Actually, your first post in this thread was in regards to “responsible spouse”. On to your next post - while you said you are a fence sitter on the abortion issue, everything you’ve said after that indicates that you are not. You know, looks/walks/quacks like a duck and all that? If nothing else, anyone who thinks that the medically correct use of RU486 is any more “life threatening” than, say, the allergy shots I get at a clinic with doors too narrow for a gurney, is either someone with so little knowledge they shouldn’t be posting, or a closet anti-choicer.
Really? There are laws in affect that insist that one small section of medical care has to conform to much higher standards than any comparable medical care? Care to provide any cites?
If by other clinics you mean those not providing abortions, I can tell you without guessing that not all are complying. I also have no idea why you are singling out Morgyn since I haven’t mentioned him/her at all, nor did I respond to anything you have said to him/her. I do note that you managed to ignore pretty much everything I said, which does go to prove that you are doing what you accuse other of - obfuscating and adding irrelevancies.
Not that I mentioned that in the post you are responding to, so why do you keep bringing it up?
I think we’re going to have to start a thread again about how Sam Brownback is doing the crazy dance. This thread is turning into the “David42 vs. the world” thread. Every time abortion is even whispered about in a thread someone like David42 appears and derails it.
Brownback sure can pat himself on the back, can’t he? Crediting HIS administration for creating over 3000 jobs. I sure couldn’t understand where he got those numbers. And to call what he’s doing “right-sizing” not cutting jobs and services.
Don’t forget to read the comments that follow the article.
[QUOTE=David42]
My only agenda is for people to properly read and evaluate what is before them.
[/QUOTE]
Excellent, then you can read and evaluate the entire text of the bill (PDF) which I’m putting “before” you. The one that was signed by “Solidified Santorum” and went into effect on July 1st. Then you can show us equally onerous regulations that apply to clinics in the state that don’t perform abortions.
Yeah, well, I’m sure Sammy will provide us with lots more to complain about soon!
I like how the federal money that should have gone to planned parenthood, and cannot be used for abortion or abortion related procedures, was given to Sedgwick county. Nice.
Sadly, this is the law, not the regulations themselves. It specifies that these regulations must cover, but it doesn’t get into the detail work. I’m still trying to find a copy of the new regulations, but now it’s for my own edification.
Yes, but many of the problems with it are present in this text, such as the accomodation for gurneys, female present when pelvic exam is performed, etc.
I long ago clarified that my complaint may be one badly written news article that made it appear that legitimate safety concerns are being objected to by the pro-choice groups who claim safe abortions are their goal.
But if you see red every time you see something that does not perfectly promote your view, it is easy to lose track of what all else is going on.
I do actually argue that a fair debater who is not trying to manipulate calls any specific group by the name the group itself wishes to be called.
This was bait, done purposefully to see if someone who didn’t complain about pro-life groups would rake me over the coals for it. Now please also complain of pro-choice groups calling pro-life groups “anti-choice.”
Anti-choice is not a fair description because it makes the pro-lifers look like they support rape, which they do not (in general; though a nut job here and there might) and if you want to be fair, call them by the name they call themselves.
(I had called pro-choice people pro-abortionists)
All people have biases. The only truly stupid irrational thing is to not be able to see your own biases.
That makes not sense. I’ll complain if I find someone who says he or she is on the fence and uses the term anti-choice. You said you were on the fence. You used the nonsense term pro-abortion.
Man, you really gotta work on your debating. I’m no master debater and even I can see that.
There’s a fairly significant qualitative difference between “anti-choice” and “pro-abortion”–as has been said before, almost no one would actually be happy if there were more abortions qua abortions, and if you find that guy, then you can call him “pro-abortion”. The rest of us just think it’s immoral for the option to not exist, hence “pro-choice”.