Second Federal Challenge to Texas Anti-Abortion Law Goes to Court Today


Read more of our coverage on the HB 2 hearing here.

Texas abortion providers head back to federal court in Austin today, challenging two parts the state’s omnibus anti-abortion law: the requirement that abortion facilities operate as hospital-like ambulatory surgical centers, and the mandate that abortion-providing doctors have admitting privileges at local hospitals, specifically how it has affected doctors and patients in the Rio Grande Valley and El Paso.

More than half of Texas’ legal abortion providers have closed their doors in the wake of the passage of HB 2, and if a federal judge does not block the implementation of the last plank of HB 2—the ambulatory surgical center (ASC) requirement—just six of Texas’ existing legal abortion providers will be able to remain open.

“This is a battle to stop the politicians who have already done devastating and potentially irreparable harm to the health care system for women in Texas from obliterating it entirely for millions of women statewide,” said Nancy Northup, CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is heading up the challenge to HB 2 in court, in a press release Monday morning.

Amy Hagstrom Miller, CEO of Whole Woman’s Health, which once operated five abortion facilities in the state, says she has already been forced to close three of her clinics. Of the two that are left, in Fort Worth and San Antonio, only the latter is an ambulatory surgical center.

“Whole Woman’s Health remains committed to fighting back against these underhanded attacks on women’s health and rights and do everything in our power to continue providing Texas women with the high quality reproductive health care they need and deserve,” said Hagstrom Miller.

HB 2, an earlier version of which made national news as the law that Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis filibustered for 13 hours in June 2013, is a four-part law: in addition to mandating that abortion facilities operate as ASC’s and requiring Texas doctors who provide abortion care to have admitting privileges at local hospitals, it bans abortion after 20 weeks and puts heavy restrictions on the prescription of medication abortions. The Texans who choose medication abortions—at the few remaining providers who will prescribe it—now must return to their doctors for four separate visits to take the pills in-office.

The ASC provision is set to go into effect on September 1, barring an injunction from the federal court this week, though either the State of Texas or the plaintiffs could appeal any unfavorable rulings and the ultimate decision on HB 2 is expected by many to be made by the Supreme Court.

The judge hearing this week’s challenge, Judge Lee Yeakel, also heard abortion providers’ earlier challenges to HB 2 last year concerning the statewide affects of the admitting privileges requirement, and sided with the plaintiffs. But the State of Texas immediately appealed his decision to the famously conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, which ultimately upheld that part of HB 2 as constitutional.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Andrea Grimes on twitter: @andreagrimes

  • Arsenio Dallas

    HB2 ENSURES that abortion remains SAFE, Legal (for now), and most importantly — what it has not been until now — RARE. Let’s think this through.

    The effect of the law will be that fewer women get abortions. Abortions are unsafe — every “successful” abortion results in the death of at least one homo sapien and in the worst case, two. To reduce the number of deaths of homo sapiens is a worthy goal of a civilized society and is the only way to ensure that abortions remains RARE.

    Next, a pregnant mother has fully 9 months to choose whether she will herself love, nurture and succor her baby until at least 16 years of age, or, failing that, give him or her up for adoption to one of 2,000,000 loving couples waiting to adopt newborn babies who wish to lovingly raise them as their own and put their imprimatur on them from the earliest age possible — to train them up in the way they should go.

    This is a Win-Win. Future Presidents, Congresswomen, Senators, Doctors, Lawyers, Inventors, Entrepreneurs, Engineers, Professors, Teachers, Pastors, Sanitation Workers, Secretaries, Technology wizards, etc., will live rather than be killed in utero and will make significant contributions to church and society in the future.

    Let’s pray HB2 stands and fewer deaths result.

    • dudebro

      Even more bullshit

    • lady_black

      The net effect of the law will be that women will have more dangerous abortions, not less abortions. And just a side point here, but a woman with an unwanted pregnancy owes you bupkiss. She isn’t a prize breeding sow for barren, greedy vultures like that Australian couple who saw fit to stick their surrogate with a sick baby that is their genetic child, and make off with the healthy twin. Thankfully, that poor Thai woman cares more than the barren, greedy vultures whose spawn she is now stuck raising. Why don’t you do a solid and go donate a nice fat check to her to help pay the baby’s medical expenses? It seems like the least you could do.

    • Ella Warnock

      Fewer poor women will get abortions, certainly, as they can’t afford to travel or pay private doctors. Wealthy and middle class women who can afford to travel or pay private doctors will do so at more or less the same rate they do now in countries where abortion and/or contraception is restricted.

      Hard to influence that particular demographic with laws that can easily be circumvented if one has the resources to do so. Use of force vis-a-vis restrictions on travel for ovulating women might be more effective in securing their observance of a law banning abortion.

    • StealthGaytheist

      Hurrah. More women will seek, out of desperation, unsafe abortions because antichoice zealots took away the safe options. Many will be injured or even die.

      Others will raise children in poverty, or be broodsows for privileged strangers–since such people consider themselves entitled to not only infants but the bodies of unwilling women.

      “Future Presidents, Congresswomen, Senators, Doctors, Lawyers, Inventors, Entrepreneurs, Engineers, Professors, Teachers, Pastors, Sanitation Workers, Secretaries, Technology wizards, etc., will live…”

      So will future thieves, rapists, child molestors, serial killers, arsonists, terrorists, etc. The zygote that would become the guy who starts WWIII could be in the uterus of a woman you keep from having an abortion.

    • Jennifer Starr

      There are over 100,000 kids in foster care who are available for adoption and often age out of the system because of your selfish couples who only want newborns. Forgive me if I’m less than sympathetic to their plight.

      • StudentHealer

        When I wrote a paper on the topic a little over a year ago, my research showed that the number most reported for children in foster care was closer to 400,000. Close to half a million kids who need loving homes and these anti-choicers are gonna come in to *any* forum and be all “Buh whut about the BABBIES?!?!!!!11!!”

        I maintain that these particular folks are anything *but* “Pro-Life”. They are anti-choice, they are pro-gestation, they are pro-forced-gestation, they are anti-women, they are anti-children… at this point, I’m hard pressed to not refer to them as “anti-life”, because just about everything they stand for is about throwing up roadblocks to millions of people actually, y’know… continuing to live their lives.

        • fiona64

          Yeah, the AFCARs stats show 100K, but I’m given to understand that they are not easy to understand, as each exit and entrance are counted differently … even if it’s the same kiddo. The fact remains that Willy, er, Arsenio bleating about how 2 million people want to adopt is a big fat *lie,* or there would be NO kids awaiting homes, let alone aging out.

