A legislative bill that suggests, hey can we maybe after 5 months of a pregnancy, think about alternatives that aren't abortion? Oh, and in the interests of womens' health and maybe not letting women die in charnel houses like the one Kermit Gosnell ran with their filth, disease spreading carelessness, with unqualified workers administering drugs and other necessary "health care thingys"? ("Thingys" was about as deep as it got for some of these highly trained professionals).
Not to mention pickled baby parts.
The argument from those who politely demur, is the ever-popular time tested coat hanger prop.... Take a look at some of the photographic evidence from Kermit's little shop of horrors and remind me you are terribly concerned about the health of women.
It's amazing how so many of the "pro-choice crowd" will argue that Kermit Gosnell was evil and that this is why we need more abortion clinics. The thing is, most of the worst things that Gosnell did were either legal, or ignored by the state's relevant authorities--most of whom were pro-choice. They turned a blind eye to him, because making abortion easy to obtain was more important than making it safe. And in Texas, there is at least one more abortion mill which is run similarly to Gosnell's house of horrors; and that's ignoring the ones which are merely unsanitary.
There are complaints that the result of this bill will leave only five abortion mills open in the state of Texas: good riddance to the others! But that won't really be the end effect. Several other the others which operate in sup-par conditions of cleanliness will more than likely "upgrade," and if the rest close down and were previously raking in big bucks (meaning, were actually being used) you can bet that somebody else will step in an build some newer, cleaner, "safer" (for the mother) facilities.
The opposition to SB1/HB2 tells me a few things:
- Keeping abortions rare is a lie (this is more a confirmation than a revelation)
- That the whole back-alley rhetoric thing is only meant to keep abortion mills open. It's the location and not the conditions that these people care about, since back-alley conditions might exist in street-front abortion mills with nary a peep from the people who want abortion to be "safe and legal."
- There really aren't many "common ground" solutions between pro-life and pro-abortion. Basically, if it places any restriction whatsoever on abortion for any reason whatsoever, the pro-abortion side opposes it en masse. The few things that they ever propose involve handing out more condemns (which will in turn lead to more risky sexual behaviors, and thus more "unwanted pregnancies," and thus more abortions) and demanding more government money to "alleviate poverty" (though this is always done at the federal or at best the state level, and never results in actually helping people).
All the rhetoric about back alleys becomes a bit silly when the "safe, legal" abortion mills themselves aren't even going to be held to any particular standards of cleanliness nor safety.
Update: And now Ace's own take (the link above was one of the other bloggers) on this, responding to the piece E.N.V. linked today about the Burnt Orange Report. I don't always agree with Ace, and rarely 100% so: no exception here, by the way; but this is still worth the read.