text:
Student Hut
Want to know the best laptop for students about to embark on an all-night study session? How about the best student bank account for making your loan go that extra mile? Maybe you want to know who does the best student broadband packages.
Whatever you're after, we have the answers. We surveyed our student community to find out which essential products they would recommend for other students. With 13 categories, ranging from tech, games, and phone contracts, to insurance, banking, and streaming platforms, we've got something for everyone.
Top Laptops for 2021
1. Google Pixelbook Go
Google's Pixelbook Go is the top premium Chromebook on the market, thanks to its incredible battery life, 1080p HD webcam and state-of-the-art keyboard. You cannot go wrong with one of these.
2. Dell XPS 13
The XPS 13 oozes class. The tiny frame can be deceiving, but don't be put off; with high specs, a decent memory, and a battery that can last you all day, this machine really is as good as it gets.
3. Acer Aspire 5
With decent battery life, good performance, and an HD webcam, Acer's Aspire 5 is a solid laptop for students.
View Recommended
Top Bank Accounts for 2021
1. Starling Bank
Launching in 2014, Starling has quickly taken the world of student banking by storm. Renowned for its award-winning app, this flexible bank features excellent customer support and budgeting tools.
2. Monzo
So popular that it's spawned the phrase "Monzo me the cash", this bank is ideal for students and travellers alike.
Monzo's coral red card could be perfect for you, with an easy-to-use app interface and no charges for international transactions.
3. Nationwide Flex Student
Nationwide's FlexStudent account is a firm favourite with students, and it's easy to see why. As well as being the UK's only fee-free provider, they offer a tiered overdraft scheme of up to £3,000 over your three years at uni.
Top Credit Cards for 2021
1. Aqua Rewards
If you're looking for a foolproof way of building your credit score, Aqua Reward is the card for you.
As the only card to offer 0.5% cash back rewards, it's perfect for managing your day-to-day expenses.
2. NatWest
With low rates and 0% transfers, it's easy to see why NatWest is still one of Britain's most widely-used credit card providers after all these years.
3. Tesco Bank Foundation Card
The grocery giants are a great option for your first credit card. With oversight into every spend, credit alerts and score factors, you'll be able to curate a fantastic credit rating for the future.
Top Broadband Providers for 2021
1. Post Office Broadband
With network speeds to match their rapid delivery times, the Post Office's low-cost packages are perfect for students.
Monthly rates start from as low as £17, and there are no upfront costs involved.
2. Hyperoptic Fibre Broadband
Hyperoptic is a brand new provider that packs a hell of a punch compared to its competitors, thanks to its low cost and high speeds.
They can offer gigabit broadband, and prices start from £19.95 a month.
3. BT Broadband
The nation's number one network provider still has a solid foothold in the broadband game, with speeds of up to 67MB and good fibre-optic options.
Top Phone Contracts for 2021
1. Voxi
Launched by Vodafone in 2017 with a young audience in mind, Voxi has now been opened up to users of all ages. Despite this, it remains the number one student network, with competitive tariffs and good coverage. Their 'friends with benefits' scheme allow you to win goodies and vouchers for signing your mates up to the network.
2. Sky
The television and news giant do decent phone contracts too, as it turns out. With a solid selection of SIM-only deals and cross-compatibility with Sky TV, these guys have some great options for students.
3. Tesco Mobile
Every little helps, especially when it comes to saving on your phone contract. Tesco Mobile have tons of good deals to choose from.
Top Home Insurance for 2021
1. Home Protect
Spilt your tea on your laptop? Dropped your phone on your tiled floor? Home Protect has you covered. Living in a range of different houses with changing circumstances, this might be the insurance provider you're looking for.
2. More Than
These guys allow you to replace old items with new ones and offer up to £200 home emergency assistance. Offering building and contents cover, More Than goes the extra mile.
3. Admiral
Admiral is a tried-and-true option for students across the country. In a big win for students, it covers communal spaces as well as your room, perfect for halls and student housing.
Top Energy Providers for 2021
1. Octopus
For the second year running, their affordable deals have given Octopus Energy the top spot. With customers saving around £222 compared to the average variable tariff, there's a reason students use Octopus.
2. N Power
Npower has built a reputation for being easy to use, flexible and student-friendly. Their mobile app makes everything easier, from meter readings to online account management and loads of other useful features.
3. EDF Energy
EDF are the UK's largest producer of low-carbon electricity. They also offer fast quotes online, making a tricky process a lot smoother. Check out their deals today, and you won't be disappointed.
Top Smartwatches for 2021
1. Fossil Sport
Blending style with substance, Fossil's Sport is as durable as it is sleek.
Offering high-quality workout tracking features, the watch is also swim-resistant. Expect to pay around £219 for this model.
2. Apple Watch 6
Apple's latest smartwatch is a thing of beauty, thanks to its crisp graphics and lightweight design.
With all the features and functionality we've come to expect from Apple's products, this watch has you covered from sleep tracking to step counting.
The pioneering Versa 3 is the first Fitbit to incorporate GPS tracking, adding a whole new dimension to the much-loved brand's fitness tracking products.
Top Tablets for 2021
1. Apple iPad Pro (2020)
With processing power to rival most laptops, the 2020 iPad Pro is a real top-of-the-range heavyweight.
Featuring an edge-to-edge Liquid Retina display, this tablet's graphics are far superior to any of its competitors. The iPad Pro is capable of demanding tasks, such as editing 4K video and designing 3D models, making it a great choice for tech-savvy, creative student.
2. Microsoft Surface Go 2
Up next, we have Microsoft's Surface Go 2. This device packs a real punch with processing power that rivals most laptops of a similar price range.
It's 10.5 inch LCD touchscreen makes it suitable for both essay writing and Netflix binging. And, at £399, it won't make as much of a dent in your student loan as the iPad Pro.
3. Galaxy Tab A7
If you're looking to make that loan stretch further, then the A7 might be the tablet for you.
This device packs a real punch for its price, with long battery life, an excellent display, and high-quality speakers. A bargain for the sum of just £179.
Top Mobiles for 2021
The OnePlus 8 Pro is everything you need from a smartphone, with a state-of-the-art display and 5G compatibility, as well as wireless charging capabilities.
It's 48-megapixel rear camera should also be enough to satisfy even the most avid of shutterbugs.
2. iPhone 12
Apple's latest flagship phone does not disappoint. The iPhone 4-esque redesign is a subtle homage to the tech firms roots, but the phone itself is anything but dated. The 6.1 inch Super Retina display will blow you away.
3. Oppo Find X2
With a better display than any of its competitors and a charging time of just 38 minutes, the Oppo Find X2 is a phone to be reckoned with. Throw in its decent camera and high storage capacity, and you're looking at an industry-leading smartphone.
Top Games for 2021
1. Marvel's Spider-Man
The latest instalment in the Spider-Man game series sees Miles Morales donning the famous outfit to protect the streets of New York. The gameplay is incredible, as are the graphics, and the hyper-accurate city map will blow your mind.
2. The Last of Us II
This game is an absolute masterpiece. With stunning graphics, a gripping plotline, and challenging combat mechanics, The Last of Us II has something for everyone.
3. Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War
The much-loved first-person shooter series is back with another great instalment. While Warzone's frenzied battle royales have kept us busy for much of lockdown, their latest game returns to the franchise's roots with a gripping plotline and the fan favourite Zombies mode.
Top Streaming Services for 2021
1. Spotify
Everyone and their nan is on Spotify these days. With the Premium student discount for less than a fiver a month, you'll also get a free Headspace subscription thrown in for all your well-being needs. Avoid those annoying ads and unskippable songs with one of the most popular music apps.
With Netflix Party, you'll still be able to binge-watch your favourite series with your friends without needing to go to the trouble to sync-up the audio and video. Share a subscription with your friends to stay within budget.
3. Apple Music
The majority of us have iPhones, so Apple Music is the easy way to listen to all your favourite songs from your phone. Sync up to your Apple Watch, iPad or MacBook, too.
Top StudyTubers for 2021
1. Eve Cornwell
Eve Cornwell is one of the original StudyTubers, who has shared her university experience from undergraduate, postgraduate and graduate life.
2. Ali Abdaal
If you're looking for videos on Cambridge, productivity tips and how-tos, then Ali's videos are for you. With over 1 million subscribers, he's certainly a top StudyTuber.
3. Jack Edwards
If you like reading or watching other people read, then Jack's videos where he breaks down books will be right up your street. Follow his journey as a graduate navigating post-university life.


text:
Virginia's House Gearing Up to 'Probe' Women Who Want Abortions February 16, 2012 katied
Virginia's House Gearing Up to 'Probe' Women Who Want Abortions
By katied
The Virginia House passed a bill 63-36 requiring that women who wish to have an abortion must submit to a "transvaginal ultrasound." This would be a mandatory procedure and women would not have the right/freedom to refuse.
The ultrasound legislation would constitute an unprecedented government mandate to insert vaginal ultrasonic probes into women as part of a state-ordered effort to dissuade them from terminating pregnancies, legislative opponents noted.
"We're talking about inside a woman's body," Del. Charnielle Herring, a Democrat, said in an emotional floor speech. "This is the first time, if we pass this bill, that we will be dictating a medical procedure to a physician." The conservative Family Foundation hailed the ultrasound measure as an "update" to the state's existing informed consent laws "with the most advanced medical technology available."
As the author of this article wrote, "This is totally medically unnecessary invasive procedure. It serves no purpose other than to humiliate and shame women and intimidate them from choosing a legal medical procedure."
Speaking in support of the bill, one delegate said:
"We hear the same song over there. The very tragic human notes that are often touched upon involve extreme examples," said [Todd] Gilbert, R-Shenandoah. "But in the vast majority of these cases, these are matters of lifestyle convenience."
Now I don't intend to turn this into a debate on the morality of abortion because it's been done a million times over. However, in Virginia, abortions are legal and this is clearly just the Conservative (and Christian) attempt at deterring women from going through with the procedure and, if nothing else, violating and humiliating them in the meantime. Regardless of what anyone might wonder, that is NOT an enjoyable experience for any woman. The violation of having such a procedure "forced" upon you before you experience the already extremely violating procedure of abortion is disgusting and deplorable.
