Abortion restrictions become NC law after veto override

RALEIGH, NC (AP) -- Women seeking abortions in North Carolina will be required to wait 24 hours and receive state-mandated counseling and an ultrasound before a procedure.

The Republican-led Legislature completed its override Thursday of a measure vetoed by Democratic Gov. Beverly Perdue.

The Senate canceled the veto thanks in part to a Republican senator who was absent for the final vote. Sen. Stan Bingham of Davidson County had voted against the abortion restriction last month. His absence meant bill supporters got the votes necessary for the override.

The House agreed to the override earlier this week.

Perdue vetoed the bill because she said it obstructs needlessly the patient-doctor relationship.

Social conservatives praised the bill, which also requires a woman consider an offer to see the shape of the fetus and hear a heartbeat.

(Copyright 2011 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.

That's your opinion, which you are entitled to...I'm also entitled to mine, which is that it's NOT offensive, and is a step in the RIGHT direction.

Are they forced to wait 24 hours or not? You are making it sound like it is optional.

It says they have to wait, they have no choice.

Why does the government, of any kind, have any right to force religious morality on a woman? I don't belong to your church, and quite frankly, I don't care what you believe. I respect you for your right to believe it, but you should respect others that do not as well.

In the same respect; this "extra time" is nothing more then brow beating a woman who is in a difficult situation. This law could potentially create mental and psychological issues from the result of what is imposing.

The good thing is, it will be overturned in time. Society, as a whole, is past this. However, the hyper-sensitive, radically conservative society is dying. Survival of the fittest, not survival of the most conservative.

Who says that believing that life begins at inception is "religious morality"? You?

I'm not a particularly religious person, although I do believe in God, but I'm not what I would consider religious. However, I totally believe that it is a developing human being in that womb that shouldn't be tossed like you would throw away an old worn out dishrag.

I believe more in birth control and making sure you don't get pregnant to begin with.

Religious morality? No, I just believe it's wrong.

Pushing their damn religous righteousness right down the throats of North Carolinians. This is absurd; I don't agree with public funding for abortions but this is a slap in the face of the freedom of women across the state. This is what happens when you let religion and state intermingle. It is a country and state based on separation of relgious beliefs and government. We have gone drastically in the wrong direction.

I really dont want any state "pastors" in office any longer. This is sick. The best thing is that this law can be overturned when we have some more like minded people involved.

More biblcial bullsh**.

You're the only one mentioning religion here. Falling back on the same old tired arguments.

What's wrong with a woman having an extra day to figure out if this is what she really wants? After all, she has to carry that burden with her the rest of her life.

biblical again?
and extra day??? you think she'll get the counseling and the ultrasound in a day?????????? dream on.

Lee:

What gives any of us the right to tell the woman she should wait? We don't have it, therefore we shouldn't impose it. This law is a violation of the womans rights; I hope it is contested to the highest court.

These same people, or hypocrites, that support this Pro-Life movement are also the same that attack Doctors, Nurses and the like for doing their jobs and providing a medical servi

Pro-BS.

I could see your point if you were talking about women having to wait weeks or even months. But we are talking about a 24 hour period here. It sounds like you're afraid they might change their mind about having an abortion.

Pro-abortion...BS.

Its not about whether I think she will change her mind or not; its about not being ANY of my or YOUR business. It is her business. She has the right to an abortion and no one should have the right to have her wait.

Do we have too many abortions running around on the streets or do we have too many children who cannot be cared for because their parents weren't ready or many other issues such as rape, disease etc?
It’s about respecting the decision and not forcing morality on anyone. Maybe we should start giving 24 waiting periods before people order a Pizza or maybe 24 hour waiting periods before we decide to have surgery.
Conservative bullsh**.

Should we give 24 hours "warining" for the morning after pill too? Or maybe a 24 hour warning before we sell condoms?
You want less government interaction but more restrictions on abortion? That is a complete contradiction. Not one single social conservative has yet to address that issue. Maybe you can discuss it at your next tea party!

Ooops? Less handouts? But what if she can't pay for that damn ultrasound the law dictates!? Then what? We [Taxpayers] just paid so little Mary got a bedside chat from Dr. Morality because someone decided to carry their bible to the next state session.

North Carolina will continue to live with backwards policies if this bible belt isn't stopped from entering into our government.

Your post is so full of liberal rantings that it's hardly worth the effort of commenting. To go into each point you made would waste my time and wouldn't accomplish anything with a closed, one-sided mind like yours. However, you do remind me of something President Truman once said, "If you can't convince them, confuse them."

As opposed to carrying a child around for life? Your stuck with the decision one way or another. Do you think twice or wait a day before taking antibiotics to kill an infection or virus? It's little different than an early stage abortion. There is little difference between a newly formed fetus in terms of self awareness and ability. One may have potential to be more, but it isn't that early on! In the end, the government has NO PLACE in telling a woman what to do or WHEN to do with her body!

A baby is not a virus. You are comparing a baby to a virus, and that's absurd.

I still believe that 24 hours isn't that big a deal. You're just trying to make it one.