          • StudentHealer

            You’re right… AFCARs statistics show the 100K-ish children that are eligible for adoption. The Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute (http://www.ccainstitute.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=25&Itemid=43) shows that close to 400K kids are “without permanent families in the foster care system” across the United States. But I understand now that only a fraction of those children are actually eligible for adoption.

            But whether it’s 100,000 or 400,000… that’s still way too many children who the anti-choicers are *not* helping. It’s still evidence that the pro-forced-gestation side doesn’t actually care about living children.

    • P. McCoy

      Women don’t exist to be pregnant and don’t owe the world enslavement of their bodies to produce healthy Aryan babies for your and anyone else’s use. The pre born may have human parts but are not human beings, no more than a cancer cell is human. People are seeing where the future battle is- changing the Constitution to prevent religious fanatics from imposing a christo-fascistic theocracy upon the citizens of the United States. When this is accomplished, abortion, contraception and LGBT rights will be secured and religious tyrants will keep to themselves or be imprisoned as Domestic Terrorists.

    • Jennifer Starr

      And seriously–their ‘imprimatur’? What century are you living in?

    • fiona64

      one of 2,000,000 loving couples waiting to adopt newborn babies

      … because they’re too fucking selfish to adopt any of the 100K kids already available for adoption in the US alone.

      There. I finished the sentence for you.

  • CC

    “HB2 ENSURES that abortion remains SAFE, Legal (for now), and most importantly — what it has not been until now — RARE”

    If this law is about safety, why do the real mainstream medical professionals oppose it? Why are abortion clinics held to a higher standard than other outpatient clinics? And what business is it of anybody’s how many abortions women have?

    “Abortions are unsafe”

    Actually no, abortion is safer than childbirth and – wait for it – colonoscopies.

    “give him or her up for adoption to one of 2,000,000 loving couples waiting to adopt newborn babies who wish to lovingly raise them as their own and put their imprimatur on them from the earliest age possible”

    Way to go! Women are incubators for childless couples. Once again, the misogyny of the “pro-life” movement rears its ugly head.

    “Future Presidents, Congresswomen, Senators, Doctors, Lawyers, Inventors, Entrepreneurs, Engineers, Professors, Teachers, Pastors, Sanitation Workers, Secretaries, Technology wizards, etc., will live rather than be killed in utero and will make significant contributions to church and society in the future”

    As well as future serial killers – just saying….

    • Arsenio Dallas

      The mainstream medical professionals you refer to are staunchly pro-abortion, among other reasons because they make their living off of aborting ~1,150,000 gestating babies/year which amounts to about $494,500,000 in revenue. You don’t ask people whose livelihood depends upon a lethal surgical procedure to be objective and support their own economic demise.

      I know Pro-Abortion does NOT value human life younger than about nine months old but those of us who value all human life from moment of conception in a Fallopian Tube to womb to tomb KNOW for an empirical fact that every “successful” abortion results in the death of a homo sapien and death is NEVER safe. Never.

      1,150,000 humans come into existence every year and have their lives ended by quintessentially UNSAFE abortion.

      There are more people struck by lightning and killed by shark bite every year than there are serial killers. We need not worry about serial killers when the biggest serial killers are women who kill via abortion two or more of their babies in utero with impunity.

      Misogyny results in death. The most literal and empirically verifiable misogyny is that which is practiced by women who annually kill 600,000 gestating FEMALES — the future women of America — in utero with impunity.

      Women have been created by God with uteri to gestate and birth babies. It’s how you got here. In fact, all of us. This is an irrefutable, empirical fact and no amount of misogyny or misandry (American women also kill about 600,000 gestating baby boys/year in utero w/ impunity) can refudiate it.

      The only safe abortion is the one that never occurs. ADOPTION is a Win-Win; women who are too selfish, unloving or too narcissistic to gestate, birth and nurture their innocent babies can give them up for adoption to couples who would love to gestate and birth but can not for any number of reasons but CAN and WILL nurture and love someone elses baby whom they’ll lovingly make their own.

      No one need be punished and die because a woman made the mistake of getting pregnant when she didn’t want to. Punishment is reserved for the guilty and the least guilty human in an unwanted pregnancy is the baby.

      • dudebro

        So much bullshit I don’t know where to start.

        • Arsenio Dallas

          Ignorance never knows where to start in the face of brilliant erudition. What ignorants call bullshit is nothing more than the facts they hate and wish weren’t true. What smart people call bullshit is what dumb people offer in lieu or scholarship, exactly what you did.

          • dudebro

            No I’m just marking your idiotic post so that I can respond in greater detail when I have time.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Brilliant erudition being something that you know absolutely nothing about, Mr. Green.

          • fiona64

            As soon as you post any brilliant erudition, Little Willy Green, I promise to acknowledge it.

      • lady_black

        Since when has abortion become more profitable than delivering babies? You DO realize that the same doctors do both in the normal course of their practice, right? They’re called OB/GYNs. Compare one abortion (average price $500) with one delivery (average price $10K+, depending upon complexity). Then multiply those figures again, and you’ll figure out what a Gomer you sound like stating that abortion is profit-driven. I mean, the doctors have to make a living and all, but if profit was a major motivator, don’t you think the doctors would be all behind this bullcrap, and be pushing women to give birth instead? The rest of your comment is not quite hyperbolic enough. Go back and try to put more crap emotionalism into it. I know you can do better than this.

        • sherrb1158

          Soooo, your argument states that most of the physicians at abortion clinics are OB/GYN’s that normally deliver babies and make more money for live birth procedures than doing abortions, hence they don’t have a monetary reason to be biased in this matter. How likely is it that these doctors then DO NOT have hospital admitting privileges??? I don’t believe they would be able to obtain malpractice insurance for delivering babies without hospital admitting privileges. I think you might want to re-think that entire argument.

          • dudebro

            You’re not very bright, are you?

          • sherrb1158

            Is that all you’ve got in the way of a response? I happen to know that this is true ….. what is your argument against my response to lady_black, who …. btw …. is the one I was conversing with.

          • dudebro

            It’s a public forum dumbass.

            Abortion doctors TRAVEL, and may not have admitting privileges at the hospital closest to the clinic, you imbecile

          • sherrb1158

            Your juvenile dumb*ss and imbecile comments aside, you didn’t even read or comprehend my post. I was disputing the argument made by lady_black where she said that these same doctors are OB/GYNs that make more money delivering babies. Well, that isn’t likely, as doctors can’t get the required insurance for an OB/GYN practice with normal live birth deliveries without hospital admitting privileges.

            So, “DUDEbro”, we are in agreement that this is a public forum, where obviously dumb*sses like yourself can validate that is exactly what you are.