Sadly, this bill is expected to pass through the Senate… nice going, Virginia.
Support for Evolution Education Comes from a Surprising Source
February 16, 2012 Can Atheists Raise $1,000,000 for the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society?
Does she have to look at it?
MegC
"Probe"? Without consent? I think the word we're all searching for is "rape."
Rev. Ouabache
I suggest we force men who want a Viagra prescription to undergo a prostate exam. It's only fair.
Has anyone noticed that it appears to be mostly (all) men that are mandating and passing these laws? How many of the 63 were women? And why would they vote away their rights to something that is a legal procedure that is not forced on anyone?
This is government-sanctioned rape. How anyone could consider themselves a moral person after supporting this bill is beyond my comprehension.
It can't be said often enough that the Republican Party is deeply hostile to women.
Janet Howell is a genius for suggesting this 🙂
Janet Howell, Virginia State Senator, Attaches Rectal Exam Amendment To Anti-Abortion Bill
Ashley Chamberlain
No. I live in Virginia and have heard a lot about this. The woman is absolutely not required to look.
Servaas
You are right, but may I suggest a slight improvement to your phrasing? It's government-MANDATED rape.
We hope so, otherwise it is a pointless excercise. Also, what is the law on doctors, may they refuse to do the procedure in the state?
"We're talking about inside a woman's body," Yes, and we're talking potentially taking a baby apart. It is a serious procedure, all should be done to make sure the woman knows exactly what she's engaging in. Would be silly to play ignorant or hide the truth.
"Lifestyle convenience"? I would like to come up with a well-reasoned retort to Rep. Gilbert's suggestion that it is abortions are only demanded by irresponsible sluts who didn't have the good sense to wait until marriage to procreate like their heavenly father wants them to. At the moment, however, my mental faculties are being overwhelmed by the desire to break something.
Because it makes about as much sense as forcing women to have a transvaginal ultrasound.
Most men who ask for Viagra prescriptions are older and are more at risk for prostate cancer. Makes more sense than this bill does, actually.
Think goose and gander 🙂
Skeletal Dropkick
So a woman is forced to undergo and uncomfortable, unnecessary and expensive medical procedure AGAINST HER WILL to get an abortion? How could this possibly be constitutional?
A digital exam or a PSA (don't know if that would count under you proposal) seems like it wouldn't do enough to protect men. I would recommend a colonoscopy before a 30 day supply of ED medication is given or renewed. Sex can be strenuous so we must assure that men are up to it you know in the vast majority of these cases, these are matters of lifestyle convenience.
same reason as having women get a
transvaginal ultrasound, none.
They aren't even trying to pretend that there is some medical validity to this procedure. These are sick, sick people.
Does the bill propose who will pay for this unnecessary, invasive procedure?
Nice move by her.
In reading that article, it appears the mandatory vaginal ultrasound bill was sponsored by a woman:
Sen. Jill Vogel (R-Fauquier County), the sponsor of the mandatory ultrasound bill…
LifeinTraffic
This was passed in conjunction with a "personhood" bill that no one found out about–even Planned Parenthood–until the day it passed the House of Delegates. It went to the Senate almost immediately, and was passed there in short order. All it lacks is the Governor's signature. Those of us opposed had literally no time to effectively make our voices heard, though we certainly tried (my husband started a quite a noise on his campus, myself and many friends spent hours on the phone and on social media, etc.). Polls show a majority of Virginians oppose both of these measures, but we have no say in the matter. If the Gov signs them, and he's already said he'll sign the ultrasound bill, the best we can do is wait for the next election and hope to vote them out.
Regardless of someone's stance on abortion, I don't see how they can think it's fine to allow personal (and largely religious) doctrine to dictate a woman have unnecessary, invasive medical procedures in order to obtain a legal medical procedure. Or to limit FDA approved medications of any kind. If nothing else, because of the "slippery slope" argument. Despite the conservatives assurances that this wouldn't disallow birth control in the state, they shot down an amendment to assure exactly that.
I have no idea what is going to happen in the net days, weeks, and months; but, as a woman, and as a secularist, I am pretty sure it's going to violate my rights and those of other women in the state. It's terrifying. That isn't an overstatement for me. We can't move for at least a year–will I be a criminal in that time, because some religious person thinks they,and their skydaddy, have more rights over my body than I do?
Ashley Bone
The FBI's definition of rape is "penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim."
Since consent is taken away from women by this bill, this is clearly state-sponsored rape.
Also note that the Virginia House passed HB1, the "personhood" bill.
Took me a second to figure our what you were saying. You're failing a trolling
This is a fucking lie. It has nothing to do with informing women. It's an attempt to frighten, traumatize, or shame them into changing their minds.
It's just like the mandatory script in Indiana, which requires doctors to misrepresent the risks by making them say that potential complications of abortion include death while completely leaving out the fact that continuing the pregnancy and giving birth has a much higher maternal mortality rate than abortion. That, too, was done under the pretense of "informing" women.
Absolutely agree. Want to know what's being said about it here, in the state? They're saying it's not, because it's the woman's choice to have an abortion, therefore she's consenting to the "medically relevant" procedures required. Hence, not rape. A local radio show (disclosure: I live near Liberty U, so I realize I may be hearing the worst of it) said there was no difference in that and a woman agreeing to her pap smear.
It's abominable.
Yeah, I was really bummed (but obviously not surprised) to hear it was shot down. Apparently the men couldn't (wouldn't?) see the parallel.
As far as I know, doctors would be legally required to perform the intra-vaginal ultrasound, even in cases of rape. Because a woman who's been brutally raped clearly needs to have yet another violation of her vagina before she can make an "informed decision" about her life.
A blob of cells on a computer screen is not going to change the situation or circumstances that lead a person to seek an abortion.
Gus Snarp
These people are so desperate to make the real world just like Leave it to Beaver that they're willing to take medical decisions away from doctors and patients and put them in the hands of politicians, but they still claim to be supporters of "liberty". I'm ashamed to live in a country where such men can hold high elective office.
As an aside, I looked up the two men (always men, damn it) running for the Democratic nomination for the my local House seat, and one is anti-abortion, while the other holds some bizarre strict constructionist view of the Constitution under which the government does not have the right to prevent school prayer. Neither one should be nominated to call themselves a Democrat.
SweetRenin
I'm sorry, are you seriously suggesting there is some validity to this law?!
Yep. Her or her insurance. The procedure runs, roughly, about $400-600, I am told by a physician friend.
A pap smear? That's a high level of delusion.
Rwlawoffice
A similar law passed in Texas however, there was no need for a vaginal ultrasound. The doctor is to perform an ultrasound and describe what he sees and a monitor to listen to the baby's heartbeat. It passed a constitutional challenge and was found not to violate the constitution by the 5th circuit court of appeals.
Emily Walker
I'd suggest a nice swabbing for STI's- that way they are still protecting women and, from what I hear, a good swabbing is worse than a prostate exam.
Also note that the Virginia House passed HB1, the "personhood" bill
And let's not forget that Virginia is also the state that not only doesn't recognize same-sex marriage OR civil unions, but also passed an amendment that "establishes a section that explicitly prevents the government from recognizing the legal status of any relationships outside of heterosexual marriage. Though paragraph one of the amendment specifically bans same-sex marriage, paragraph two prevents the government from recognizing the legal status of any relationship of unmarried individuals that would in anyway approximate marriage.
Lovely place.
Yeah, it is. To me, this is like saying someone having open-heart surgery must donate a kidney to have the procedure done, and because they consent to have the open heart surgery, then their consent for the kidney donation is implicit, and so not a violation.
I had a hunch that they wouldn't. It's the kind of law that just begs for another layer of absurdity to be added to it.
To be fair, short of doing it Clockwork Orange style, I am not sure how you could make a woman look. I am not at all sure about this, but I suspect there will a form that she has to sign saying the procedure was done and that the woman was shown or given the opportunity to look.
It's worth nothing that they rejected an amendment that would have given the alternative of an external ultrasound if it could provide the same kind of information. That means that the Republicans explicitly wanted women and girls requiring an abortion to be vaginally penetrated, even if there was no medical reason for doing so and less invasive alternatives.
Now, I've been thinking about the word "rape". It is an extreme word, to be sure. It's true that sometimes these procedures are a part of getting an abortion because of medical requirements. However it's one thing to have this done because it's a medically neccesary step and quite another to have this done knowing that it's only happening because lawmakers whose religion tells them you are a murderer want you to feel shame and fear at it. Sort of the difference between being cut open in an apendicitis and being randomly stabbed in the leg during the same operation because some jackass thinks the appendix is sacred. One is a medical procedure, the other is assault. Women forced to submit to vaginal penetration purely as an expression of disapproval of their choices are being assaulted.
They would do it by withholding the abortion until she's confirmed as having looked.
No it wouldn't affect the fact that it's a dumb law, just how many different types of dumb it is.
So I assume the woman would be paying out of pocket. Even if abortions are covered on a woman's health insurance, insurance companies could easily deny coverage of this added procedure since there is no medical reason for it.
I'm ready to scream…
Well, it's not just VA. Oklahoma's senate JUST passed there personhood bill, and it is seemingly even worse than ours (still researching this). It goes to it's House shortly, where it's expected to pass with flying colors.
Pretty much, yes. Meaning that, once again, poor women are likely to be the most affected. Those without the least means to fight for their rights, to have access to good medical care anyway, now have one more obstacle the rich don't face.
*with the least means. Sorry.
You hit the nail on the head. The decision to undergo a medical procedure should be made by doctors and patients on a case by case basis, not by politicians who simply want to make it as unpleasant as they possibly can to have a perfectly legal procedure.
Mistletoe Ethaniel
Why does this remind me of witch hunts in the old days, in which the accused was made to pay for her own incarceration and provisions during that time?
Some days I really wish global warming would just hurry it the hell up and get it done with.
"otherwise it is a pointless excercise" What do you mean 'otherwise'?
Is there a "Dislike because it's horseshit" button?
We're talking about potentially destroying fewer living organisms than when you sneeze into a tissue.