At the molecular level the virus is even more advanced then the zygote at certain stages. So if this is a battle over "life" the abortion and killing a virus is exactly the same thing. However, people have a difficult time looking at abortion on a scientific level and run right back the pews with it. Life is only precious when it is convienent for you right? I'm sure you can start off with that the animals were put here for us to do this to and that to but the people, well, that is different. Your wrong, science doesn't care life is life.

I doubt the "baby" as you put it wouldn't even know what happened because its not a "baby" at all. You killed more "life" walking home today when you stepped on all those insects and single celled organisms. So don't go getting all offended so quickly.

Government and Beliefs do not mix.

this saddens me greatly - - - who pays for the extra testing and counseling. and are they both offered in a timely manner.
more BS and heartache for women. Do you think most women do this lightly and don't think about the consequences.

....they couldn't override the veto requiring a valid form of identification to vote. I still cannot uncerstand what's up with that. Now the illegals, the felons and those too lazy to get off their fat butts to register can vote this smiley clown back into the Govs office again! Geeeeeeez!

Republicans are absolute hypocrites! They say they want less government, except when it comes to things like this. This is nothing short of the government telling a woman what she can and cannot do with her body. It should be a private matter between a woman and her Doctor and the government has NO place in the matter. I am ashamed of this state today!

...you may not be here today. There are definitely indiviuals on this earth that we would be better off without. Some posters too...

@absolutely disgusting, you are disgusting. Read the bill! This allows a woman to have a fully informed decision when it comes to an abortion. All too often women believe this is their only choice and it isn't. This will not infringe upon the patient's privacy with her physician and it certainly doesn't abolish abortions. Abortions will still be an option to those that request one. It will, however, ensure that baby (and it is a living baby) has every fighting chance possible. Not to mention the teen, college student or woman who would have to live with the guilt of knowing they extinguished a life based on the ignorance of the status quo. Every living being with a pulse deserves to be fully informed and have a chance at life! This is a victory for women across this state, not an infringement of ideological agenda. Do your homework!

Tell me dear socially conservative republican...who will PAY for all these babies. I hear the religious wing nuts like yourself spout off about the evils of abortion ten minutes after they spout off about the evils of medicaid and well fare. Why don't you go live in Iran or Saudi Arabia where religion is free to be involved in politics. Here we have Separation of Church and State quite thankfully.

Social Conservative:
Anti-Abortion
Pro-Death Penalty

Gotta love the hypocrisy!

Is it time for your medication or mine?

Social liberal:

Pro death for innocent babies and Pro life for animals and criminals. That isn't hyprocisy?!

Also, FYI separtion of church and state was designed to protect the church from the influence of the government! Read some history!

You know my views. I'm totally in favor of providing free abortions (and mandatory birth control) to anyone on TANF or any other government assistance program. I believe any woman has an inherent right to terminate her pregnancy.

That said,this law does nothing to endanger that right. It simply stacks the deck less heavily against the baby.

Having an abortion should not be as easy a decision as what to have for breakfast or what color shirt to wear today. It should be a carefully thought-out decision based upon a woman's needs AND she should consider the human life that is resident in her womb.

If this law forces her to perform the latter, it's GREAT in my book.

I totally agree with you on this one, Common. You are 100% right.

It's not all Republicans, its the outrageously social conservatives. I truly believe, in time, they will become our third true political party, The little girls in pink dresses with plastic cups called the tea party.

You are right, they want less government when its convienent but more when it comes to religious issues. It's not about being left alone; its about being more like them.

Abortion is a private matter between a woman and her unborn fetus. Perhaps even the father, should he want to be invovled with the approval of the mother. This is not a matter for Politicans, Republicans, Democrats, Independents or otherwise. Roe vs Wade happened a long time ago, why are we going backwards? Whats next? Introducing segregation again? This is crazy. Lets finally put this to rest and realize its a womans right to have an abortion.

I am so wanting to move to Canada if these tea party right wing nutjobs continue to reproduce.

"Abortion is a private matter between a woman and her unborn fetus." This is insulting--it is a baby, one whom isn't really consulted! And "the father ...with the approval of the mother". If it is only a fetus is she the mother and why doesn't the father had any rights?

Silly, silly self-absorbed women who think they can just kill the consequences of their behavior.

I personally believe that we are seeing more mothers killing their children because we have devalued life in this country. What is really the difference between killing your unborn child and your newborn child?

Oh, for the record the woman in the Roe-v-Wade case gave birth to her child and became very anti-abortion.

This law infringes on the rights of the woman. How do you know every single situation was as a result of the consequences. You are right, we devalued life a long time ago when we started paying for all the children the mother's couldn't raise.

This law is based on hyper-conservatives who say they want less government intervention BUT just asked for more. It will be overturned.

"What is really the difference between killing your unborn child and your newborn child?"

Murder.

These requirements in no way, shape, or form restrict a woman's right to kill her baby. (And that's exactly what it is, though I can live with that) They simply require her to pause and think about it, to make sure that she really wants to end the pregnancy.

I don't think that's any great inconvenience and I think the baby deserves that minimal consideration. Plus, I know more than one woman who regrets the long-ago decision to have an abortion. Had they given it greater thought at the time....

It SHOULD be a very heavy decision, carefully thought out and with great consideration of the moral ramifications. There are cases where abortion is the only logical option, but many more cases when abortion is simply the easy, fast way out...

...for the WOMAN, of course.