For once, the comments are largely supportive (so far.)
Not The Onion.
Of particular interest is this last quote from a resident who is against the ordinance because:
But Nelson resident Lamar Kellett called the idea “big government at its worst.”
“Why have an ordinance if you’re not going to enforce it? What’s the point?” Kellett asked. “They just want publicity to say Nelson is a town full of weapons.”
“This is big government at its worst: Government mandating what a free individual can and will have in his home.”
But really, what could go wrong?
At some point, I suspect “The Party of Limited Government” will be comprised of left-leaning Democrats while right-wing Republicans advocate for “The Nanny State.”
Arkansas, I hope you have plenty of money to pay the lawyers on both sides of the challenge when you lose.
The Trust Women Foundation, named in homage to Dr. George Tiller, will be opening a reproductive healthcare clinic in Dr. Tiller’s former building next week. From the CrowdRise page:
“For nearly three years, Trust Women has worked to reestablish reproductive healthcare services in Wichita and the day has finally arrived that we can say, “It’s happening!” We are finally ready to open our first clinic.
This facility will mean women in the Wichita area can be assured that, for the first time in nearly four years, they have quality abortion care that doesn’t require a 3+ hour drive. The non-abortion care we will provided, from annual exams and STI testing to obstetric and post-natal care, will help close the gap in gynecological services in the Wichita area.
With renovations nearly complete, staff being interviewed, and medical providers signed on, we are on the verge of success. All the pieces are really falling into place. The one thing we need now is MONEY! That’s where you come in.
Once the clinic is up and running, it will be self-sustaining in a matter of months. But first we need to get these doors open. That’s why we’re organizing this final fundraising push.”
Please help if you can, or signal boost to get the word out.
To be fair, the clarification was “The bill is not intended to target victims of sexual assault.” But, the revised language leaves healthcare providers open to criminal charges.
Because it’s “tampering with evidence.”
Oh yes. You read that correctly. If you are raped and get pregnant, and you terminate the pregnancy, you will be put in jail. Because despite pro-lifers’ claims that fetuses are PEOPLE with RIGHTS, they’re apparently just “evidence” if that will criminalize more people who are seeking abortions.
This is a proposed law. It has not passed, and God willing, it won’t. And before you ask: yes, you can get DNA evidence from an aborted fetus. Does it really surprise you that a Republican pro-life legislator proposed a bill with no basis in actual science?
UPDATE: Late last night she tweeted her intention to introduce a modified bill. I’m not sure it’s any better. I see her claims of mortification that she didn’t “catch the error” but I don’t see an apology.
So the next question for anti-choicers: “How do you respond to Rush Limbaugh’s call for the open murder of women seeking abortion?” Let’s get them on record.
n.b. I’d say, “call for the summary execution of women” but I’m not sure the question would be understood with that language.
“Four specific types of legislation were cited as being of particular concern.” They included laws banning the discussion of gun safety with patients; mandating the discussion of end-of-life options; limiting the information doctors can disclose to patients regarding exposure to chemicals; and mandating medical procedures not supported by evidence, such as the ultrasound requirement prior to abortion that has been passed in several states.”
So we know abortion is a Constitutionally protected right. But:
- One must wait up to three days before obtaining one
- One must undergo at least one ultrasound
- One must see their physician at least twice
- and pay for the privilege
- Providers are regulated, sometimes out of existence.
Gun ownership is also a Constitutionally protected right. So:
- Why not enforce a strict waiting period?
- Why not require say, safety courses and certification?
- Why not require multiple trips to the store?
- Why not enforce licensing fees?
- Why not regulate gun sellers and registration of private sales? *
Regulating weaponry won’t stop gun violence any more than legislation will stop abortions. But the parallels are quite striking.
*Some of these points are already in place but often unenforced or subverted. My point is that if one right can be restricted, why not others? Conversely, if one right cannot be restricted, can others?