Rutherford Institute Urges Stringent Health and Safety Regulations for Abortion Clinics

In article ,
says...

Citing Risks to religious dominance, Rutherford Institute Urges the
Governor to
Implement unneeded but Stringent Health and Safety Regulations for
Abortion Clinics.
Founded in 1982, The Rutherford Institute is a for profit religious
nut
organization dedicated to the destruction of constitutional and human
rights, especially women's rights.
The Institute provides legal assistance at a high charge to
individuals whose wish to violate or threaten the basic human and
constitutional rights of others.

Religious filth is at it again. Know who's pro-lie and vote against
them.
Baby, bad. Abortion, good.
--
http://folding.stanford.edu
Save lives, visit today!

"John Whitehead" wrote in message

Citing Risks to Women, Rutherford Institute Urges Gov. McDonnell to
Implement Stringent Health and Safety Regulations for Abortion Clinics

9/2/10 for immediate release

RICHMOND, Va. - Pointing out that many centers in which first
trimester abortions are performed are treated as regular doctors'
offices and are not subject to even basic licensing requirements, The
Rutherford Institute is urging Governor Bob McDonnell (R-VA) to
implement more stringent health and safety regulations for abortion
clinics. In a letter to the governor, Institute president John W.
Whitehead calls on McDonnell to use South Carolina's Code of
Regulations § 61-12, which was upheld by the Fourth Circuit Court of
Appeals in 2002, as a model for the Commonwealth to follow in
drafting its own regulations. The Institute's letter, which was
copied to members of the General Assembly, comes on the heels of an
official opinion issued by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli in which
he concludes that the Commonwealth can regulate abortion facilities
without offending constitutional principles.
A copy of the Institute's letter to Governor McDonnell is available at
www.rutherford.org.

"As the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized, abortion is inherently
different from any other type of medical procedure, and the
Commonwealth of Virginia has significant interest in ensuring that
the termination of pregnancies is not treated with as little
oversight as the routine removal of warts," said John W. Whitehead,
president of The Rutherford Institute. "Requiring abortion centers to
comply with the same kinds of regulations as other outpatient medical
centers is really a matter of common sense."
Under Virginia law, outpatient abortion clinics are defined as
outpatient hospitals. However, as Attorney General Cuccinelli
recently noted, abortion facilities that limit their practice to
reproductive services often characterize themselves as "physicians'
offices," whereby they are legally exempt from licensure requirements
that apply to other outpatient hospitals. Taking issue with this
exemption, Whitehead insists that the "nature of the abortion
procedure and its inherent risks are reason enough to advocate for
increased regulation of abortion clinics in the Commonwealth."
Moreover, courts have identified a more fundamental reason for
regulating these facilities even more stringently than other
outpatient surgical centers. As the Supreme Court has acknowledged,
abortion is different "because no other procedure involves the
purposeful termination of a potential life."

Potential life? What do you mean potential life?
If there is no married couple with a proper plan to raise a child/family
there is no potential life.
Maybe a potential hell for the poor child. Abortion at an early stage might
be a far more humane option than a lifetime of unloved hell.

Regarding Health and Safety, have there been any specific complaints lodged
against any abortion clinics?
I think its unlikely.
This is clearly yet another asinine concocted charge brought by the
religious right to put down abortion clinics because of their usual
superstitious beliefs from the middle ages.

By the way, I hope the people in rec.collecting.coins and alt.guitar.amps
also enjoy posts about abortion clinics because they are getting this thread
also (probably because the O.P. has a coin collection and a guitar and goes
to that group).
Lol. Unbelievable.


The Institute's letter
concludes by urging Governor McDonnell to advocate the adoption of
common-sense clinic safety regulations for the protection of women
undergoing abortions and the promotion of public health. As Whitehead
points out, "in light of the serious, invasive nature of abortion and
the well-recognized state interest in promoting public health and
welfare, the Commonwealth has both the authority and an obligation to
its citizens to adopt reasonable, common-sense regulations."
Founded in 1982, The Rutherford Institute is a nonprofit civil
liberties organization dedicated to the defense of constitutional and
human rights. The Institute provides legal assistance at no charge to
individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or
violated.

"Steve" wrote in message

On Sep 2, 4:22 pm, "RichL" wrote:
"John Whitehead" wrote in message

...

Citing Risks to Women, Rutherford Institute Urges Gov. McDonnell to
Implement Stringent Health and Safety Regulations for Abortion
Clinics

Wow.
A Christian right organization is trying to impede a woman's right
to make her own choices!
And the rightie-nutbag AG of Virginia is going along with it!
Will wonders never cease!

Abortion under any any circumstances is murder.


You must be a religious folk or something.
Murder is a word that is only associated with those already born.
That's the accepted definition.

If you want a real crime: - forcing an unmarried school girl to leave school
and have a baby and raise it on her own with no husband/father.
Of course this has probably never actually been executed, which goes to show
that the religious right are just full of a bunch of religious hot air.
They haven't thought things through at all, and they most likely haven't
spoken to even one girl actually having a pregnancy crisis.

"Spender" wrote in message
ews.com
On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 16:34:25 +1000, "The art of critical thinking"
wrote:

"Steve" wrote in message


Abortion under any any circumstances is murder.


You must be a religious folk or something.
Murder is a word that is only associated with those already born.
That's the accepted definition.

