence up close and personal on an ultrasound screen before they go through with an invasive, harsh and devastating ordeal such as abortion.

    It’s a bittersweet day when we have to see legislators taking a stand to bring women out of denial and legislating their need to have a conscience and some morality.


    February 24, 2009 at 3:01 pm

  4. Thousands of babies a year being killed and youre worried sick of the killings in Juarez. Granted some of those people were innocent but many were involved in the drug business, a choice they made.

    What choice do the babies have? Abortion is just as hideous as pulling the trigger on a gun. But we have no problem with using it as a contraceptive and demanding Fed. and state funds for the abortion.

    Why should our tax dollars pay for something we dont agree with, simply because you didnt want to say no or accept responsibilty?


    February 24, 2009 at 3:37 pm

  5. President of the United States Obama’s wife was the advocate at a hospital in Illinouis that aborted babies and actually left them to die after birth. For further information contact NewsMax at to obtin a copy for the book. The baby would be born and laid aside with no medicial care. That not being abortion but a form of geneside.


    February 24, 2009 at 4:18 pm

  6. Abortion is infanticide… A sonogram is the least that can be done. Criminals have more rights.


    February 24, 2009 at 7:41 pm

  7. I believe that no one is pro-abortion and we would all like to reduce the necessity for this procedure. However, many pro-life advocates oppose contraception and sex education. We have enough unwanted, neglected and abandoned children. Shaming women/girls into having unwanted babies is wrong.

    Ken G

    February 24, 2009 at 11:18 pm

  8. thanks, your article is very informative.


    February 25, 2009 at 6:26 am

  9. Murder is no shame and not wrong? These women/girls are then able walk with their heads up high? Saying no, self control and consequences of behavior is more difficult than killing the baby?

    These women/girls are NOT the victims, the babies are. Thats where your sympathy should be.


    February 25, 2009 at 9:06 am

  10. This is a MUST pass bill. Newspaper tree – please start putting links to our senators and representatives so that our voices can be heard. Contact your state senator and representatives and tell them to vote for this bill.


    March 2, 2009 at 12:04 pm

  11. No, she would not have an “opportunity” to decline this. It would be required by law.

    Also, if the doctor does not force the woman to hear the heartbeat and his description of the fetus’s external membranes and internal organs, he could, by law loose his license.

    The woman is allowed and I quote from the bill’s text, to “… avert her eyes from the screen.”

    Please visit the bill’s official website below, and you can ready the grisly details.


    April 14, 2009 at 1:05 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: