It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Va. OKs bill to likely close most abortion clinics

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Va. OKs bill to likely close most abortion clinics


apnews.myway.com

Democrats and abortion rights supporters said Virginia will become the first state to require clinics that provide first-trimester abortions to meet the same standards as hospitals. Democrats and abortion rights supporters said clinics resemble dentists' offices and "This is not about safety for women."
(visit the link for the full news article)


edit on 2/25/2011 by semperfortis because: BAN Guidelines.. Copy the EXACT Headline




posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Sen. Maime Locke, D-Hampton doesn't want your abortion clinic to be as safe as a hospital because it would be "draconian and patriarchal at best." She wants to restrict this to and abort the babies of "poor women". Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, an Italian-American, and the top law enforcer in the state, said "For over 25 years, Virginia abortion clinics have not been held to minimal health and safety standards".

apnews.myway.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I believe that abortion can be an invasive procedure.

One would think that it should be done in a hospital setting or at least to the same standards as a hospital.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   
This is great! Abortion clinics should be much safer and cleaner, it's good to see someone change the way they are now, hopefully more states do this.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
This is a slippery one. The clinics, if they must exist, should be safer and held to certain licensing standards. However, I have to agree that it is pretty transparent that this is a back-door method to limiting the service for those who cannot afford treatment need it most, thinking that this will prevent abortions and pretending that it's all in the name of safety. If they truly cared about safety, they would include provisions to help the clinics get up to code—such as preapproved loans or a grace period so they could acquire the funding to do so.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by thewanger
 





require clinics that provide first-trimester abortions to meet the same standards as hospitals



You mean they weren't required to meet those standards?



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
If they shut down the dirty ones I wonder how many that is?

We could take the anti-tobacco lobby's stand then- after half the bars and restaurants are out of business they say the bar and restaurant business is booming (the ones that are left having less competition).

So this could be good for the pro-choice crowd! Maybe the Baby-Murder Clinics will see an increase in business with less competition?! They're used to justifiable make-believe arguments anyways....



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 
I read the info at the link you posted.

I think the Democrats in VA have been hoodwinked a bit. They are saying that abortion clinics do not have to provide medical care at the same standards that a hospital has to?

They have been saying for years that abortion must be legal to be safe. Someone is trying to make it safe, and they are against that? Weird.

If a restaurant can't meet health department codes, code enforcement shuts it down, right? I am sure if the restaurant owner said that he can't meet the codes and still keep his prices low enough to feed low income people, they would laugh in his face.


edit on 25-2-2011 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 

Yes. Some seem to think this bill has an ulterior motive, and that's a very good possibility. There are signs the might suggest that pro-lifers are trying to find all sorts of "creative" ways on a state level to get at Roe v. Wade, however and wherever they can. This really hasn't changed in decades. They're tenacious. And this is just the current round. As for the bill itself, I'd need to find a copy of it to see how reasonable or unreasonable it seems. Being up to the same standard as a hospital could mean a lot of things. Equipment, personnel on hand, and so on. Certain critical care and even medical day spas all over the country that perform similar procedures with similar risks are probably run at the same level as these clinics, so I'm not sure if they're being singled out. I can't imagine that there are no controls, so assume this might be a matter of simply tightening them. Anyway...if I have time...



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 
Good points you have there. I don't know what's in the bill either. I think sometimes there are no smart moves to make politically when it comes to abortion.

I am sure that the tea party has an ulterior motive here, but it may be just to make the pro-choice crowd look a little stupid, standing up against safety.




posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 

Exactly. Very clever. You have to give them that. You know, if this much energy and funding and fighting was focused (or refocused) into the areas that could really make a difference in our abortion problem, and there's clearly a problem with the number we have in this country, aimed at the root causes, we'd all be so much better off. Clearly this is an issue that cannot and will not be legislated away—not at the federal level and not at the state level. So why not attack the real problem with real solutions, no matter how that might "offend" your own morals or sensibilities?

For example, it's so ignorant for people to be running around saying Planned Parenthood "promotes" or "encourages" abortions, when they are clearly so very focused on education and prevention of both pregnancy and disease for those who really can't get it elsewhere.

Why not encourage and even fund the efforts, but along with that assign quantifiable metrics to the issue and then base future funding on performance instead of throwing the good out with the bad? Closing PP and even some of these clinics down will only exacerbate or hide the problem and increase costs in other areas. There seems to be no way for these two warring factions to compromise or even have a real dialog with real communication. Both sides seem to have dug their heels in and are continuing this practice of using illogical methods to attack the real issue—get those numbers down.

edit on 2/25/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
5

log in

join