Are you honestly blind enough, or outright stupid enough, to think that a woman doesn't already know what she's engaging in? "Oh, you mean abortion is terminating a pregnancy so I don't have to commit a minimum of 20 years of my life to a life other than my own? I HAD NO IDEA!"
Ha ha. "Otherwise" it's a pointless exercise. I see what you did there.
Psyguy
Surely any physician with an ounce of morality and ethics would decline to carry out the procedure where there was no medical reason to carry it out? Or are all Virginia doctors taodies of government?
*toadies
Since this is a pretty cut-and-dried example of religious bullsh- erm, I mean "faith" interfering in affairs of state, I think that the state of Virginia should being collecting back taxes on churches and use that money to fund this procedure. Certainly the church administrators wouldn't mind paying taxes for such a "worthy" cause, right? Right?
Government mandated sexual abuse…disgusting…what further sickens me is the fact that this is stemming from the Christian Right—you know, the people who claim the moral high ground…Enough is enough, we need to separate religion from politics in a serious way in this country.
Pvshastab
Sign a petition opposing this law!
http://www.change.org/petitions/us-senate-and-virginia-state-senators-stop-virginias-vaginal-probe-law#
I'm a lifelong Virginian, and I was horrified when I found out about this, and the "personhood" bill. The "personhood" bill is even more disturbing, as it is probably intended to ban the use of the Pill.
I am not feeling very proud about being a Virginian right now *sighs*.
As a transplanted Virginian, I share your horror. Equally terrifying is the silence and swiftness with which these bills went through. There has been almost no coverage of these bills here, and there was none at all prior to the passage through the House.
Not that I voted for these idiots, but I will say that this isn't the platform they ran on. They campaigned on jobs, on the economy…they've done nothing for either, but boy do they have time and resources to push their religious agenda. I can only hope the people who voted them in will have the good sense to vote them out.
Ubi Dubium
I just wrote to my state Senator about this. Not that it will affect anything, because he is already strongly on our side.
What a sad way to view a life.
I wrote my delegate and senator both, as well. Like you, it's not going to make a difference. Unfortunately, in my case it's because they're both staunchly anti-choice, conservative, fundamentalist and evangelical Christian Republicans. I did write Gov. McDonnel, though he's already pledged to sign the ultrasound bill. He's remained quiet on what he'll do about the personhood bill, but I suspect the only reason he'd considering veto would be concern that it may harm his chances at his well-known ambition to be a VP candidate either this Presidential election or next. Though, with the way this country feels like it's being dragged back into the Middle Ages, by next election it might be points in his favor if he does sign it, I suppose.
Thackerie
You know what's really sad? People who apparently view women as nothing more than walking uteri and who support mandatory child bearing.
Still not a bad idea. Contacting your reps and senators is useful even if you already approve of their position. Constituent correspondence is a way politicians judge just how passionate their voters are about a given issue. If they get all the emails/letters from one side (say, the side angry you are opposing vaginally assaulting women for wanting an abortion) they may assume that the other side is indifferent or at least not as passionate about it. If voters make sure their representative knows that they are VERY passionate about an issue, their rep will make sure that he or she is also very passionate about the issue.
Felyx Leiter
The government of VA is mandating medically unnecessary, unconstitutional vaginal probes, and yet you only muster outrage when someone states a biological fact? THAT is sad.
I agree. Also, it's worth calling, too. It's harder to ignore someone on the phone than it is an email. You'll likely need to call your rep's Richmond offices right now (assuming you're somewhere not Richmond).
Just did. Thanks for the link!
Thank you for beating me to it — I was hoping I wouldn't be the only one frothing at the mouth over that. Right. The majority of abortions are due to women who just can't be arsed to have a filthy brat underfoot. You know, I have to wonder why we continue to have representatives who IN NO FUCKING WAY represent anything relevant to the everyday life of the average citizen. These are people who are so far removed from our reality that it's a wonder that they stay tethered to the planet itself.
In the words of the Enlightened George Carlin, "The Catholic church alone could wipe out the federal budget deficit if all you did was tax them on their real estate holdings!"
I foresee a lot of women taking it into their own hands to have an abortion, injuring or killing themselves in the process.
I'd certainly be upset by this if I were a woman in Virginia.
So if I get raped, I have to go through a "government-mandated rape" process (good analogy, above comments) in order to have a DESIRED operation to get rid of the "child" in me? What bullshit. It's MY body. If the doctors aren't willing to help me, hell, I'd do it myself. I don't want a god-given rape-baby. And that's the mentality some women are going to take.
Venture Free McGee
By that logic, holding a gun to a woman's head and telling her she can have sex with you or be shot isn't rape. After all, she had the option to refuse and decided to have sex instead.
Holytape
You mean Government-mandated god-given gifts, right? That's how we are supposed to refer to non-consensual contact brought about by the woman's hussy dress and sinful actions. If she didn't want to be probed, she shouldn't have worn that flimsy hospital gown. I mean her butt was just hang out of it.
Reminds me too much of the "virginity checks" forced on women protesters in the Arab Spring demonstrations in Egypt.
If anyone is interested in how a swing state like Virginia which voted for Obama in 2008 can do such a thing, here is the story: Virginia Democrats made a deal with Virginia Republicans. They would allow gerrymandering to give the Republicans control of the House of Delegates if the Republicans would allow gerrymandering to give the Democrats control of the State Senate. This plan was agreed upon and passed. Unfortunately this past November, things did not go as planned. The Virginia Democrats did not do a good job finding serious candidates to run for office and focused on too few races. This meant that the Republicans picked up two seats which split the senate equally between the two parties. This gave the Republican Lieutenant
Governor the tie breaking vote. Since the Virginia state senate does not have filibuster ability, this means that, except for the budget, the Republicans now control the entire state government. It will stay that way at least until the 2013 Governor's race. So despite being a moderate state, Virginia will be the center of many hard core right wing votes for the next two years. Let's hope that we can at least use this to motivate the people to come out and vote this November and next.
Cmdavis961
I am an outraged Virginia resident who sent an email when this bill was first being debated to my recently elected state legislator (a male republican) and received the standard "go pound sand because there's no way I'm voting against this bill" response.
Katherine Lorraine
There is no other way to state this than what it is.
Virginia has mandated state-sponsored rape by medical proxy.
Gkeyt
Not required to look. Just required to allow a stranger to force a cold ultrasound probe into her vagina against her will. How very fucking magnanimous.
"What a sad way to view life."
You might have a point …. perhaps we should require a full sinus flush before buying tissues.
MariaO
I sense that most in this thread do not know first-hand about this procedure. I do. I had this done to me for reasons not connected to procreation – its unfortunately a good way of seeing some parts of the whole general misch-masch. And I can asure you it is very uncomfortable (read painful), deeply embarrasing, and generally horrible. Those who compare it with a pap-smear are comparing twisting your ankle with breaking your leg. This law is so horrible I lack words!
Nazani14
I'm going to ask my gynecologist to refuse to conduct such exams. If she refuses, I'll find a new gynecologist.
If you live in Virginia, please join me in encouraging physicians to stand up for the rights of their patients.
You are making an ownership claim on a woman's body, and claiming a place in her reproductive choices. You are advocating that a woman be raped with a foreign object so that she will take your concerns seriously. If you were not blinded by your disgusting hatred of women, you would realize that you are advocating rape and slavery. For your mother, daughter, sister, friends….rape and slavery, personal bondage to a fascist theocratic government with the power to jail you for disobeying. Many of these same people also want to be able to punish women as murderers if they do have an abortion. They've tried before, and they WILL try again.
You, and all of those supporting this bill, are a real and direct threat to women's freedom as human beings. As such, it would not be against my moral code to go to war against you and the rest of your ilk. I only lack enough people who feel as strongly. I often hear conservatives talking about the need for another civil war, and I'm starting to think that they have a point. A quater million supporters of slavery went to an early grave for their efforts 150 years ago, and apparently, it wasn't near enough.
I know I probably sound extreme, and I know I"m in for a whole lot of criticism, even from those who don't really disagree, and that many here will probably distance themselves from these opinions so as to not look like a crazy zealot. But when I think about these issues, I just don't understand how people can live with it and try to honestly debate people who are claiming to own the nation's women. They are the zealots, and they are a real threat.
Think about it….really try to see it from the point of view of a privileged man who is used to his freedom, and wants it to be the norm for everyone. If anything comparable happened regarding men's sexuality, it would likely never be enforced, and I believe there would be copious bloodshed if it were enforced. I think that everybody else knows this too. So why do we accept it for women, and act as if there is anything worth debating? Only because the oppression of women has been historically normalized. It's time to stop debating and DEMAND. This freedom of reproductive choice should not be a male privilege, but a basic human right.
I guess it's a sign of my male privilege showing, but I'm deadly serious….no man would put up with this, and nobody would expect us to. Nobody should expect such obedience from women either, and my greatest wish is that more women, and the men who respect them, will join together to fight this tyranny. Debate, yes. Protest, yes. But if that still isn't enough, then by whatever means necessary.
Any support for any restrictions on abortion, is viewing women as group property, period. No ifs, ands, or buts. Why are clumps of cells more important than constitutionally protected citizens?
LeftSidePositive
Women forced to submit to vaginal penetration purely as an expression of disapproval of their choices are being assaulted.
Quoted for truth!!
MichaelnotTchristian
I say: Jam Baseball Bats into the asses of all the men who voted for this!!!!
BOYCOTT Virginia!!!!!!
Scotthalley11
I am a woman, I do not view myself or any others of my gender as property. However, a fetus is a bit more than a clump of cells by the time clinical abortion becomes an option. Therefore the womans rights to her body do not extend to having complete control over another human being, i.e. the one in her uterus. I'm sure you would agree if a woman is 9 months pregnant and could give birth any day it would be wrong for her to abort the baby. Thus, at least that restriction on abortion is warranted, right? Restrictions on abortion are not necessarily an assault on woman's rights.
SpitefulFox
Virginia was already up there on my "List of Shitty Places to Be", so I'm not all that surprised.
I think he means "if the already-troubled patient isn't arm-twisted into another christian-invented guilt-trip by being forced to look at THE POOR INNOCENT BABY! OHHHHH NOOOOOO! that she's going to *gasp* MURRRRRRDURRRRRRRR with this horrible evil satanist atheist scientist gay-ist liberalist medical procedure!"
