These rules are designed to protect health. What jeopardizes women's health
is allowing clinics to exist that do not have hallways wide enough to safely
remove patients in emergencies.In no other case would anyone try to
claim government regulation could do anything but help the health of consumers.
Liberals are opposed to abortions being performed by doctors skilled enough to
have admitting privileges?Liberals are opposed to abortions being
performed in surgical facilities?I thought one of their arguments
was they did not want back-alley abortions – now they are saying
back-alley abortions are OK, as long as they can be performed.Utefan60Unwanted pregnancies – they CAN be prevented, all it
requires is a little foresight and/or self-control. Are liberals incapable of
To "Jim Cobabe" but the act to create the "unwanted" child was a
voluntary act. Would you absolve somebody from having to pay for damages caused
by their car when they drove too fast and ran over fence?If a couple
doesn't want children then there are a few ways that are 100% certain to
prevent impregnation. They can skip having sex. The man can get vassectomy.
The woman can get her tubes tied.Otherwise you are telling people
that they can have an accident and be absolved of any responsibility for their
actions.Do you really want to tell people that if they mess up that
they can be absolved of any consequences?
The American Civil Liberties Union said "The law is having a devastating
impact on women in Texas."Well, how would they describe the kind
of impact that abortions are having on the babies being aborted? Being brutally
and completely terminated is incomparably worse than just having a
"devastating" temporary inconvenience. It's the ultimate finality
in losing your one chance at life here on earth. Abortion is the
most barbaric practice that modern society (in general) has ever accepted.
It's almost inconceivable that some liberal zealots are actually still
making excuses for it's acceptance. That is truly living within a cloud of
self-arrogance and self-deceit with zero concern for the defenseless.
This law was about safety and preventing late term abortions. I had to go to a
hospital when I had routine surgery on my foot, why not have the same simple
standard for an abortion.
If men had to carry an unwanted child to full term in Texas, would they still
presume to call them men? In my view, this kind of tortured rationale only
clouds rational consideration. It seems sensible that the compassionate would
favor sound medical practices even in abortion clinics. Perhaps if these new
state regulations cause abortion clinics to shut down, they were substandard in
the first place, and that itself justifies regulation.Whether it
happens to be men or women that are patients seems incidental to such
considerations. Why the showy Wendy Davis led protest against reasonable
minimum medical standards? Are red tennis shoes more compelling than a standard
that calls for board-certified doctors and clean operating rooms? When I go to
the dentist, even though I am a man, when I see a state-issued license, I fully
expect to find trained qualified practitioners and clean conditions.
I agree with pope Francis and Mormon prophet monson on the abortion issue. It's nice knowing my views are closely aligned to theirs
I am not for abortions as a personal belief. However if men had to carry an
unwanted child to full term then abortions would be much easier. It is still
between a woman and her doctor. Most of these laws are set up and signed by