Texas Abortion bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mississippi's sole abortion clinic faces fresh legal fight to stay open

Ohio Shows How an 'Admitting Privileges' Requirement Can Become a Backdoor Abortion Ban

Getting local hospital privileges may be difficult for abortion clinic doctors | al.com

Federal Court Blocks Mississippi Admitting Privileges Law

Here's a few articles that talk about reasons obtaining admitting privileges is so very hard for abortion doctors, including statements from several hospitals giving some of the reasons I listed as to why they won't grant AP to abortion providers.
 
Mississippi's sole abortion clinic faces fresh legal fight to stay open - Five hospitals allowed them to apply, interestingly enough, the article does NOT state why they were denied.

Ohio Shows How an 'Admitting Privileges' Requirement Can Become a Backdoor Abortion Ban -

"...the hospital is associated with a university, any sign of working with an abortion provider is tantamount to taxpayer funding of abortion. “Our problem was, and is, that the transfer agreement was signed by the University of Toledo, a publicly funded university, and is totally tax payer funded,” Coats told the Independent Collegian. “We know if the transfer agreement did not exist then this abortion mill would not be able to legally operate …. Ohio law prohibits state tax dollars from paying for abortion and it is against the law for publicly funded state hospitals to perform non-therapeutic abortions.” So that hospital won't grant them admitting rights because it's funded by tax dollars. The article fudges this by saying the hospital "likely" wouldn't be the location of any abortions...PROBABLY. Which means that they COULD be the location of abortion...in which case the hospital is legally restricted from allowing them admitting privileges.
 
This blog Getting local hospital privileges may be difficult for abortion clinic doctors | al.com states that "UAB requires that physicians be a faculty member of the UAB School of Medicine in order to be credentialed and able to admit a patient to UAB Hospital," UAB Hospital interim CEO Anthony Patterson said in a statement. "No formal relationships exist with outside facilities that allow non-UAB School of Medicine faculty to admit a patient to UAB Hospital." That is their policy, and it is their right to adhere to it.

Essentially, you want to force hospitals to accept abortionists of whatever capability, regardless of where the funding comes from...and if you can't do that, then you insist that there be no oversight at all, and abortion clinics just operate in their own little universe, separate from the rest of the world, and overseen only by their own corrupt and essentially non-existent officials.

If you are going to insist that abortion be available for all, then the abortion bloc needs to get off its fat ass and bring their standards up. Perhaps they need to build their own hospitals. They have the money to do it.

But they won't want to do that, because that (again) requires real oversight, and carefully monitored funding, and a degree of professionalism and medically safe practices that, quite honestly, nobody who supports the abortion industry is interested in seeing applied.
 
Well, it would be hypocrisy, if the TEA Party folks had actually been in the meeting. But they weren't -- Democrats lied to law enforcement and had their political enemies' rights suppressed.

But of course, you're a flat-out liar, so you think nothing of making this false equivalence.

That is merely your unfounded and lying opinion.

And it certainly applies to the disrupted town meetings in 2009 and 2010.

They were banned by the government from attending the meeting. That's neither unfounded, lying, nor an opinion. That's just plain fact.

Yes, they were, for reason apparently.

Avatar, stay on track. Should government permit people to attend if there is prior reason to believe they will intentionally disrupt the meeting?
 
All abortion clinics should be run by licensed Physicians, just like any other medical clinic.

What more should be asked of them?
 
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Wearing pink tennis shoes to prepare for nearly 13 consecutive hours of standing, a Democratic Texas state senator on Tuesday began a one-woman filibuster to block a GOP-led effort that would impose stringent new abortion restrictions across the nation's second-most populous state.

Sen. Wendy Davis, 50, of Fort Worth began the filibuster at 11:18 a.m. CDT Tuesday and passed the halfway mark in her countdown to midnight - the deadline for the end of the 30-day special session.

Rules stipulate she remain standing, not lean on her desk or take any breaks - even for meals or to use the bathroom. Colleagues removed her chair so she wouldn't sit down by mistake.

If signed into law, the measures would close almost every abortion clinic in Texas, a state 773 miles wide and 790 miles long with 26 million people. A woman living along the Mexico border or in West Texas would have to drive hundreds of miles to obtain an abortion if the law passes.

In her opening remarks, Davis said she was "rising on the floor today to humbly give voice to thousands of Texans" and called Republican efforts to pass the bill a "raw abuse of power."

PilotOnline.com: national & world News for Hampton Roads, Va., from The Virginian-Pilot

Wow. What a racist.
 
That is merely your unfounded and lying opinion.

And it certainly applies to the disrupted town meetings in 2009 and 2010.

They were banned by the government from attending the meeting. That's neither unfounded, lying, nor an opinion. That's just plain fact.

Yes, they were, for reason apparently.
Democrats lying may be sufficient reason to you, but it's not for normal people.

Comrade.
Avatar, stay on track. Should government permit people to attend if there is prior reason to believe they will intentionally disrupt the meeting?
There is reason to believe that you will exceed the speed limit tomorrow. You need to take a check for $278 to the courthouse tomorrow before close of business.

The accusation is enough to convict you. Pay it tomorrow or a bench warrant will be issued.
 
All abortion clinics should be run by licensed Physicians, just like any other medical clinic.

What more should be asked of them?

They should be able to legally treat women in a hospital if they need to.

Because the truth is, women who get abortions often need to be hospitalized...and aren't, because the abortionists have no standing in real hospitals.

And those pukes should be drummed out of business, and replaced with real medical personnel. Who actually do care about providing quality service in the safest conditions.
 
I don't want to force hospitals to grant admitting privileges. I also don't want to close 90% of all abortion providers because of the religious or moral beliefs of others.

I would be more than happy with a provision that actually requires higher standards for abortion doctors. The AP bill did not do that.

You would be closing them because they don't provide quality care, and they are not qualified or have the facilities to practice real medicine.

If you don't like that 90 percent of abortion facilities would be shut down if oversight is applied, perhaps your concern should be for the women who are suffering in those substandard clinics, rather than for the quacks who are getting rich off them. A woman is safer driving 500 miles to get an abortion from a qualified abortionist who can treat her in a real medical facility than she is walking to the neighborhood legal backalley abortion sewer.
 
And if she can't drive 500 miles, then she is safer having the baby.

What it comes down to is this..progressives think it's good and right that women risk their lives and die, in order to make sure that everybody has an abortion clinic in their backyard.

They don't care how dangerous it is. It's all about location location location.
 
I don't believe Shroom said anything about being against her right to do it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top