It feels really twisted to say, but I think I'd like to see some really, really spiteful abortion patients jerk the rug out from under this whole charade by willingly acquiescing to this, staring dead-on at the ultrasound monitor, pointing out and commenting on visible anatomical components of the developing embryo/fetus, and then saying "Okay, doc, we done here? Let's make with the abortin'."
It sounds like something out of one of those stupid "scare 'em back to Jeezus" videos, one of those "if atheists ruled the world" strawman tracts, but boy would it kill the belief that guilt trips work on abortion-seeking women.
It's shit like this that makes me want not just federally-legalized abortions, but federally-legalized LATE TERM abortions. Just as a slap in the face to fundie-fascist sexist motherfuckers like this who would see 1/2 the population of humanity oppressed and subjugated for kicks. See how they like federally-legalized day-before-the-due-date abortions. Oh, no, am I making the baby Jesus cry? Maybe you assholes shouldn't have played body-nazi with pregnant women then.
Yes, she has the absolute right to control the other human being who is IN HER UTERUS. If someone is in your HOUSE without your consent, you damn well have the right to shoot them, so why should we tolerate an intruder in our bodies?
Don't use the perfectly-health-nine-month-old-fetus strawman. It's bullshit and you know it. The vast majority of abortions happen before the embryo has a brain, and later abortions generally happen because of undetected pregnancy, fatal fetal anomalies, maternal health needs, etc., etc. Trying to restrict later abortions will do NOTHING to solve the desperate and deadly situations in which women need late-term abortion, and will put people with medical need in a desperate situation and they will not have access to medical care in an emergency.
I remember a case study some years ago of a woman whose very wanted pregnancy had polyhydramnios and other anomalies incompatible with life. She had to wait FOR DAYS swollen and in so much pain that she couldn't walk, while the hospital ethics committee debated what to do with her body. How could you think it is acceptable to put another human being through that?
Do you also think women should be forced to undergo C-sections or placed under hospital arrest if she differs with her doctors on the plan of treatment for her pregnancy?
Bodily autonomy matters. People who don't want to be pregnant fix the situation as soon as they can. People generally don't freely gestate for 9 months unless they really want to, and restricting people doesn't save any of your imaginary healthy babies, and creates horrible suffering for women with difficult pregnancies.
FYI-A digital exam is not a Prostate Specific Antigen test. That's a blood test.
First of all, you seem to have misunderstood what I said, I was using a statement that most people agree with: that a nine month developed but not born fetus was indeed a person in it's own right. I was not suggesting that all abortions occur at this time, I'm fairly familiar with statistics and understand that this is frankly not true. I meant for Neil to acknowledge the fact that it is wrong at a certain point (what this point may be we may disagree on) to terminate a pregnancy because the fetus is now enough of a person to deserve protection. I repeat, I was not saying that the opposing argument was that 9 month old healthy fetuses should be able to be aborted. Simply making the point that personhood begins at some point before birth.
There is a big difference between a malicious intruder in your house and a fetus growing in your uterus, namely that the malicious intruder has willfully entered your house, whereas a fetus has no choice in the matter, additionally in order to intrude, one must have existed outside of a place in order to intrude. Semantics aside, there's a big difference between a willful choice and the only means of your existence. (Additionally, you do not have the right to shoot someone for simply being in your house, legally or morally, think toddler or mentally ill person who may have wandered in accidentally.)
No, I do not think that doctors should be the only ones involved in decisions regarding any pregnancy. Actually, I don't think doctors should be involved at all in most pregnancies, however, given that the pregnancy poses a medical risk to the mother or baby, medical help is necessary. But the final decision on most of those matters lies with the mother.
Do you agree with the nine month developed healthy fetus being a person and therefore should be protected by law? That would have been a better way to phrase that the first time. I was just trying to establish some comment ground.
Demonhype
Don't give them any ideas. I wouldn't put it past them.
That would be late-term abortion, troll. Early term abortion involves a blob of cells, and there is no "baby" to take apart.
Why do these people always seem to think that once the egg and sperm meet, there is some fully-formed widdle tiny pweshus baby that just increases in size over nine months? Or at least, that's how they seem to understand it, what with all their smugly uninformed or misinformed ramblings.
Thank you for such an excellent take-down of that view!
No stats on hand, but I recall reading somewhere that even in places where it is legal to abort for any reason up to the last day of pregnancy women still choose late-term abortion only for medical reasons and abortions for unwanted pregnancies still get done in the early term. Women, contrary to popular mostly right-wing christian opinion, are not stupid chunks of warm meat intended solely for incubating the poor wee widdle iddy-biddy babies. They are fully capable of making their own decisions, and you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who, given the opportunity to freely choose without delaying tactics, would choose to abort in the last term just for "kicks". I understand late-term has more significant risks too, so can any of these people explain to me why a woman would choose a more invasive, more expensive, and more risky abortion nine months later for an unwanted pregnancy if they can have a less expensive, less invasive, and less risky abortion right now? They never can, which is why they resort to the emotionally-charged lies and strawmen.
No, I do not believe a fetus should be "protected by law," because the only time a fetus's protection would be relevant would be AT THE EXPENSE OF THE WOMAN. Anything else would be protecting THE WOMAN by law. When you talk about protecting a fetus you are by definition talking about stripping rights away from women.
A woman does not give up her rights to her body just because she is pregnant. The vast majority of late-term pregnant women want what's best for their future children, so you don't need to police their bodies.And, seriously, what is the point of "the only means of your existence"??? Why the fuck am I obligated to sacrifice my body to help someone exist? Why do I owe them existence? If they don't exist yet, what stake do they have?You don't get to have it both ways about the moral value of a fetus–it can't be a person with full moral rights and yet absolved of all moral responsibility for the harms it is causing to others. Moreover, it's not like abortion is done with any animus toward or retribution for the fetus–it's not about "punishing" a fetus, it's just about protecting an autonomous agent from unwanted harm.You are NOT showing common ground. You are trying to interfere in women's lives, and you need to stop. I don't need to find any fucking common ground about MY AUTONOMY. You are trying to set up women with life-threatening illnesses and futile pregnancies as sacrificial lambs so you can beat your chest about "protecting fetuses" at the expense of people in desperate medical need.
Kind of like "look, Brisol Palin didn't have an abortion, and she's just fine!" Well, there's kind of a world of difference between the daughter of a rich white republican politician and a poor girl living in the ghetto, isn't there? Or even the former and an average girl? Or "look at how Sarah Palin didn't abort a pregnancy when she found out it would be [I don't know the PC term, so feel free to help me out, but retarded?]" Well, I'm pretty sure that kids with those issues cost quite a bit of money, due to the special education and the increased health risks, all of which are lifelong as the child will never be able to be fully autonomous, which can bankrupt an ordinary family. Let's not pretend little Bristol or Ms. Sarah have any idea what those situations mean for the average, non-rich and in many cases non-white citizens of the country.
Oh, wait, I forgot. They'll just fall back on "well, the slut should have thought about it."
Words cannot describe how much I hate these people. I'm starting to come around to Neil's way of thinking. Once a tyrant has taken too much ground, there may not be a nice peaceful way to deal with them. And you can't negotiate with someone who has invaded your country by force and is declaring some special right to dictate what goes on in it–which is what these people are doing to millions of women's private bodies, turning their flesh into public property over which they have absolutely no power, which is even worse. When you're being invaded by authoritarians who come to conquer and control you absolutely, it's futile to just sit there going "um, hi, if it's not too much trouble could you maybe not do that, please?" Get real, they're not interested in negotiation, and these people have no interest in making sure women get "informed" (otherwise, there would be an equal mandate to inform women that pregnancy carried to term has a higher rate of mortality and risk than abortion). They want to force women into the roles they feel Jesus has delineated for them, nothing more.
When will people learn? Every single Republican is a liar. Maybe there was a time when they weren't, but that isn't the case anymore. They know damn well what's important to people, they use it to manipulate votes, then turn around and ignore that issue while fighting their petty little "I hates when wimmenz haz sex without gettin' preggers!" issues.
Yet more evidence that they aren't concerned with women making informed choices or with genuinely reducing pregnancies. What they want is to punish women who have sex in the God-mandated way, by pregnancy and subsequent poverty, pariah-hood, and deprivation of opportunities or by bleeding to death in a back-alley from an illegal abortion, like the "trash they are" (which is how one anti-choicer said it in front of me as a child in Catholic school, I shit you not.) If they were concerned about reducing pregnancy, as has been said again and again, they would support wider and easier access to contraception. No, this is about forcing everyone, especially women, to mold their lives according to fundamentalist Christian dogma regarding sex (for starters).
Problem is that "dead sluts" are a feature and not a bug to these monsters.
Exactly this. They don't care (clearly) if women die (as evidenced by their direct attack on any facility that offers abortions in VA.Yep, more religiously-motivated social legislation is already being passed through to make performing abortion outside a hospital practicably illegal, and many of our hospitals won't perform them at all unless the life of the mother is at stake). Women aren't people. Women who would have an abortion are below "not people," and all the way to "great, one less problem" if they die. Their answer will be that a woman made her choice, so deserved what she gets.
The way some of you talk about unborn children is literally frightening. The only reason you are able to be here to say it is because your mother didn't view you as a blob of cells or an intruder in her body that needed to be expelled. You should consider yourself luckier then those whose mothers thought differently. Unfortunately, those need others to stand up for their rights. I understand you don't think they have rights, but it is the only class of knowingly innocent victims of someone else's choices that people like you think should not be protected.
"The vast majority of abortions happen before the embryo has a brain, and
later abortions generally happen because of undetected pregnancy, fatal
fetal anomalies, maternal health needs, etc., etc."
That is simply not true. Over 80% of abortions occur within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy with 60% occurring around 9 weeks. The baby has a functioning heart with its own blood type within 20 days and brain activity within 40 days.
So if the lack of brain activity is a sign of death, logically the presence of brain activity should be seen as a sign of life.
I'm going to do something I have never done before and thought I never would. I'm going to talk openly about having an abortion.
