Idaho lawmaker asks if woman can swallow camera for gynecological exam before medical abortion

[Rothbardian Girl]

BOISE, Idaho — An Idaho lawmaker received a brief lesson on female anatomy after asking if a woman can swallow a small camera for doctors to conduct a remote gynecological exam.

The question Monday from Republican Rep. Vito Barbieri came as the House State Affairs Committee heard nearly three hours of testimony on a bill that would ban doctors from prescribing abortion-inducing medication through telemedicine.

Dr. Julie Madsen was testifying in opposition to the bill when Barbieri asked the question. Madsen replied that would be impossible because swallowed pills do not end up in the vagina.

The committee approved the bill 13-4 on a party-line vote. Barbieri, who sits on the board of a crisis pregnancy center in northern Idaho, voted in favor of the legislation.

More at link: http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle...293718211.html

[acptulsa]

Let us pray that she isn't the sharpest tool in that particular shed.

No bets, however.

[Dr.3D]

She must have been sleeping in elementary school when the digestive tract was covered.

[Rothbardian Girl]

Just to be clear, the person in question was a male lawmaker who sits on the board of a "crisis pregnancy center" - aka an anti-abortion center. The larger point here is that apparently it's appropriate for people without any basic knowledge of female anatomy to legislate on the subject of said anatomy. If that's not terrifying, I don't know what is.

[phill4paul]

Just to be clear, the person in question was a male lawmaker who sits on the board of a "crisis pregnancy center" - aka an anti-abortion center. The larger point here is that apparently it's appropriate for people without any basic knowledge of female anatomy to legislate on the subject of said anatomy. If that's not terrifying, I don't know what is.

People without basic knowledge of anything legislate on the subjects of anything all the time.

[acptulsa]

Just to be clear, the person in question was a male lawmaker who sits on the board of a "crisis pregnancy center" - aka an anti-abortion center. The larger point here is that apparently it's appropriate for people without any basic knowledge of female anatomy to legislate on the subject of said anatomy. If that's not terrifying, I don't know what is.

Doesn't seem to me to be quite as terrifying as people without any basic knowledge of male anatomy legislating on the subject of said anatomy. But I'd be happy to meet you halfway and admit that anyone with no basic knowledge of any anatomy legislating on any subject of anatomy is plenty terrifying enough for me.

[dannno]

Let us pray that she isn't the sharpest tool in that particular shed.

No bets, however.

She must have been sleeping in elementary school when the digestive tract was covered.

Ya, she's an idiot.

[fr33]

I'm just posting to attach a picture of Vito Barbieri from another host to help the internet shame this dummy.

[TheTexan]

I dunno, man, I seen a lot a strange things come outta there

[GunnyFreedom]

Lol wow. That's almost as bad as a bunch of Marines and dependents capsizing Guam....

this is belongs in that 'stupid lawmakers' thread. F'r reals tho.

I would argue that the vast, vast majority of lawmakers legislate issues about which they have zero clue.

The saddest part of all of this, is that this is NOT an Onion article.

[presence]

You'd think a doucher like this guy would have a better understanding of the situation.

[Anti Federalist]

People without basic knowledge of anything legislate on the subjects of anything all the time.

And, that.

[Rothbardian Girl]

People without basic knowledge of anything legislate on the subjects of anything all the time.

The issue here crucially hinges on how government agents get to have a say in what at the end of the day are ultimately women's personal medical decisions, whether you agree with these decisions or not. Women rightly complain that men typically have no idea how issues surrounding conception and pregnancy even work (case in point). Abortion is an intensely private matter; that is to say, any anti-abortion law would require violating women's privacy beyond anything even the most rabid surveillance supporter could dream of. It's a little different from, say, an economic planner trying to coordinate a market he does not understand. Anti-abortionists often demonize women's characters based on what they perceive the decision to have an abortion to be about.

[otherone]

I'm just posting to attach a picture of Vito Barbieri from another host to help the internet shame this dummy.

Gotta wonder how Vito "A hole's a hole" Barbieri's been doing sex....

[tangent4ronpaul]

Just to be clear, the person in question was a male lawmaker who sits on the board of a "crisis pregnancy center" - aka an anti-abortion center. The larger point here is that apparently it's appropriate for people without any basic knowledge of female anatomy to legislate on the subject of said anatomy. If that's not terrifying, I don't know what is.

This guy is really an idiot!

Plan B, MyWay and one or two others are available OTC nationwide with no prescription needed and no age restrictions. The problem is that at least Plan B, the most well known one, price gouges with the single dose selling in the $40-50 range. Other options that are Rx are much, much less expensive.

Secondly, BCP's that a female may already be taking or that they could get from a GF or just go into a walk in clinic and ask for a script for BCP's and it's legal for the doc to write that script - even if the consult was via telemedicine.

He's a list for the ones that work in the US.
http://ec.princeton.edu/countryquery.asp

umm, just click list after USA.

While Plan B is effective up to 5 days after conception, the others, particularly BCP's given generally in overage are only effective for about 3 days post conception. But they are a LOT less expensive!

What a totally useless law...

-t

[acptulsa]

The issue here crucially hinges on how government agents get to have a say in what at the end of the day are ultimately women's personal medical decisions...

Damn, RG. Why do you insist on indulging in Their Collectivism, when it's the disease and individualism is the cure? You claim to be Rothbardian, but you are missing the most basic and most fundamental point, and shaming Rothbard in the process. The issue here crucially hinges on how government agents get to have a say in what at the end of the day are ultimately individuals' personal medical decisions. Gender is just another distraction, and just another way to divide people who ought to be united in fighting this most personal of all tyrannies. What does it take to get you to see that?

Yes, using the gender buzzwords might help get our message through to certain select audiences. But this forum is not one of those audiences. Who are you talking to?

Better rhetoriticians than you have attempted to divide and conquer us. When are you going to come to value all individuals equally highly, and thus become an actual libertarian? 'Cause I've got news for you. Ignorami like this Vito clown have no more idea how the things that issue from their scrotums get there, and that won't keep them from issuing ignorant laws on that subject either. Every individual under the sun would be wise to be alarmed and dismayed by this behavior.

[jkr]

spit, swallow it doesn't matter to me...