          • dudebro

            Dumber than a box of rocks.

          • sherrb1158

            So, you are admitting that you don’t have any intelligent input to the discussion.

          • dudebro

            I already explained it to you:

            1) they often travel

            2) hospitals are pressured into denying privileges

            And Lady_Black backed me up

            Now go back to the little kid’s table while the adults talk

          • sherrb1158

            DUDEbro … I’m actually trying to have an intelligent “give and take” conversation with lady_black, Ella W. and Judy K. I don’t continue discussions with people that converse in nothing but name calling and rudeness. You do nothing to further your cause, but instead hurt your cause. They, in contrast, are engaging in intelligent discussion with me. Please leave me alone to converse with who I can have some meaningful discourse with. Thank you.

          • Jennifer Starr

            What dudebro said was absolutely correct.

          • sherrb1158

            Okay, FINE Jennifer … I was actually having some meaningful discourse with some of the other folks on this site and you have to jump in and defend DUDEbro’s juvenile statements. Way to GO Jennifer!

          • Arekushieru

            Dudebro is a woman. When I first saw their NAME, I figured that that was most likely the case. After all, that is a name to more likely be used as a TONGUE-IN-CHEEK reference. Oops.

            And why do you insist on focusing on the name-calling alone, rather than what she’s actually SAYING BEFORE wondering why she delves into name-calling?

          • dudebro

            You wouldn’t know meaningful discourse if it slapped you in the ass.

          • sherrb1158

            Can you post one single comment without profanity or insults? Obviously not. I already asked you to not converse with me anymore, but you are just stuck on acting like a child.

          • dudebro

            The forum is public, little girl. Grow up.

          • sherrb1158

            And you are doing nothing to further your cause or anyone’s appreciation for your contribution, (or lack thereof), to the discussion. Can you just hush and allow others to converse, or do you have to prove what a juvenile arse you are by constantly interjecting yourself into other peoples’ discussion?

          • dudebro

            Not my fault you’re too dumb to understand simple logic.

          • fiona64

            More tone trolling …

          • Arekushieru

            Sorry, but I am sure Ella, Lady_Black and Judy K. don’t appreciate the insulting little pat on the head you gave them. They get a reward from an anti-choicer because they are behaving like GOOD little girls. Blech. No one has to be respectful to someone who is part of the typical, anti-choice, tone-trolling crowd. Kthx.

          • sherrb1158

            Well that’s just FINE Arekushieru … we will just stop all discussion towards mutual agreement because YOU said so. You are the tone deaf one. Good luck with any mutual agreement in the future. You are the poster person for total lack of communication. Good luck with that going forward in your life. I don’t know what you think you might accomplish by having absolutely no willingness to have discussion with someone that is willing to listen and compromise.
            All you have shown me is your total lack of ability to discuss … which results in total opposition ….. I hope you are proud of yourself.

          • Arekushieru

            You don’t have very good reading comprehension, do you. NOWHERE did I state that mutual agreement is a discussion that we shouldn’t be having. Tone trolling also prohibits a willingness to have discussion. So, you have shown me YOUR total lack of ability to discuss resulting in total opposition, AS WELL AS your inability to comprehend, which have both been CLEARLY demonstrated for all to see, here.

          • sherrb1158

            I have no idea what you are talking about in regard to your term “tone trolling”, but I can tell you that I have now seen the hate that you have engrained in your single-issue self and I now feel much less empathetic to you. Much less. Congrats. You now have solidified any negative thoughts I had on your side of the issue.

          • fiona64

            “tone trolling” is what YOU are engaging in when you tell people how they are permitted to address you, what kind of words they are permitted to use.

            Guess what? How someone chooses to express him- or herself, within TOS for this site, is one *more* choice you don’t get to make. Learn to live with the disappointment.

          • Arekushieru

            Hmm, I conceded that mutual agreement is a discussion we should be having. You, however, have not conceded anything. On TOP of that, you merely went off on your own little diatribe about something completely irrelevant to the comment I posted, after complaining about having no idea what I’m talking about. Somehow, I think I’M the one who should be complaining about THAT, no? But, still, YOU’RE the one who has solidified any negative thoughts I had on YOUR side of the issue and, in this case, WITH REASON. Congrats.

          • Arekushieru

            Also, tone trolling =/= to tone deaf. JFYI.

          • sherrb1158

            I no longer have any ear for you. You have proven yourself to the single partisan issue ass that you appeared to be. No more discussion is warranted. You go your way … I am no longer of an open mind to you.

          • Arekushieru

            Then just ignore me, otherwise you have just proven that the self-importance you accuse ME of is actually a projection on YOUR part. I’M not the one who is telling other people to go away when I no longer want to listen to them, after all. AW.

          • Ella Warnock

            Every gyno I’ve employed did perform abortions as a normal part of their practice, and they had admitting privileges.

          • sherrb1158

            So, then I don’t understand why the facilities in question are having challenges with that requirement.

          • Ella Warnock

            I know not, but I do know that more of their practices were
            obstetrics-based, so they were indeed seeing far more revenue from that than from abortions.

            Edited to add a quote from dudebro:

            2) hospitals are pressured into denying privileges

            That, too.

          • lady_black

            Perhaps because they limit their practice to their geographical area, and don’t fly to other states (for security reasons) to do abortions.

          • JamieHaman

            Two reasons, 1. If you go to the hospital, insurance or no, the hospital must treat you, and stablilze your condition. This is federal law. Once you are stable, they can send you home, or to another hospital. You must be physically stable, which means no one expects you to die while you are being transported else where.

            2. Most of the Dr.s who perform voluntary abortions are scared to death of the nuts who hunt them down and shoot them. So they tend to live out of state, and travel to clinics in rental cars, in hopes of not being shot and killed. Admitting privileges are usually not available for any doctor who lives out of state.

            This is terrifying for women, and this will begin to happen AGAIN. http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a6300/texas-doctor-denied-admitting-privileges/

            Texas is already seeing women illegally aborting, because the requirements of this law makes safe, legal abortion much harder to get.

          • Arekushieru

            Also. abortion is probably one of the LEAST risky types of surgery and pregnancy and childbirth is the third leading cause of death worldwide for women.

          • lady_black

            They do not deliver babies in the same state they work at clinics where abortions are done. Because of anti-choice nutcases, it’s not safe.

          • fiona64

            What part of “they travel from other states” was lost on you?

            I ask this in all sincerity: were you homeschooled?

          • lady_black

            Hospital admission privileges are unnecessary. Malpractice insurance is something no doctor practices without. Unless, you know, she’s a total idiot who wants to put all her personal assets at stake in case something bad happens. These are the OB/GYNs, saying hospital admitting privileges are unnecessary for doing abortions because they are so safe. It’s not just me, or the author saying this. You may wish to re-think YOUR argument. Hospital admission privileges are a good deal for those who will be admitting people to the hospital and treating them there, and a really bad deal for the hospital AND the doctors who don’t. Nothing personal, it’s just business. Hospital admission privileges are not for “in case something goes wrong.” If I dropped over with a heart attack AT my doctor’s office, they would call 911.

          • fiona64

            She also seems to be blissfully unaware that many physicians do work in community clinics pro bono.

      • Ella Warnock

        “Women have been created by God with uteri to gestate and birth babies”

        Eh, pretty easy to thwart ‘nature’ or ‘god’ with a tubal ligation. Gestating and birthing have never been much of a concern in my life and certainly wasn’t mandatory.

        • dudebro

          I missed that part. Lovely.

          • Ella Warnock

            “created by God”

            Snerk.

        • lady_black

          His “god” sounds like a dick.

          • Ella Warnock

            What kind of dickish ‘god’ would put the amusement park so close to the Superfund site? If that’s ‘intelligent design,’ I’d hate to see what stupid design looks like.

      • dudebro

        1) There is more money in births and c-sections

        2) pro-CHOICE does in fact value human life, which is why we fight for universal healthcare and social programs that help to improve the lives of children, and to lower maternal and infant mortality rates

        3) why are you worried about how UNSAFE abortion might be? Don’t the sluts deserve to die for their murderous behaviour?

        4) if women are serial killers then why are you worried about their HEALTH? And if you really believe that women are serial killers then what should the penalty be for women who choose to end their pregnancies/ Life in prison? Lethal injection?

        5) Yes, misogyny does result in death, as birth is more dangerous than abortion. Pregnancy has killed 1 billion women since h. sapiens has been around

        6) Women were not created by anything, there is no god, and biology is not destiny

        7) Adoption isn’t a win for anyone, as there are over 100k kids languishing in the foster care system right now, children who will never be adopted. And women suffer depression after being forced to give up their babies

        8) is having sex while female a crime?

        • sherrb1158

          So, if these doctors are actually OB/GYN’s that make more money performing live birth deliveries and therefore don’t have a financial bias ….. then why don’t they have hospital admitting privileges??? Or are they actually NOT credentialed OB/GYN’s?

          • dudebro

            Because hospitals are pressured not to give admitting privileges to ob/gyns who perform abortions.

          • sherrb1158

            Do you have some factual basis for that? All OB/GYNs that I know do at times perform abortions, at least in the case of medical risk to the mother, such as ectopic pregnancy.

          • lady_black

            Yeah, that’s not really an abortion. They treat an ectopic pregnancy with drugs now. Surgery is a last resort. Doctors (OB/GYNs) perform abortions in hospitals when needed. Clinic doctors are usually brought in from other states, for security reasons.

          • JamieHaman

            Dallas Texas. Two Ob-Gyns lost their admitting privileges due to performing abortions. http://www.texastribune.org/2014/06/10/abortion-doctors-sue-hospital-revoking-privileges/
            The hospital in part revoked their privileges because the hospital apparently failed to appreciate the forced birth protesters, and and their tactics.
            Another, more blatant reason? “voluntary interruption of pregnancy.’

          • lady_black

            That’s another good reason. The others are purely business-related.

          • lady_black

            Well, because they are usually flown in from out of state because of, you know, the whole death-threat thing, and have no earthly reason to have hospital privileges where they do not live and have the majority of their practices. And because hospitals are not interested in admissions privileges for doctors who will NOT be admitting patients. A few are starting to come around, but it’s a business matter for the hospitals. It’s a cost without a benefit. My family doctors are fully credentialed and do not have admitting privileges nor do they see hospital patients. They used to, but they stopped doing that some years back, and devote all their time to their own practice. Hospital patients are seen by hospitalists.

          • sherrb1158

            Okay, that is a point that I was not aware of. I would wonder why a doctor would fly around to other locations to perform abortions if they have their own established practice, and I would think that the patients would have better care if the doctor that performed the procedure were available in the event of complications or for follow-up however. In the case of complications that doctor would know more about the patient’s individual situation and what he/she observed during the procedure than an ER doctor, who would have to take additional time to get background and ascertain the specifics of that patient.

          • lady_black

            They do it because they CARE about women. It’s not a get rich quick scheme. In the extremely rare case where hospitalization is required after an abortion (I believe less than 0.04 percent of first trimester procedures) a local hospitalist will care for the hospitalized patient.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Death threats and stalking from anti-choice terrorists make it more than a little difficult. Plus they even contact the hospitals and threaten protests and harassment if admitting privileges are granted.

          • sherrb1158

            Death threats, or any threat of violence is not acceptable. I am not a fan of abortion, but I would NEVER advocate such behavior. I believe that peaceful protests are part of our American 1st Amendment rights, but anyone that goes to the point of threatening someone is a hypocrite.

          • Jennifer Starr

            How do you feel about tactics like this? From the 2004 Rolling Stone article by Kimberly Sevcik:

            The letter arrived on a Tuesday in march. “Dear Sara,” it read. “It is our information that you are currently an employee of Women’s HealthCare Services, a facility that provides abortions.” It went on to suggest that Sara Phares, an administrative assistant at the clinic in Wichita, Kansas, quit her job and repent her sins.
            “Please know that we are praying for you,” the letter concluded. It was signed “Troy Newman, President, Operation Rescue West.” A week later, hundreds of Phares’ neighbors received an anonymous postcard of a mangled fetus.

            This is abortion! read the big block letters. “Your neighbor Sara
            Phares participates in killing babies like these.” The postcard
            implored them to call Phares, whose phone number and address were provided, and voice their opposition to her work at the clinic.

            Another card soon followed. It referred to Phares as “Miss I Help to Kill Little Babies” and suggested, in an erratic typeface that recalled a kidnapper’s ransom note, that neighbors “beg her to quit, pretty please.” The third postcard dispensed entirely with
            pleasantries: “Sara Phares is not to be trusted! Tell her to get a
            life!”

            One Wichita resident, apparently inspired by the postcards, sent Phares letters beseeching her to quit her job at the clinic. Another neighbor, a federal agent, called her at work to express his concern.

            “Just be careful, ma’am,” he said. “You never know what kind of nuts these things will draw.”