I'm a woman, obviously, mother to two lovely children (twins). When I was 22 I fell pregnant accidentally.
I made the very difficult choice to have an abortion. It was one of the most awful experiences of my life despite the fact that I live in secular country where abortion is treated as a medical procedure, a matter that concerns only the woman in question and the medical staff who will attend her.
I was required to have an external ultra-sound. It's only sensible really, abortion carries a risk to the mother and these risks are best assessed by this non-intrusive procedure. The ultra-sound is also used to determine the age of the foetus as abortions can only be carried out on demand here up to 12 weeks, after which special authority must be sort from the ministry of health. This is not due to some moral requirement, only that such terminations carry a much higher risk.
To be honest I really don't know how the NZ public would react to abortions being regularly carried out at a later stage of pregnancy, it's not a public discussion that we have had as a nation. So, 12 weeks it is.
Apart from an abdominal ultra-sound the only other legal requirement for an abortion was one meeting with a councillor (who works at the clinic) just to ensure that the woman knows what is going to happen, is capable of making the choice and is not doing so under undue pressure.
Despite all this that day is one I will NEVER forget. I do not mean to say I look back with regret because I don't. I don't mean to say that I look back with a feeling of shame because I don't. I look back and see a difficult day, a difficult few months, but a necessary day. I do not feel guilt, and I don't think I should.
The idea that any woman should have to go through a penetrative procedure that serves no medical purpose before having to go through what I went through both breaks my heart and turns my stomach at the same time. I find it difficult to comprehend a society that so under values women and their right to sovereignty over her own body. A society that would tolerate such vile hatred of women, because that is what this is. It is hatred of women, it's a hatred of a woman's human rights. This is another way that conservative, religious men, (and let's face facts, it's mainly men and they are mainly religious), seek to control women and their reproduction, because way down deep there is a little voice that still whispers "In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children. … Thy husband … shall rule over thee." Genesis 3:16
And that's exactly the way they like it.
I too have had the internal probe ultra-sound, many times, while pregnant with my twins and you are 100% right! It is painful, it's pushing directly and bloody firmly against the cervix. It's not at all like a pap smear, think cervix check in labour, the ones you have to pant through.
It's embarrassing to boot. Is it not enough that you've already had your doctor perform an internal, and in order to actually get the abortion yet another doctor will be at work up there, along with his whole team of assistants? Must we really expose ourselves to another complete stranger for no particular reason too? Add in the ultra-sound assistant and you might as well sell tickets and pop it up on the big screen.
This is an intensely personal time, making the choice, it's not like a woman is unaware of what she is choosing.
Why do conservative, predominately christian men so often believe that women are incapable of making desicions without their "guidance" or permission?
I'm from Texas. I know (personally) a couple of doctors who won't actually do it, they just have the woman sign a form.
Thank you so much for sharing your story.
This isn't about abortion being right or wrong. You think it's immoral? Fine. Fight against that. THIS isn't about THAT.
THIS issue is about forcing a woman to be vaginally penetrated for no medical reason to get a 100% legal procedure. How is forcing one moral act on top of another act you consider immoral okay?
If I decided that hysterectomies to treat cancer were immoral because it's "against God's Will" or whatever, would it be okay for me to insist a person has an endoscopy performed to show her the uterus to be removed, even though there's no medical reason to do so?
Look, you may not like that abortions are legal. And that's your right. But you should be mad as hell that someone is forcing completely unnecessary vaginal penetration on a women just to receive a completely LEGAL medical procedure. Once you open that door–the door where legislators can dictate medical care and procedures based on no medical need but purely on their own ethics–you're opening a door to all kinds of things you probably haven't stopped to think about, but that you definitely should.
Separation of Church and State isn't just for secular people. It's just as much for religious people. Because someday, somewhere, the people in power may not agree with your religion. And the you'll be very, very glad someone stood up and fought so you could keep practicing it. While you stood on the sidelines and cheered as the rights of others were violated.
*one immoral act on top of another immoral act.
Sorry, I hate disqus–It's hard to edit when it gets this small.
I keep forgetting to post this, but even if abortion was just "lifestyle convenience" (and I realize just how incredibly awful and out-of-touch that statement really is, trust me), it's still a LEGAL procedure. Lots of things are lifestyle conveniences: breast augmentation after a mastectomy, reconstructive surgery after burns or an accident, vasectomies. That doesn't make it okay to require completely medically irrelevant, expensive, invasive procedures in order to obtain any of these completely legal medical procedures. And, no one would ever suggest we should.
Even people who disagree with abortion, even people who are so stupid as to claim it's a "lifestyle convenience," should still be mortified that our legislature has mandated a 100% unnecessary, invasive, expensive, medically irrelevant procedure in order to obtain a perfectly legal one. Not to mention they intentionally picked the most violating way to do it (vaginal penetration), when another option was presented. They shuts the alternate option down, and let's be very clear about this:
because they wanted women vaginally penetrated for no valid medical reason.
It sets a precedent that I can't believe anyone would be okay with, regardless of what they think of abortion.
It is not true that brain activity begins at 40 days, and I can tell you the exact origins of this myth. In the 1960s, a Dr. Hamlin wrote an OPINION paper arguing that we should define death based on brain activity instead of cardiac activity. In this opinion paper, he cited research done in Japan, and he got the major facts of it wrong. (PS: The fact that pro-life sites get their information from opinion papers instead of going directly to the research is telling about their concern for truth.)
The research in Japan was conducted on aborted 90 day old fetuses, and basically stated that if you jab an EEG probe through the skull of an aborted fetus, you get a reading. It never determined if the reading was brain activity, or if it was artifactal. (Fun fact: EEGs are so sensitive to interference that if you hook a person up to an EEG and an IV at the same time, you will see an EEG spike every time the IV drips.)
Dr. Hamlin misquoted research done on 90 day old fetuses as being done on 40 day old fetuses, and misinterpreted the results as brain activity. Modern studies have found that the very earliest you can get the sleep spindles and other patterns that indicate actual brain activity don't occur until after 120 days gestation, and even then they have to be drug-induced.
IT IS NOT TRUE that brain activity starts at 40 days gestation.
Mairianna
No…no! A prostate exam is not invasive enough! They should have to have a catheter inserted in their penis! That's more in line with the humiliation of having a vaginal probe inserted in a vagina.
Since crap like this is getting slammed into law so quickly with little to no public debate or even the remotest nod to the personal liberty it destroys I hope that just as swiftly those in those states who are opposed, organize and appeal it by every legal means available. This is an outrage and it is human rights violation sanctioned by the state. This is not constitutional.
You are not alone, my dear. I had an abortion when I was 32. Sharing your story is courageous and necessary for people to understand. I was married, but my marriage was miserable and my (ex)husband couldn't keep a job. We lived far from any family members and I dreaded trying to work full time and raise a child (and a husband) on my own. On top of it, I had some medical issues that made me easily fatigued. I didn't have the physical energy to raise a child. It was a heart-breaking decision, but one that I knew was right for me AND the child. The nurses and doctors at the abortion clinic were some of the kindest and most caring people I have ever met. They knew my decision was not an easy one but they never judged me. The judgment actually came from the staff at my OB/GYN's office (all women). They made it very clear that I had done a bad bad thing because, (sarcasm) oh, don't they just LOVE babies. They are SO adorable. Yeah, that's ALL that counts – Let's have a baby because they are cute. (sarcasm end) Like you, I look back and see a difficult day, a difficult few months, but a necessary day. No regrets, no guilt. As I look back, my life had many more years of difficulty even after that. It was the right decision for me.
Please understand that with this question I am not judging you in any way but I am curious about one comment you made in your post and was curious. You mention that the abortion was the best thing for the child. How is ending its life the best thing for the child? I understand the hardships you were facing but, if everyone was healthy, why would not adoption be the better choice for the child?
Uadztai
As a woman in Virginia (and an atheist, though that doesn't matter much on this topic), I'm outraged at this legislation.
And if you all think this is backward and medieval…have a gander at the "personhood" legislation our House just pushed through.
I am truly at a loss for words.
I believe that you are, quite simply, fundamentally wrong on every level. A woman does not owe society or the fetus (or the father, or the government) any more consideration in her reproductive choices than she is freely willing to give. If society and the father are treating the woman as a free human being and not asking unreasonable things of the woman, the vast majority of women will give their views some merit, but force is never justified. That you claim to not view yourself as property when you are treated as such, is simply due to the fact that you have been conditioned to not see the glaring inequities in society which are badly justified by the happenstance of sexual biology, but which also serve to take away your freedom and hand it to those who think they know better than you and should be allowed to control the most intimate, personal aspects of your life.
Feel free explain to me why the only person deeply, personally involved with the pregancy should not have absolute control over that pregnancy, when any other option requires a serious reduction in her freedom and the involvement of people with no personal stake or responsibility in the pregnancy . The woman is the only person taking a substantial risk with a pregnancy. She is the only one whose time and energy are required. She is the only one whom can be hurt or killed by a pregnancy. She is the only one who will ever really be responsible for the well-being of the fetus and the consequences of the pregnancy. She is the only one with a real interest in whether or not she reproduces. Why should this choice EVER be given to anybody else? There is no compelling government interest in forcing childbirth, as the human race is not dying out. Men have the ability to reproduce literally hundreds of times in their lives, why should they get any measure of legal control over every woman they happen to conceive with? And who the hell are you to tell another woman when she must reproduce? The only sane place to leave that choice is exactly where it is and has always truly been- with the mother.
Your nine-month-fetus example is ridiculous in any part of the abortion debate. You say you are trying to find some common ground, but you fail miserably for several reasons.
First, it's simply dishonest…9th month abortions are incredibly rare, and I have never once heard of somebody having one as birth control, because of a last-minute change of mind, or out of spite. Restrictions on late-term abortions don't save a single fetus, and only serve to restrict and harm women making a difficult medical choice. Such regulations do more to kill women than save fetuses. You are simply trying to look at this issue in terms of a sliding scale of rights, where in fact there is none. There may be a sliding scale of inconvenience, risk, or pain to the woman, but any restriction is still just a completely unnecessary intrusion that serves only to disempower women and hand their choices to others.
