Planned Parenthood is mounting a campaign to combat state laws in Tennesse, Michigan, and Pennsylvania designed to protect the health of women.
At issue are controversial laws requiring abortion providers to have admitting privileges at local hospitals, which require providers to meet certain medical and professional standards.
While the state abortion clinic restrictions followed Planned Parenthood's own "internal treatment protocols," the family planning organization still opposed the bills, Burke Said. "They're desperate to oppose state oversight, any outside oversight policing their actions."
I think you're a little confused, it isn't liberals who claim to be ideologically opposed to regulation.Liberals are not opposed to regulations, just regulation on things they favor.
did you even read the OP? lol
Yes and conversely it shows some conservatives who are not against regulateing things like abortion clinics (which seems to be the only thing they actually want to be regulated).
Oh, I forgot womens bodies, thats the other thing they want to regulate..
Even that isn't true.Liberals are not opposed to regulations, just regulation on things they favor.
Outpatient clinics are not hospitals. This is patently disingenuous as this bill applies to only one kind of clinic which provides a particular service. If this were genuinely about the health and safety of women, then the same regulations would apply to other types of clinics such as sports injury clinics which also do minor surgery.Found: Anti-Regulation Liberals | Washington Free Beacon
In the case of Penn. the existing regulations should be observed, not add new rules if there are laws already on the books to deal with it. Overall, I think it's a good idea to require these clinics to meet the same standards as hospitals, why shouldn't they?
And do you think that the current regulations allow clinics to be unsafe and filthy? In case of complications, patients can currently be sent to emergency rooms of the local hospitals - what is the point of having the abortion doctor and only the abortion doctor admit the patient and continue the emergency care? No, this bill is clearly meant to limit abortions - perhaps sending women back to back alley operators, not known for sanitation or safety, or to self-abort.How cute! Wanting the clinics to be safe, sanitary, and prepared in case of complications is now evil?
See: An Update on Tennessees HB 3808, Another Legislative Attempt to Limit Access to Abortion « Women's Health NewsIn some parts of the country, there are no providers so one from another state flies in on certain days to provide this legal medical service to women. It is very unusual for a hospital to grant admitting privileges to a provider who is based out-of-state. HB 3808, then, is partially meant to keep women in Tennessee from having access to an abortion provider who might come in from elsewhere if the state succeeds in reducing our access to this degree. An example of the effect is happening right now in Mississippi, where only one clinic in the whole state provides abortion, a similar hospital admitting law may cause that clinic to shut down completely.
I love how it is not a war on women when only women's health is under attack like this. As mentioned above, if this was honestly a health issue then these regulations would cover all offices that provide outpatient services such as sports clinics and dentists. But when these bills single out abortion providers and then people lie about why they are being singled out it is hard for women to not feel attacked.I love how it's a "war on women" when the only ones endangering women are those claiming to be fighting for them. It's pretty obvious by their response that PP is only concerned with themselves, and their profitability, rather than helping women.
Apparent the "War against women" is the right's new cause.
If that's truly the case, then it should be easy to show that those things have been a problem at abortion clinics. Please show us.How cute! Wanting the clinics to be safe, sanitary, and prepared in case of complications is now evil?
Could you remind us which side wants to take birth control and abortion away from women? Whether you agree or disagree with the issues, it is the right side of the isle wanting to tell women what to do with their bodies. I suppose one can call it demonization while another calls it a war. It all depends on which side one is on.Except it isn't happening. The left's attempt to demonize the right, rather than actually run on issues, has failed utterly.
Yeah, the one's who want to regulate abortions out of legal, affordable existence.I love how it's a "war on women" when the only ones endangering women are those claiming to be fighting for them.
It's just the opposite. PP provides necessary health care for under-served women. In many areas, they are the only ones providing affordable birth control, mammograms, PAP smears and STD screening.It's pretty obvious by their response that PP is only concerned with themselves, and their profitability, rather than helping women.
It is happening:Except it isn't happening.
Women's health and welfare IS an issue to us women - and even to some men.The left's attempt to demonize the right, rather than actually run on issues, has failed utterly.
How many of the abortions PP has done have been necessary? If not a true number, how about a percentage, or maybe even a swag?It's just the opposite. PP provides necessary health care for under-served women. In many areas, they are the only ones providing affordable birth control, mammograms, PAP smears and STD screening.
You tell her! Only necessary abortions should be allowed. You got to pay to play.How many of the abortions PP has done have been necessary? If not a true number, how about a percentage, or maybe even a swag?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?