            Before long, protesters from Operation Rescue showed up at her house.They parked a tractor-trailer across the street, plastered with twenty-foot-long images of dismembered fetuses. From its speakers came the kind of sweet, tinkling music that lures children from their backyards in pursuit of Dreamsicles. One protester, a somber man in a tan windbreaker with a three-foot crucifix thrust before him, performed an exorcism on Phares’ front lawn, sprinkling holy water on the grass tocast demons from the property. Phares, a small-boned woman with an irreverent sense of humor, joked about the exorcism. “Wish he’d held off on that holy water till after we’d put the fertilizer down,” she
            said. But her husband wasn’t amused. Since 1994, there have been five assassination attempts on abortion providers at their homes. A few days after the protest, Phares’ husband got out his revolver, loaded it and taught Sara how to use it.

          • Ella Warnock

            Wow. And people remain willfully ignorant why a site like RHRC exists.

          • fiona64

            Well, I’m glad that you find the tactics of the majority of your fellow anti-choicers unacceptable. :;eyeroll::

          • StealthGaytheist

            Maybe you should stop getting all of your information from antichoice propaganda sites. As several others have pointed out, they lie constantly.

          • sherrb1158

            Well, maybe you should actually read the posts and realize that I am trying to work with some of the medical professionals on this thread to understand some of the issues and make compromises that would be agreeable to all. But, if you are only focused on calling everyone that questions any aspect of this with “anti-choice” labels, then that give and take will never happen. I hope you are happy with your anti-discussion choice.

          • StealthGaytheist

            I read the posts. You’re spewing blatant falsehoods provided to you by the propaganda sites you read. Then when somebody calls you on it you get bent out of shape. If you want give and take you can’t go off your nut when someone points out reality.

          • sherrb1158

            Obviously, you haven’t read my posts, ORRRR, you don’t have the capability of comprehension.

          • StealthGaytheist

            I comprehend just fine. You’re full of crap.

          • fiona64

            Maybe you should come to RealityLand, then.

          • fiona64

            Or are they actually NOT credentialed OB/GYN’s?

            Being credentialed and having privileges are not the same thing. Not all physicians are employed in hospitals. I’m glad to be able to help with this gap in your knowledge base.

            And yes, dummy, the doctors who perform abortions are OB/GYNs.

        • expect_resistance

          Applause!!!!!!!!!!!

      • DC 17

        Arsenio, how many children have YOU adopted. I talk to a lot of pro lifers because I am curious about their beliefs and world view. I have yet to meet a single pro life man or woman who has adopted any children, not a single one. I know they must exist, but I have spoken to hundreds of pro lifers and never a single one has ever adopted a child themselves.

        • fiona64

          That’s because any and all “sacrifice” must be made by *others.* The anti-choice are too selfish to put their money where their mouths are.

      • P. McCoy

        Anything that is 100% dependent upon my body and my body alone for its existence is a parasite. Like any other parasite, I have the right to terminate that existence and get it out of MY body! I don’t exist to satisfy someone else’s need for a child-forced birth is SLAVERY!

      • goatini

        Hey girl… Arsenio wants you to know his deepest thoughts about women:

        Women = “serial killers”
        Women = “created to gestate”
        Women = “kill”
        Women = “American women kill”
        Women = “selfish, unloving, narcissistic”
        Women = “made the mistake”

        But Arsenio WILL happily violate his, ahem, moral standards, to b0ne you selfish, unloving, narcissistic serial killers and mistake-making gestation units on legs, so he can create the ONLY kind of women that can ever be worthy of his respect – “FUTURE WOMEN”.

        • catseye

          IOW: Another damn useless MRA troll.

      • grantal

        Adoption is NOT a win-win. it is a huge loss-loss for everyone involved. I know I was adopted. I also know others who were adopted and we all suffer with many problems. Life is only a gift when you are wanted.
        “No one need be punished and die because a woman made the mistake of getting pregnant when she did not want to”
        Well you can blame that one on God who gave women no choice except to remain celibate or since we ate from the tree of knowledge we have chemical BC. Or otherwise no woman should ever, ever have sex unless of course she will be willing to give up her life for a child. Which is great when the child is wanted and is able to be cared for properly as in economically. Funny again how people like you do not want women to get ahead in the work force. Instead you think we must all be married. Marriage would be great if there were enough decent men out there. There are NOT!
        According to people who think like you it is “ok” if the woman is” punished” with an unwanted pregnancy but it is not ok for the unborn embryo. It is not freedom and liberty when someone else’s freedom trumps ones own. Funny you people think that way when it is ok by you to shoot an unwanted intruder on spot and are in love with your guns but when a woman wants self defense from an intruder (embryo) that is just a no-no.
        hypocrisy-hypocrisy.you will never get it. just go away we are not listening to your garbage.

      • Suba gunawardana

        Cost of an abortion: $500 or less
        Cost of childbirth and pre/post-natal care: $20-30K
        Price of a baby in the adoption market: $20-30K

        Guess who’s the profit-making industry?

        “…….death is NEVER safe. Never.”

        Then you have a bigger problem than abortion. There’s not a single living being ever born who won’t die. Everyone dies, without exception. If you have a problem with death, complain to your “creator”. If he fixes it and makes everyone immortal, THEN you may have a legitimate beef about abortion (or any other killing).

        To sustain each human life, millions of non-humans have to be ACTIVELY killed. If you have a problem with death, how come you don’t have a problem with that? Talk about a HUGE double standard!

        • Arekushieru

          Yeah, they like to claim that humans are special snowflakes, then attempt to treat us (women, at least) just like breeding livestock. Hmm. These asses are SO fucking contradictory.

      • JamieHaman

        Did you take your meds today?
        Women were not put here by God for the sole purpose of having babies. That maybe your version of the truth, rest assured, it isn’t everyone’s version. Evolution is way cooler than the murderous Christian God.

        • Arekushieru

          I’m just going to put this out there, partly because I’m a Christian and partly because I LOVE beating these people at their own game, particularly: Even according to the bible that isn’t true. God PUNISHED women with ‘increased pangs of childbirth’. If women were put on this Earth for the sole purpose of having babies, the method for having them would not have been repackaged as a punishment for the ‘sins’ of Eve. Also, even if punishment = purpose, the punishment for men no longer applies, and they (unarguably, imo) are the ones more greatly deserving of punishment. So, if those who deserve a punishment more greatly can have their punishment lapse, then why can’t those who are LESS deserving of punishment, have theirs, and thus their ‘purpose’ lapse, as well?

          As for evolution being cooler, I agree. We can see it happening in single lifetime cycles, after all. Specifically, in certain kinds of butterflies and manatees. There was a program on PBS just the other day about how certain ‘pods’ of manatees responded to species endangerment by reaching reproductive maturity much earlier.