Second, I still disagree anyway, even if I accept your idea of a "reasonable" restriction. Even if there were large numbers of crazy women having 9th month abortions to spite their husbands(which there never will be), I would rather let a few fetuses of such people die than introduce intrusion in to all women's choices. Cry about it all you want, but I would not value a few fetuses over the health and freedom of tens of millions of women, even if it were a real issue, which it isn't. While I might think it was irrational and even morally wrong to abort a healthy 9th month fetus(depending on many different circumstances which you and I have no way to know about), I am not willing to pretend that I have the authority or the interest in placing hurdles that could easily hurt real women, just to save some hypothetical fetuses. It's simply not my decision to make in any way, and as a rational adult, I accept that.
If you were to get over your irrational fears and your irrational sense of entitlement to other people's bodies, you might be able to accept it as well.
Right there with you, Uadztai.
Nehaprasad92
Well, I was discussing this with my mother (an OBGYN surgeon), and whilst she does not agree with their REASONS behind this, she says normally they have to ultrasound before they do an abortion to date the foetus/thing/it, so that they can use the most suitable method. But just my two cents, I think the reasons why they are enforcing this on women is wrong.
kaydenpat
Lawsuit? This foolish law is ripe to be subjected to a legal challenge.
Oh, dear dog. I just had an anti-choicer (who, of course, calls herself "pro-life, despite being fine with abortion in cases of rape, incest, or molestation–because apparently she alone gets to determine when life is important, but another women can't do the same) tell me that if just half of the 47 million abortions in the US had been carried to term, we wouldn't be in debt to China, because those people would be good, working citizens.
She wasn't kidding. This wasn't a joke. Neither was her "abortions give people breast cancer!" remark, though it's been soundly put to rest that no, they don't (just as a spontaneous abortion doesn't increase the risk; but, somehow these people cling to the idea that it's only "God" aborting the fetus that it doesn't result in breast cancer). They believe Roe v Wade was liberal legalizing abortion (instead of about medical privacy and making sure you get to decide what medical procedures to have, as opposed to your husband, for example).
Judging from the rhetoric here, these beliefs are pretty main-stream here in VA, and no one really sees a problem with mandating unecessary medical procedures as long as they feel that a legal procedure is "immoral." They just can't seem to work out the logical extension that makes it a hugely bad precedent. They cling to "but it will save teh bayyybeez!", even when it's proven over and over that ultrasounds do not diminish abortion rates. They still insist on abstinence as the only education, even that what is proven to work is easy and inexpensive access to good contraception and quality education (of all types, not just sex ed). They Will. Not. See. It. I can't even go into the rest of the crazy here, the misinformation, the it-has-to-be-intentional misunderstanding of law.
You cannot reason someone out of something they weren't reasoned into. I am exhausted, I am headed to a protest tomorrow, and I hope many, many others will join me. Because dealing with crazy takes a lot of energy, and those of us in this fight could really use the help.
In very heartening news, our Governor has had a change of heart, and is refusing to sign the ultrasound bill as-is. He's requesting changes, but there is a shot that this ridiculous game of politics is going to end with the bill dying entirely. The Senate sponsor of the bill, Jull Vogel, has said she will withdraw the bill if rules allow her to do so at this stage.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Now it gets interesting! This totaled out 2018 Camaro ZL1 has a story to tell. As we dismantle this new build we discover more and more. This is going to be one of our most exciting builds so far! Stay tuned and see what happens next! Thanks For Watching!
For me that hellcat was better than to corvette..
William Alfonso Me too, MoPar forever!
"Dang son" & his brother "Man"
Haha, that was pretty funny!


- illstr., facsims., genealog. table, maps, plans.
The theme "the new-born child in a small boat of woven rushes floating on the Nile and recovered by the king's daughter" is known as one of the most popular stories in connection with Moses.
A less-than-critical reading of the Moses stories in the Bible can lead us to believe that an accidental foundling, the infant Moses, was fortunate to have been discovered and brought up by a princess. In reality, the episode with Moses in the little boat on the water is an example of an "internationally" widespread cult-ritual for designated crown princes before and after the time of Moses, although the Bible in its present version may leave the impression that Moses' experience was unique and almost a "miracle".
Stories of a new-born child found in a boat floating down the River Euphrates were already known from Babylon almost a millennium before Moses' time, where a boy-child - later to become the king named Sargon (Sargon I) - was found, brought to the king's palace and given a high education; (cf. Appendix 1). According to his so-called 'autobiographical' record, this child (Sargon) in the rush boat was the son of the king's daughter. No foreign child of low birth could have obtained such a significant education followed by a royal career. Thus, it must have been a thoroughly planned happening intended for a child of royal origins.
A similar cult-ritual is related in ancient Scandinavia, where a young boy-child - "sent by the gods" - arrived alone in a boat floating on the water. This too describes what must have been a staged happening, since "all the people who received him on-shore immediately knew that the child was to be the country's future king". This child was later to be known as King Skjold ('shield') of Denmark, the progenitor of the Skjold-children's dynasty, who lived at the royal seat of Lejre.
King Sargon is the earliest known case of this ancient ritual for royal children: - "a new-born child sent by the gods in a small boat on the water, recovered and brought to the king's palace by the king's daughter (and later was to become king)" - while the case of Moses is the most famous.
There have been numerous other cases since it was a widespread royal tradition and in addition a prestigious, religious custom.
The last known and in many ways similar case is about the Dalai Lama; and even in connection with the old Tibetan Bön religion where the Tibetan god, Pe har, had assumed a form of a boy and was placed in a box drifting down the Kyichu river and was then picked up by high-ranking lamas or abbots, or by the Tibetan leader, the Dalai Lama himself.
In ancient Egypt, the pharaoh was considered to be a god, and thus the pharaoh-son to be the god-child, Horus, who was recovered by his mother, the goddess queen Isis, from the little vessel in the reeds or bulrushes, on the Nile.
In addition to King Sargon I found on the Euphrates (ca. 2300 BC) and Moses found on the Nile (ca. 1500 BC), it is known that Erechtonius, the first Athenian prince (ca. 1400 BC) was found in the water on the coast; and that the Greek "god-child" Dionysus - born of King Cadmus' daughter Semele - was found in a little boat riding the waves near Brassiae in Laconia.
Another Greek "god-child", Attis, was received on the banks of the River Sangarius by the mother-goddess Cybele. However, many scholars have too easily dismissed these cultic traditions, places, and persons as being myths and fairytales. But in the 1950's, the burnt ruin of Cadmus' royal palace was found by archaeologists, and likewise in Denmark in 2004 the royal palace in Lejre was found. Thus, both sites are scientifically dated, proving time and location correct and disproving these as being myths only. Moreover, the Mycenaean (ancient Greek) linear-B tablets prove that the name Dionysus was known ca. 1500 BC.
In India the Sun-god's son, Karna, the Prince Royal, was placed in a woven reed boat by his mother, the king's daughter Kunti; as similarly was the Babylonian Queen Humar's son set out on the Euphrates to be received and recognized as heir to the throne.
The Latin King Romulus was found on the River Tiber (ca. 800 BC); while King Tu-Küeh of the ancient Turkish people was set out on the water at Turkistan (ca. 200 AD). As with King Skjold ('shield') - also known as King Sheaf - on the Roskilde fiord near the settlement Lejre, in Denmark.
The same ritual was held not only for King Arthur on the Cornwall coast (all ca. 600 AD), but also for the Celtic kings' children on the Rhine; and it even appears in ancient myths in Tibet (within the Bön religion) and Japan (the new-born son of Izanagis and Izanamis was set out in a woven rush boat). And the ritual was also known to be associated with high leaders of the (early Asian influenced?) North-American Tlatlasikoala-, Tsimschian- and Tlingit-Indian tribes.
Even much later, this tradition or idea may be identified demonstrating its widespread occurrence. For example, all over the south of France the tradition of Mary Magdalene arriving on the coast of Provence is still well-known. The place, later a city, is named: Les Saintes Maries de la Mer. It was normal in the 1st century AD that Jewish refugees escaped to southern France, for instance the 'famous' Jewish ex-king Herod Antipas. Some Christian texts of Antiquity together with partly secret legends tell us that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' wife and most preferred disciple. In addition that she carried their unborn child, thus of "royal blood" (cf. royal ancestors of Jesus, in the New Testament), on her arrival to the coast "in a boat without sails and oars", where they were picked up and helped ashore.
The event where Moses was received with the ritual for the chosen royal child indicates him as being an Egyptian - the Israelites had no kings until 500 years later (Saul, David etc.). In any case, the Moses episode in the Bible seems actually to describe a cult ritual for the initiation of royal children chosen to become heirs to the throne.
In Egypt, occasional fragments of this royal ritual are well-known (see chapters 4 and 14, and cf. the Egyptologist H.W. Helck below in the present chapter), but in less detailed form. Also the fact that Moses went through this ritual, of which also minute details can be recognised in the Bible, and was then for some time placed with a wet-nurse, conclusively speaks for Moses as being the child of Pharaoh's Daughter.
It was a normal practice that royalty used wet-nurses for their children. Thus the previously mentioned Hatshepsut, at that time a very young Pharaoh's Daughter, seems to have similarly arranged for her child to be briefly "returned" from the wet-nurse's-care to partake in the ritual.
The Mystery Play: a Key to Ancient World Concepts!
In ancient society, mystery plays or cult-dramas had an extremely important function. Today, it is easily forgotten how much a "religious" attitude penetrated the cultures of the ancient world, and how much attention these cult forms received. Religion, mysticism and cult were all blended on a high level and influenced most daily activities. In the profane world, one strove to re-live the myths of the gods - for instance, when the king himself was made to catch a dangerous animal while hunting, this was believed to reflect the gods' victory over the powers of chaos.
Throughout most of the ancient world in the Middle East and India, mystery plays were practiced. Later, other forms could be found in the secret society like "the eagles" of the Mayas in Central America - and even some parallels could be seen regarding the mysterious "leopard men" in West Africa. Real mystery plays still exist, especially in the contemporary Masonic lodges, when for example connected with their different steps of the initiation ceremonies.
