Abortions are very common procedures, and are among the safest of any kinds of procedures performed in the United States. But like any medical intervention, from giving birth to taking an aspirin, there is always the chance that a complication can occur, either at the time of the termination or afterwards.
Anti-choice activists have honed in on that fact to use it as an excuse to demand that those who provide abortions need to have admitting privileges in nearby emergency rooms, a practice that isn't mandated for other outpatient procedures. The purpose of the rule is to make it so fewer providers can perform abortions, although they claim it's an issue of a woman's safety.
But now, a new line is being introduced, and it's the greatest example of twisted logic yet. A provider who terminates pregnancies must have admitting privileges so that the costs of care that could be associated with addressing complications will not be transferred onto the E.R., and hence taxpayers who do not support abortion.
Did you follow that? Sort of? Well, a theory that complicated and convoluted can only be proposed by one person.
Yes, it's Phyllis Schlafly.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
3 comments:
What is wrong with some people--what kind of moral deginerate would believe that an unborn child should be protected. It is ridiculous. Women should be able to have unprotected sex any time any where and with anyone, right? And if they are punished with a pregnancy then the 49% of hardworking taxpayers should have to pay for an abortion!! After all, abortion only kills half a million black babies every year--just like Margaret Sanger envisioned! So absurd to think that a woman should take any personal responsibility in preventing pregnancy, it would really be a nuisance--everything should be free, too!!!!
Should need husbands written permission also.
Thank You, 130P! No one has said it better.
Post a Comment