The accepted definition of murder is killing that which is alive, not
necessarily born.


Ah, no. That would mean that killing a dog or a tortoise or a banana tree
is also murder.
Have you ever murdered a fly and mosquito?


I know you like your definition better because it
allows you to feel there is nothing at all wrong with partially
delivering a perfectly healthy term baby only so far as to allow you
to get to its head, crush its skull and scramble its brains.


Appeal to emotions noted. (head crushing and brain scrambling).
The religious right must learn that one cannot win arguments by using shock.

Also very few abortions are late term F.Y.I.
And the proper (non emotional) term is fetus. 'Baby' is used by mothers to
be, and its in the future tense, i.e. it will be a baby when its born.
And not all fetuses are 'perfectly healthy'.

"Spender" wrote in message
ews.com
On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 19:56:20 +1000, "The art of critical thinking"
wrote:

"Spender" wrote in message
ews.com

The accepted definition of murder is killing that which is alive,
not necessarily born.

Ah, no. That would mean that killing a dog or a tortoise or a
banana tree is also murder.
Have you ever murdered a fly and mosquito?

The abortion issue is referring to animals? Didn't know that.


You did say it was anything that is alive.


I know you like your definition better because it
allows you to feel there is nothing at all wrong with partially
delivering a perfectly healthy term baby only so far as to allow you
to get to its head, crush its skull and scramble its brains.


Appeal to emotions noted. (head crushing and brain scrambling).
The religious right must learn that one cannot win arguments by
using shock.

It is telling that you aren't shocked by the truth of the matter.


What you have is just a viewpoint based on emotion religious beliefs.
Regular people don't say such things.


Also very few abortions are late term F.Y.I.

I gave no indication of the number.


Then there's no problem.


And the proper (non emotional) term is fetus. 'Baby' is used by
mothers to be, and its in the future tense, i.e. it will be a baby
when its born.

If it helps you sleep at night.


Everyone can understand that, except the religious right wingers.
Try telling an average person and see for yourself.


And not all fetuses are 'perfectly healthy'.

I didn't say they were. Diversion noted.

In article . com,
says...

On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 22:13:59 -0500, "W.T.S." wrote:

Religious filth is at it again. Know who's pro-lie and vote against
them.
Baby, bad. Abortion, good.

It does slow the population growth of white liberals. Not a bad result.

I don't care what segment of the population is slowed by abortion, just
as long as abortion is safe, legal, and frequent.
Baby, filth. Abortion, purity!
--
http://folding.stanford.edu
Save lives, visit today!

In article . com,
says...

On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 16:34:25 +1000, "The art of critical thinking"
wrote:

"Steve" wrote in message


Abortion under any any circumstances is murder.

You must be a religious folk or something.
Murder is a word that is only associated with those already born.
That's the accepted definition.

The accepted definition of murder is killing that which is alive, not
necessarily born. I know you like your definition better because it allows
you to feel there is nothing at all wrong with partially delivering a
perfectly healthy term baby only so far as to allow you to get to its
head, crush its skull and scramble its brains.

There isn't. Crushing the skull of a fetus is a normal, decent thing to
do. Letting it be born is very, very sick and very abnormal.
Baby, bad. Abortion, good.
--
http://folding.stanford.edu
Save lives, visit today!

On Fri, 03 Sep 2010 04:18:50 -0500, Spender wrote:

On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 16:34:25 +1000, "The art of critical thinking"
wrote:

"Steve" wrote in message


Abortion under any any circumstances is murder.


You must be a religious folk or something.
Murder is a word that is only associated with those already born.
That's the accepted definition.

The accepted definition of murder is killing that which is alive,

Then I murdered several salmon and a few veggies last night.
Come arrest me.

not
necessarily born. I know you like your definition better because it allows
you to feel there is nothing at all wrong with partially delivering a
perfectly healthy term baby only so far as to allow you to get to its
head, crush its skull and scramble its brains.

Uh oh, a 'partial birth abortion' kook.

"W.T.S." wrote:

In article . com,
says...

On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 22:13:59 -0500, "W.T.S." wrote:

Religious filth is at it again. Know who's pro-lie and vote against
them.
Baby, bad. Abortion, good.

It does slow the population growth of white liberals. Not a bad result.

I don't care what segment of the population is slowed by abortion, just
as long as abortion is safe, legal, and frequent.
Baby, filth. Abortion, purity!

Hey, I like that. ;-)

You're a lot more interesting than that "Art
of Critical Stinking" character. So - in
keeping with your take on it - when a partial
birth abortion is performed, the, ah..."thing,"
um, "undifferentiated tissue mass," um...
"inconvenient medical anomaly," ah...
ok, the "filth," while it's hanging out of
the pussy (a little non-medical lingo for
the hoi polloi), remains "filth" until the
heroic Champion of a Woman;'s Right
to Choose jams something-or-other up
the old funhole and scrambles the filthy
thing's brains - while it thrashes ecstatically,
obviously enjoying the holy sacrament
of which it is the object - at which point
it is then purified, and is enshrined in
a small wheeled mausoleum behind
the Temple of No Consequences.

That about cover it?

Sounds pretty damn pure to me.

LV

In article ,
"The art of critical thinking" wrote:

Everyone can understand that, except the religious right wingers.
Try telling an average person and see for yourself.



I generally don't jump in on abortion threads for the simple reason that
neither side ever persuades the other of anything.

Tony