In the ancient world the more or less secret cults with their sacred rituals and other special ceremonies where the secret mystery plays were also practised were an "international" phenomenon. This in principle reflects a homogeneous form of cult-practice and an equivalent unified core of religious-philosophical ideas in spite of all the external differences. In the Bible's original Hebrew text about the "ritual episode" with the infant Moses on the river Nile, we find that key words in the story - bulrushes, papyrus, Nile, riverbank, etc. - are not Babylonian but in fact ancient Egyptian words.
Some of the forms of development taken by the mystery plays (as mentioned in detail in later chapters) follow directly from ancient Egyptian texts. Many of these were translated by Kurt Sethe, the German Egyptologist, in his "Dramatische Texte zur altägyptischen Mysterienspielen" (Leipzig 1928). Several authorities depict the mystery plays associated with throne-inheritance rites: inter alia, Egyptologist Alan H. Gardiner, - and Henri Frankfort in his book "Kingship and the Gods" (Chicago 1948), and in H.W. Fairman & S.H. Hooke's dissertation "The Kingship Rituals of Egypt" (Oxford 1958).
An impression can still be given concerning the importance of this part of culture in Ancient Egypt through the many traces of ancient mystery plays in the late middle ages. For instance, the crowning rituals of the kings, in commedia dell'arte, in the crib- and passion plays of the church, and also in the ceremonies of the freemasons. Archaeological finds of the priests' great god-masks for such plays in Egypt are also well-known.
Theatre-playing in Europe has its origin in these mystery plays via Greek tragedies and satires, and from the mystery plays they have continued the tradition of using masks and costumes, especially those of gods and demons.
Elements of the mystery plays, which seem strange today, can be recognised in many significant situations of Moses' life, and are also recorded in the Rabbinical Writings and other ancient texts.
It was, of course, possible for power-seeking rulers and competing branches of the royal family to abuse the situation when a new-born prince and heir to the throne went through the ritual of being set out in a boat, thereafter to be received by high-seated persons, taking the opportunity to get rid of an unwanted heir. The child could then be removed under cover of this rite or by arranging an accident during a ceremony.
Some of these practices are also hinted at in several myths; yet again some of the incidents are but witness to the tribulations the child had to go through via the mystery plays, since at the same time the rite was perceived as a consecration of the child as "the chosen one".
These trials originated from earlier, often more brutal, traditions where the survival abilities and "power" of the king's child were tested by literally life-threatening methods; for example by setting a child out on the water or in the wilderness. In other cases, on the contrary, the goal was protection of the child e.g. by reporting the child lost, while at the same time having arranged in secret for childcare by strangers in a hidden place far away.
Throughout history the practice of the more or less secret cults with their mystery plays was exercised by royalty, the highest ecclesiastic persons, the nobility and aristocratic families. For example, at Hagia Sophia, a Byzantine emperor, a queen and an heir to the throne all played the main characters in frequently performed ecclesiastic mystery plays dealing with the birth of Jesus.
The story in the mystery plays connected to a newborn royal-child's first consecration - as protection against evil influences - is retold in the Brothers Grimm story about the Sleeping Beauty. Three fairies (originally goddesses) came to the newborn child, offering magical cradle-gifts.
However, one of the fairies took the opportunity to achieve her own mischievous purpose - still within the rules of the game. Even this twist in the plot has its origin in the content of the mystery plays, where a suitable balance from an "opponent" was always sought for - not necessarily by compensating for the good gifts with something bad, but for example by giving rights together with duties.
Thus the reception of the three-month-old Moses by the women of the royal house dressed as goddesses, had also been performed within a cultic mystery play, whereafter, like the act of the fairies, the child was endowed with royal attributes such as wisdom, strength, beauty, devotion etc. Such mystery plays with "good fairies" (goddesses) at the birth of the heir to the throne, relating to early Egypt, can be found in "Papyrus Westcar" from the times of King Cheops, ca. 2550-2525 BC.
To be able to better understand what actually happened on this special occasion when the princess received Moses from the Nile, some well-documented early Egyptian conditions must be taken into consideration.
In ancient Egypt, religious processions often included taking statues of gods out of the temples, dressing them in special costumes and then carrying them in chests/coffins (in some cases known as 'fdt-st3t, 'cista mystica' ), in processions, with halts on the way in certain places. Here the escorting priests and audience could praise, intone hymns, genuflect, or prostrate themselves to honour the gods.
Similar religious practice is known from ancient Babylon and later also with ancient Roman gods. In principle it is still to be found, 3,500 years later, in the Catholic Church, where statues of saints are dressed and carried along certain routes, also having special stops at "stations" on the way for genuflection, supplication, and prayer.
Instead of using likenesses of gods, i.e. figures, statues, pictures, these religious rites could also be expressed by certain persons dressed as gods acting out the gods' part - and that is exactly the practice characterizing the mystery plays. In Egyptian temples and tombs frequent illustrations are found showing human figures dressed as gods.
A form of religious procession, used on numerous occasions, was carried out by sailing on the Nile with different gods - also here often in coffins placed on the boats - which thereafter were received on the east bank near the Amun(-Re) temple close to the palace in Egypt's then capital No, i.e. Karnak/Luxor - 680 km south of present Cairo - more precisely in the northern part (Karnak); the town and place which was later called Thebe(s) by the Greeks (from Greek taibe, 'ark/chest/coffin', thus related to Egyptian debet).
The traditional narratives about royal children who were "sent by the gods", like Sargon, Romulus, Skjold etc. - and thus also Moses - and who from their special boat were then taken up by the king's daughter and brought to the royal house, clearly were arranged mystery plays. All the aforementioned children who went through this ritual were brought up to become kings - and according to the Rabbinical Writings and several ancient writers, this has also been the case with Moses.
An important element in Egyptian religion is also seen in the many religious processions where gods (statues) in chests/coffins were transported, e.g. the traditional religious teaching about the mythological king-god Osiris, who after his death was laid in a floating coffin. (Likewise the rabbis describe the little boat of Moses as "the little ark" on the Nile). From this ark, the king-god was then to be revived, with the help of the goddess Isis, in the image of his and Isis' newborn son Horus, a god-child that was to become the new king. In other words - again, exactly like Moses.
In this Horus-myth an important feature was that Horus' mother, Isis, appeared together with her twin sister Nephthys, the goddess, so that the god-child, Horus was conceived by Isis and "born", in a figurative sense, by Nephthys. Therefore, the delivery was painless - but the ambiguity was understood and reported so that in reality Isis conceived him, and yet another sister of Isis, Hathor (the goddess of the sky), nursed him.
In the study of Egyptian theology and mystery, this ambiguity could be perceived as if the child went through a physical as well as a spiritual birth. The same line of thought is later seen in some of the old Christian and Christian-inspired sects, for instance the Gnostics in Egypt (and also with Rudolf Steiner in more recent times), where Jesus too is connected with this religious idea of having two mothers, a physical mother and a spiritual mother. Likewise, some of the mythological pictures of the Deir el-Bahari temple, for example, deal with the birth of Hatshepsut, showing her as a newborn child in a similar dual form, where she is depicted as two identical king's children - one of which personifies her ka, or soul.
From the written records as well as from historical knowledge of the ancient Egyptian relations, it is possible to reconstruct the structure in this mystery play, where it will appear that Moses acted as the divinely born Horus-child, the new king, who arrived on the Nile in Osiris/Horus' ark.
This "container" was no ordinary rush basket - the Hebrew Bible explicitly states that it was a boat woven in papyrus, and was "an ark", i.e. shaped as a rectangular chest or coffin with a lid, in Hebrew theba, an equivalent of the previously mentioned Egyptian word debat (debet): 'ark', 'chest', or 'coffin' (later taibe in Coptic and Greek). It was such chests/coffins - though mostly made of wood - that were used by the Egyptians for storing statues of their gods at ceremonies.
The ark of the Moses child, made of reed (bulrush, papyrus) was sealed with zefeth, Hebrew for 'pitch' - originally an Egyptian word from the time of Hatshepsut: sifet, an oil-product either as 'pitch', or as 'oil-ointment' especially used for preparing the dead in the coffins. Modern research has discovered traces of pitch in the mummies, and that the pitch normally being used was imported from Canaan (cf. "La Recherche", février 1990). Of the Bible's different words for 'pitch', the use of the word zefeth in the texts about Moses is to be connected with the coffin/ark of the Osiris-ritual.
From this special boat - the floating, woven coffin - Moses was consequently received by his mother Hatshepsut, who, since she was Pharaoh's Daughter, performed the role of the mother of the god-child, Horus, the goddess Isis in this mystery play.
In addition, Moses was supplied with a nurse, who correspondingly filled the role of the goddess Nephthys. Royal nurses were recruited from families of great reputation - as one example, the later pharaoh Tuthmosis III made his nurse's daughter, Sat-iah, his chief wife long before he married an Egyptian daughter of the king.
It is also a well documented situation that in the era of the kings of the 18th dynasty - and hence in the time of Hatshepsut - it was a tradition that the nurses at the court were ladies-in-waiting who were married to high ranking officers and who had special connections with the king.
The aforementioned German Egyptologist, Hans Wolfgang Helck, explores this issue in two of his treatises (cf. Bibliography: group 9a), "Der Einfluss der Militärführer in der 18. ägyptischen Dynastie" (Leipzig 1939) and "Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen Reiches" (Leiden 1959). Furthermore, such an upbringing must be seen in relation to the fact that the Rabbinical Writings and also several ancient writers mention the young Moses as already having great abilities as a general and a military tactician in the service of the then ruling pharaoh.
"... the woman was told to 'be a nurse' to him, but not breast feed him ...".
Several Rabbinical Writings also mention that this wet-nurse and (surrogate) mother "delivered without pain". This is in total correspondence with her role in the mystery play as the goddess Nephthys who was also nurse, reserve mother, and "delivered without pain" since she is not proclaimed as the biological mother of the (Horus) child. In accordance with Hans Wolfgang Helck's "Twk und die Ramses-Stadt", in Vetus Testamentum (vol. 15, Leiden 1965), the motif of the episode in the Bible is just as Egyptian as it is Semitic.