  • Cathy Young

    I can’t help but wonder how many of these pro birth males have children they have abandoned. How many dead beat dads, or my favorite, the ones who claim the woman “trapped” them with pregnancy, actually do nothing for their kids? I notice it is usually males who are bellowing about what women are doing to their bodies. Until a fetus can survive outside of the mother, then it should not matter what is done by the mother. As long as society makes women bear the brunt of ALL thing pregnancy and child related, they should just shut the fuck up when it comes to her decision.

    • Arsenio Dallas

      Your logic: “As long as a woman can’t survive off of life-support or medicine or pace-maker, etc., it should not matter what men do to women, including kill them.”

      That’s horrific logic and as immoral as killing 1,150,000 gestating babies in utero per year!

      • Cathy Young

        you see that is where people get stupid dude. A woman on life support has been alive already! A 2 week old fetus has not ever been alive. This “killing children” to describe abortion is as stupid as the day is long. NO…it is NOT alright to kill a child, but every child ever has been born already. Until it is born it is a fetus or a zygote it is NOT YET a child!!!!! Trying to compare a brain dead woman on life support to an 6 week old fetus is so ignorant. God I get so tired of these stupid arguments people put forth. As for what men do do women…they kill them every damn day and no…no one seems to care. Anti choice people don’t give one rats ass about the woman or the baby after it is born. If you do not believe in abortion, or have any respect for the beliefs of others, you better make sure you are keeping your little swimmers in the pool, and go out and adopt some of these babies. I personally feel one hell of a lot worse for the already ALIVE children that get murdered, beaten and abused than I do for a fetus that is a few weeks old. Why don’t you pro fetus people get your heads out of your collective ASSES and do something to protect children, real, born children from abuse, hunger and homelessness, and stop trying to control every single (already born) women in the country.

      • lady_black

        Yeah. I’m pretty sure that women who need life-support, medication, or a pacemaker, etc. aren’t in need of some man’s uterus to sustain her life. So I guess he can just STFU and sit down, bro.

      • StealthGaytheist

        If by “life support” you mean “hooking her directly into another person’s blood and organs without that person’s consent” then I fully support the right of that person to take the woman off life support.

      • goatini

        Oh, that reminds me – next early spring planting season, I’m going to ask for “gestating tulips” and “gestating crocuses”. I’m SURE they’ll know exactly what I mean… and NOT think I’m just batsh!t crazy.

        • JamieHaman

          Pick up some gestating oak trees too will you? No more room in my yard.

      • JamieHaman

        Not an accurate comparison either. Cathy Young is talking about a fetus that is not a, breathing, feeling human being.
        Surprise! Women are thinking, breathing, heartbeating PEOPLE.
        Big big difference.

      • Arekushieru

        Yeah… no. That’s YOUR logic, douchebag. If a woman needed to survive on life support, your ilk would happily let her die. See the woman who was forcibly kept on life support ONLY because they wanted to keep the FETUS alive (which only ended up being in vain, too, actually) for reference, now AND in future. It’s only when it comes to the FETUS that special circumstances arise. However, if it were just MEN that needed to survive by having sex, I’m sure you people would be more open about your lust to make rape legal if that were the case, at least.

    • Ella Warnock

      My personal favorite are ‘pro-life’ guys who get it on with a woman without first finding out what she would do in the event of an unplanned pregnancy. They just la-la-la with fingers in their ears until the inevitable happens, then expect to demand that she submit to his wish for her to have ‘his’ baby. Dude, if it was really *that* important, then you would have made sure she was as ‘pro-life’ as you are.

      • Cathy Young

        or he would have taken care of his part of the birth control and worn a damn condom. Or he should just keep his dick in his pants unless he wants to make a baby. If that is good enough for women it should be good enough for men since women do not get themselves pregnant.

        • Ella Warnock

          Well, there you go, using common sense and logic. Pro-liars will not be having any of THAT sort of nonsense.

          • Cathy Young

            Damn me and my logic. LOL I forgot

        • StealthGaytheist

          They always want women to be available to them, but women who enjoy sex but don’t want to be pregnant are sluts who’d better pay for their own fun. For some reason they don’t see why we have a problem with that.

        • lady_black

          I generally don’t like “keep it in your pants” because it’s spectacularly unhelpful. However a guy COULD 1) have a vasectomy, or 2) use a condom (after bothering to learn how to do it properly) along with spermicide, which when used together are nearly as effective as the pill. Using them can even be a regular part of foreplay if the couple is imaginative enough to make them seem sensual. And nothing says “I care about you and respect you” like a man who takes equal responsibility for contraception and protection.

  • sherrb1158

    You’re worried about women resorting to “back-alley” procedures, but you don’t think it is important to have a doctor with hospital admitting rights and the proper facilities to take care of the girls and women having these procedures in the event that there are complications?

    They’ve known about these new regulations for a long time now …. it they care so much about the quality of the healthcare for these women then why haven’t the facilities taken the time from the passing of the law to now in order to arrange for any required facility upgrades and to have doctors on their staff with the required credentials?

    • dudebro

      Abortion is safer than wisdom tooth removal.

      Where are the admitting privilege requirements for dentists?

      • sherrb1158

        Please quote your source of that statement.

        • Arekushieru

          It’s common knowledge. So, if you were trying to have a true, factual discussion rather than post the same-old, same-old regurgitated drivel from Lie Site News without expecting flack from it. you would have actually researched and found that out, beforehand. So much for your theory that you are a special snowflake who needed ‘hit’ people sent after her.

        • cjvg

          If your concern is safety lets pass laws forbidding hospital admission in the US. After all we have one of the highest rates of patient deaths (not even counting irreparable harm to health) of the civilized world

          “A recent Institute of Medicine report quoted rates estimating that medical errors kill between 98.000 and 195.000 people a year in US hospitals.” http://www.cdc.gov/HAI/pdfs/hai/infections_deaths.pdf
          http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/11856.php

          As for wisdom tooth removal deaths, calculations based on literature is roughly 1 death occurs in every 400,000 cases where anesthesia is used in dental offices.

          -Edward M. D’Eramo. Morbidity and Mortality With Outpatient Anesthesia: The Massachusetts Experience. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992. 50. page 700-704.
          -Edward M. D’Eramo. Mortality and Morbidity With Outpatient Anesthesia: The Massachusetts Experience. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999. 57. page 531-536.
          -Edward M. D’Eramo and et. al. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. Adverse Events with Outpatient Anesthesia In Massachusetts. 2003. vol 61. pages 793-800.
          -Edward M. D’Eramo and et. al. Anesthesia Morbidity and Mortality Experience Among Massachusetts Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008. 66. pages 2421-2433. -Peter J. Nkansha. and et. al. Mortality Incidence in Outpatient Anesthesia For Dentistry in Ontario. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1997. 83. pages 646-651.
          -Alan E. Deegan. Anesthesia Morbidity and Mortality, 1988-1999: Claims Statistics From AAOMS National Insurance Company. Anesth Prog. 2001. 48. pages 89-92.
          -William G. Flick and et. al. Illinois Dental Anesthesia and Sedation Survey for 1996. Anesth Prog. 1998. 45. pages 51-56.
          – William G. Flick and et. al. Illinois Dental Anesthesia and Sedation Survey for 2006. Anesth Prog. 2007. 54. pages 52-58.
          -David H. Perrott and et. al. Office-Based Ambulatory Anesthesia: Outcomes of Clinical Practice of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003. 61. pages 983-995.
          -Carol Smith. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Enough Scrutiny in Dental Deaths? July 15, 2008. http://www.seattlepi.com/local/370740_dentists15.html Accessed January 14, 2011.
          -Michelle Nicolosi. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. October 4, 2005. http://www.seattlepi.com/specials/dentists/243228_clem27.asp Accessed January 14, 2011.
          -J.M. Davies and Linda Campbell. Fatal Air Embolism During Dental Implant Surgery: A Report of Three Cases. Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia. January 1990. 37. 1. pages 112-121.
          -Carol Smith. Fifth dental death in 3 years: Student has allergic reaction to mediaction after oral surgery. July 23, 2008. http://www.seattlepi.com/local/371952_dentist24.html Accessed January 14, 2011.
          -Karen Dorn Steele. August 1, 2008. Spokane dentist faces another legal challenge. http://www.autoreviewonline.com/breaking/story.asp?ID=15956 Accessed January 14, 2011.
          -Office of the Ombudsman for Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities. Medical Alert – Unexpected Deaths Following Recent Outpatient Dental Surgery. November, 2005. http://www.ombudmhdd.state.mn.us/alerts/dentalsurgery.htm Accessed January 14, 2011.
          – Cindy Leise. The Chronicle-Telegram. Coroner: Lack of oxygen may have killed teen girl. January 6, 2011. http://chronicle.northcoastnow.com/2011/01/06/coroner-lack-of-oxygen-may-have-killed-teen-girl/ Accessed January 14, 2011.
          -J. Theodore Jastak and Robert M. Peskin. Major morbidity or mortality from office anesthetic procedures: a closed-claim analysis of 13 cases. Anesth Prog. vol. 38. pages 39-44. 1991.
          -Stanley F. Malamed and Paul Reggiardo. Pediatric Oral Conscious Sedation: Changes to Come. Journal of the California Dental Association. 1999. http://www.cda.org/library/cda_member/pubs/journal/jour1199/sedation.html Accessed January 15, 2011.
          -Debbie Salamone. Orlando Sentinel. Death at Dentist’s Office Unresolved Seminole Gril’s Fatal Visit Haunts Mom, Investigators 1 year Later. July 22, 1990. B1.

          I guess that will do for now, I have more if you still believe dental surgery is more dangerous then abortion.

          Here is what the AMA and the ACOG have to say on that;”The fact is that abortion is one of the safest medical procedures. The risk of complications from abortion is minimal, with less than 0.5% of abortions involving major complications.”
          http://www.acog.org/About-ACOG/News-Room/News-Releases/2013/Ob-Gyns-Denounce-Texas-Abortion-Legislation

          “Surgical abortion is one of the safest types of medical procedures. Complications from having a first-trimester aspiration abortion are considerably less frequent and less serious than those associated with giving birth. Early medical abortion (using medications to end a pregnancy) has a similar safety profile.1″
          http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/safety_of_abortion.html

          Giving birth is in actuality 14 times riskier then an abortion and much more likely to lead to permanent health damage and/or death
          “a study published online in Obstetrics & Gynecology finds that a legal abortion is actually far safer than giving birth.”

          “The researchers, from Gynuity Health Projects in New York City and the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, looked at figures on live births and deaths linked to pregnancy or abortions, then juxtaposed that data with Guttmacher’s estimates on the number of legal abortions in the U.S.”

          “Between 1998 and 2005, one woman died in childbirth for every 11,000 babies born, compared to one of 167,000 women who died due to abortion complications. It’s probably not too surprising considering that women are pregnant for nine months, leaving far more opportunity for complications to arise than in an individual procedure.”

          “Dr. Bryna Harwood, an ob-gyn from the University of Illinois in Chicago, told Reuters Health that various studies have confirmed that legal abortions are safe”
          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22270271

          • JamieHaman

            Ah, now I feel dumb, I posted for oral surgery statistics. Wish I’d seen this comment first.

          • cjvg

            You can never have to much information, bury them in an avalanche of it. Maybe the anti-choice will be so busy they forget trying to own other women’s personal and private decisions. (probably not, but one can hope)

        • JamieHaman

          Here you go: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html for abortions, is 1 death per million, at or before 8 weeks. You will want to scroll down to the section labeled Safety of Abortion to verify.

          http://www.salmoncreekoralsurgeryandperiodontics.com/Portals/0/General%20Anesthesia%20(Sedation%20or%20Sleeping)%20%20Pre-Op%20Instructions.pdf For oral surgery, 1 death per 600,000.

          So, as it happens, yes, the abortion at or before 8 weeks is substantially safer that oral surgery.

    • Julie K. McCarty

      No doctor needs admitting privleages to any hospital. Even speciality doctors. If you go to the ER, you do not need your doctor to admit you. The ER doc can do it.

      • sherrb1158

        Julie, I have never personally been to a doctor that didn’t have admitting privileges, as the hospital that a doctor has privileges at is usually one of my criteria for selecting a physician. Because of that I would be somewhat leery of a doctor without admitting privileges, and because of the reasons I listed in my exchange below with “lady_black” I would prefer to be treated by a physician that did have them in the unfortunate case of complications because of the advantage of his being familiar with my case and the procedure in the event of a complication. However, I see from your post that there may be valid reasons for a doctor to not have them.

        Sooo, maybe the requirement should be modified to ensure that there is a credentialed ER facility within the same number of miles of the abortion facility, as opposed to the requirement of the physician having admitting rights. I do believe the physician should be a certified OB/GYN, however.

        Your thoughts?

        • lady_black

          Yes. I might mention I am a nurse. My doctor does not treat people in the hospital. If I have a condition that requires surgical assessment, he refers me to a surgeon for consultation. If I have an emergency I call 911. That’s how it works for a great many people. Marcus Welby M.D. is dead, and he was probably a CRNP to begin with.

          • sherrb1158

            Point taken, and yes, the Marcus Welby, M.D. scenario is rarer than a flamingo in Antarctica! I have been very fortunate to live in an area with an abundance of access to great medical care. I know that is not the case in the southern Texas regions. Were it not for the growth in PA practices some areas would likely have no easy access to highly trained medical care.

            That being said, you do agree that the facilities should be within reasonable access to an accredited E.R. facility, correct? I ask because that is an accommodation that I think I could support. One other question … do you think these facilities should have some type of online records that would be available to the local E.R. in the event of complications ….. if they don’t already?

          • lady_black

            If people in Texas live a great distance from a hospital, that is a problem for the state to address. That means they need to open some public hospitals so all their citizens are within a reasonable distance of a hospital. I don’t live in Texas, so I don’t know their hospital situation, but it would be easy to find out online. No abortion clinic is located unreasonably far from a hospital. When someone is sent to a hospital from another healthcare facility, copies of their records go with them, and if there are any questions, they can always call the nurse who is handling the transfer. That would be the one who fills out the transfer form. If there isn’t time for that, the paramedics get a verbal report from the nurse while stabilizing the patient, which they pass to the ER personnel. Not all facilities have switched to electronic records yet, but it’s a work in progress. If they have then YES, records can be faxed online very quickly, and there is still a nurse-contact who can answer any questions they may have, and of course the patient can fill in some of the blanks, too.

          • JamieHaman

            Just an fyi, according to this: http://www.ahd.com/state_statistics.html there are 379 hospitals in the state of Texas.
            Pretty clearly Texas needs more hospitals imo.

          • lady_black

            I sadly suspected that was the case. They don’t have enough hospitals for the born, and they are wasting money trying to save “the unborn.”

        • Julie K. McCarty

          Given the fact that most hospitals and doctors now have patient files on computer, any doctor in that hospital can look up your medical history in the time it takes you to get from the admitting desk to the ER room. I have had 9 (nine) surgeries in the last 11 years and previous to that many hospitalizations. I have seen how hospital have incorporated computers into the system and those patient files.

          Any ER physician can handle an ob/gyn emergency. And for those rare events that need expertise, there is always one on-call. Every emergency room in the country has to be certified before opening their doors. I was an EMT for 8 years and did my training and continuing ed credits out of an ER/hospital. The only difference in ER’s are the level of trauma care they provide.

    • StealthGaytheist

      “Admitting privileges” is a BS criteria that adds nothing to the quality of care recieved at a facility. The only purpose of these laws is to make it difficult, if not impossible, for clinics to stay in business.

    • JamieHaman

      Have you ever done renovations to your kitchen, or bathroom? How about a full remodel of all the doorways, hallways, and bathrooms for a person in a wheelchair? No? Just to be fair, contact a local builder and ask about ball park figures for that type of remodel. The prices are outrageous. Then, just for giggles, ask how long that type of remodel generally takes.

    • fiona64

      but you don’t think it is important to have a doctor with hospital
      admitting rights and the proper facilities to take care of the girls and
      women having these procedures in the event that there are
      complications?

      Oral surgery is far more likely to have complications than an abortion. Where is your concern about admitting privileges for oral surgeons?

  • sherrb1158

    Many of you on this thread are willing to have discussion focused on the care of the girls/women involved in this legislation. Then again, many of you refuse to read the thread and attack anyone that is actually trying to have open discussion to work through some of the issues in the care of women and go straight to the “we hate you” mode, don’t pass “GO … just go straight to “shut up … we don’t want to hear your input mode”.
    If you are only focused on calling everyone that questions any aspect of this with “anti-choice” and “hater” labels, then that give-and-take will never happen. I hope that those of you with that approach are happy with your anti-discussion choice. In those cases, YOU, and you know who you are, are choosing the path of no tolerance for any resolution.

    • Arekushieru

      Wrong, it’s been the other way around for FAR longer. At first, it was the anti-choice (btw, that’s a factual term, not an insult, because, until the so-called Pro-‘Life’ movement supports contraceptive services and comprehensive sex ed as an underpinning of the platform of their total movement, that’s all they WILL be, mmkay?) brigade that walked all over the Pro-Choice movement because most of the momentum of support was behind the ANTI-choice movement, and they found it easy to intimidate and marginalize pro-choicers, especially because the anti-choice movement used the backlash that they knew a concerted effort from Pro-Choicers to push back against them would generate, against the Pro-Choicers, themselves, using the resulting weakened position of the Pro-choice movement to garner even MORE support for themselves. But, we finally began to understand the catch-22 position in which you so handily put us. AND understood how we would be blamed no matter what. So, since there would have been no ‘deeper’ understanding, either way, we finally said enough is enough and we wouldn’t let YOUR ilk put us in the same position it ALWAYS has, no matter WHAT.

  • sherrb1158

    I hope you are all pleased with yourself. I came to this discussion wanting to have civil discourse, but you hide behind your “hit” people that totally trash anyone trying to come to any mutual understanding. Good luck with that. You have lost me for any attempt at discussion. You give no support to anyone that is willing to listen, understand your points, compromise, agree with you on points or discuss in general. I felt mixed on this subject. Now you have made me believe that most of you are just small and hateful people. Congrats!

    • Ella Warnock

      Now, hang on just a minute before you flounce off into the sunset. No one here ‘hides’ behind anyone else. We all say whatever it is we’ve got to say, and a crucial component of any discussion board is the ability to feel comfortable being yourself.

      Being here together and commenting for the length of time that we have, any reasonable person would expect that we agree on many things, and we have somewhat of a shorthand borne of familiarity. It’s not my place, or anyone else’s, to police others’ comments.

    • lady_black

      Have I not been civil to you?

    • Suba gunawardana

      I haven’t read all the comments but if you present valid points I am more than happy to respond.

      Do you support abortions as long as they are performed with all safety standards in place?

    • fiona64

      Ooh, stick that flounce!

      Don’t forget your pail and shovel!

    • L-dan

      Late to the party and all…but really? You drop in concern trolling and characterize reasonable pushback as hit people? Looking at your posts, I don’t see any interest in reasonable discussion or mutual understanding, just an attempt to push a ‘gotcha’ argument that pro-choice advocates are somehow uninterested in women’s safety.

      Your concern was noted and thoroughly debunked. Rather than have an actual conversation about abortion and safety, you’re flouncing off and pretending we’ve somehow lost a chance to come to mutual understanding with a potential ally. It’s pretty obvious that was never your angle, and you fool nobody.

      • Arekushieru

        Yup, you pretty much summed it up, as usual, L-dan!

  • fiona64

    Is there a reason why you’ve spammed this post repeatedly?