1. The pursuit of the child: - is mentioned already in "Papyrus Jumilhac" (VI, 9).
2. Which text also refers to Nephthys as: - "the sister, who watches in the bulrushes".
"... he (the Horus-child) sails in a reed boat, and then Isis said, 'let me see my son that is hidden in the bulrushes' ...".
4. The pharaonic child on the Nile is delivered by the god: - this is directly to be read in the inscriptions about Egyptian kings (more details in chapter 14).
5. That a mother with royal connections, as in this case Pharaoh's Daughter, thus "taking over" her child, is a known ritual: - "adoption of pharaoh" (see chapter 4).
According to the information in the Bible, the woman that nursed Moses was a Levite; in later Jewish tradition, she was generally perceived as belonging to a Hebrew tribe of Levi. However, much seems to indicate that in Egypt, most of these Levites actually were Egyptians originally (more on this in chapter 6).
As a starting point it was not unrealistic to presume that Moses' nurse could be of Egyptian origin, possibly slightly "Levitine"; or even more foreign, a Hebrew. Compare with the fact that as late as in the 1860's, rich white Southern State, Americans entrusted their children with nurses selected from among their slaves. But the Book of Exodus (2:9) mentions that a woman was paid to nurse the infant Moses. Thus, as opposed to servants and slaves, she was a paid employee of the Pharaoh's Daughter, which, at the Egyptian court, was a practice with ladies-in-waiting; and according to the Bible as well as the Rabbinical Writings, the woman who nursed Moses already had two children.
"… And when she (Moses' mother) saw him (the infant Moses) that he was a goodly child, she hid him three months …".
Egyptologists have demonstrated that special circumstances existed when Egyptian royal children were born - forming part of a cultic ritual. These births took place in special huts or tent-structures often erected on the roof of the palace or temple - according to, e.g. the German Egyptologist Emma Brunner-Traut's treatise about 'vigil-huts': "Die Wochenlaube", in Mitteilungen des Institut für Orientforschung (Band 3, Berlin 1955, pp. 11-30).
The mother could, in this childbirth-pavilion, "hide the child" in isolation from the public during the first period after birth, "protected from danger" according to "Papyrus Westcar" - exactly as stated in the Bible.
Since most mothers would probably think that their child was good-looking, there must be another meaning of the expression 'good-looking' ('goodly') found in the biblical text. In Egyptian, this expression is absolutely logical - as no word for 'good' existed as a moral expression - but was the word nefer (nfr), which in "humble" translation means 'good or beautiful (in appearance)' and was mostly used in referring to kings and gods, and meant 'royal radiance', or 'divine radiance'.
- which is in harmony with the fact that the god-child, Horus, traditionally also was connected with the sun.
These conditions must be seen in relation to the previously mentioned tradition where goddesses (like the fairies) gave the god-king-child "magical" crib-gifts of such attributes. This mystery play was a sort of theophany, '(first) appearance of the god', and is later known also by the church. It now appears to be a reality that all the traditionally prescribed rites were included in the episode with Moses.
In this book the use of such even generally accepted procedures is referred to as a starting premise by means of which evidence of customary practices and rituals are treated as being relatively true, as long as they are not proven false or unreasonable (i.e. as a useful, provisionary working hypothesis only and not seen as a fixed proof). This has proved to be more plausible than assuming beforehand that almost anything, in principle, in the ancient reports is not true before it has been established. This present method was also used by several archaeological authorities like Cyrus Gordon, Yigael Yadin, and especially W.F. Albright who introduced stringent standards into biblical archaeology, making it more scientific and acceptable. Evaluations made by them for which they were especially criticized, were often cases where they had deviated from using this present method.
It has now been shown above that several parts of the Biblical texts and Rabbinical Writings in question are relatively correct reports - also concerning ceremonies on the Nile - and seems to be in logical agreement with Egyptological knowledge. This strengthens the historical certainty of the essence of the ancient reports - not necessarily as "hard evidence" about the "truth" of the Bible, but shedding new informative light on its content.
- Examination of several ancient Middle Eastern ceremonial performances which resemble the episode with Moses, has shown that this special procedure could only be related to royalty and was an "international" tradition for royal children as heirs to the throne. This implies that Moses must also have been a royal child when in the first place thus able to partake in this rite.
- The ritual for the royal child was arranged as a mystery play. In the Egyptian version, this meant that one of the participating women acted as the royal child's wet-nurse. This fits in with the biblical mention that Moses' nurse was paid, and again that the nurses of the royal house in Egypt were not serfs or slaves but were attached to the court as ladies-in-waiting.
The Delivery Hut, protects a new-born baby. The traditional draping with bindweed had a special meaning.
Right: Royal delivery hut with bindweed and covered with tent canvas, and having the picture of a princess inserted. Both from the 18th dynasty.
Below: Ritual bathing of "Pharaoh's Daughter" (now meticulously hacked away) in holy water being poured out as vitalising ankh-streams from temple vases by participants dressed up as gods. Relief from Hatshepsut's chapel in Karnak.
The references and bibliographical sources already mentioned or skimmed in the text of the Chapter Two, are also presented here below - all beeing gathered.
- - : Moses in Historical and Theological Perspective, "Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God", (ed. Frank M. Cross et al.), Garden City 1976.
- - : The Biblical Period, Oxford 1952, pp. 8ff.
Baring-Gould, S. (ed.): Moses..., in "Legends of Old Testament Characters from Talmud and Other Sources", (vols. 1-2), London 1871, vol. 2, p. 74.
Brunner-Traut, Emma: Die Wochenlaube, Mitteilungen des Institut für Orientforschung, Band 3, Berlin 1955, pp. 11-30.
Fairman, H.W.: The Kingship Rituals of Egypt, - in: Hooke, S.H. (ed.), & H.W. Fairman & H.H. Rowley & Geo Widengren et al.: "Myth, Ritual and Kingship, Essays on the Theory and Practice of Kingship in the Ancient Near East and in Israel", Oxford 1958.
Frankfort, Henri: Kingship and the Gods, Chicago 1948.
Ginzberg, Louis (ed.): ("Moses" in) The Legends of the Jews, (vols. 1-7, Philadelphia 1909-1938), - vol. 5, Philadelphia 1925, p. 399.
Gordon Cyrus H., & Gary A. Rendsburg: The Bible and the Ancient Near East, 4th ed., New York 1997.
Helck, Hans Wolfgang: Der Einfluss der Militärführer in der 18. ägyptischen Dynastie, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Aegyptens, Band 14, Leipzig 1939.
- - : Twk und die Ramses-Stadt, Vetus Testamentum, vol. 15, Leiden 1965.
- - : Zur Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen Reiches, Leiden 1958.
Lewis, Brian: The Sargon Legend: A Study of the Akkadian Text and the Tale of the Hero Who was Exposed at Birth, ASOR, Diss. Series, vol. 4, Cambridge, Mass., 1980, pp. 1-10.
Magazine: Poix en l'Egypte ancienne, "La Recherche", février 1990.
Philo, (Philo Judaeus of Alexandria): De vita Mosis, I-IV, Loeb Classical Library, 6, London 1935.
Redford, Donald B.: ("Moses" in:) The Literary Motif of the Exposed Child, Numen, 14, 1967, pp. 209-228.
Sethe, Kurt: Dramatische Texte zur altägyptischen Mysterienspielen / Der dramatische Ramesseumpapyrus: ein Spiel zur Thronbesteigung des Könings, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Aegyptens, Band 10, Leipzig 1928.
Yadin, Yigael: Is the Biblical Account of the Israelite Conquest of Canaan Historically Reliable?, B.A.R. (British Archaeological Reports), March-April 1982.
The Bibliography is the so far most comprehensive collection of books, articles, and other non-fiction texts about Moses. The collection, through many years build up by Ove von Spaeth, has been used for all his 5 volumes on research of the historical Moses.
The supplementary sources in the Bibliography, especially about Egyptology, anthropology, history of religions, archaeology, and astronomical dating are contributing to a necessary interdisciplinary, general survey - and establishing a major co-ordinated connection in a greater scale than otherwise possible.
Last update of the presented Bibliography: January 2005.
Although some of these may be of an earlier date, they are all to be found in the libraries, and many have been reprinted, or others are even presented on the Internet. It has often been a somewhat automatically, general practice to anticipate that the latest published research books/papers almost inevitably also has to be preferred among the best. This is an unqualified underrating of the foundations hitherto. Instead, in the present book-series on the historical Moses, the only reasonable procedure has been to use the best of recent information as well as the best of the scrutinized earlier date materials.
In addition, in order to meet the questions or doubts often raised in connection with the new-orientating knowledge on the historical Moses, a generally less known or inspected group of evidences of authenticity is gathered here: Genuine Egyptian Source Documentation on Moses. Also, cf. documentation on the historical dates: A More Precise Dating of Moses.
Also, it may be preferable to read succeeding Chapter Three to be familiar with further, significant documentation.
- credentials, statements from a number of scientific experts and professionals are presented in the section 1 of the website page containing introductions to Vol. 1.
- information through further credentials concerning authorship, research, and the entire book-series can be found on these pages: authordata-4, Reflecting Views and Zenith IC Project.
... In its entirety Volume 1 contains: 20 chapters, 2 Prefaces, 3 Appendixes, and 35 pages of Bibliography.
References, info, data concerning present Volume 1: see introducing text at the top.
This chapter 2, above, was translated by Sara L.W. Stern and Ove von Spaeth. - Revised and approved by Ove von Spaeth.
Historical and astronomical research - and updating: Copyright © 2006 (& © 1999; © 1984) by: Ove von Spaeth.
All text and editing - and updating: Copyright © 2006 (& © 1999; © 1984) by: Ove von Spaeth.


text:
Elasmia cave is a species of moth of the family Notodontidae. It occurs in New Mexico, Texas and possibly Mexico.

Adults are dark brown-grey with obscure transverse markings. Adults are on wing from April to early October.

Etymology
CAVE is the acronym, used by the U.S. National Park Service for Carlsbad Caverns National Park. The specific name of this species, cave, refers to the type locality, Carlsbad Caverns National Park.

References

Moths described in 2011
Notodontidae

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia