Skip to comments.Identifying Abortion Doctors, Staff, Patients Online May Soon be Prohibited: California
Posted on 07/08/2006 11:29:17 AM PDT by wagglebee
CALIFORNIA, July 7, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) A bill that would make it illegal to post information about abortion practitioners online may soon become law in California, the St. Helena Star reported yesterday.
AB 2251, brought forward by Democrat representative Noreen Evans, would ban any online posting, sale, trade or solicitation of the personal information of abortionists, abortion clinic staff and volunteers, and patients of abortion clinics. Addresses, telephone numbers and pictures would be considered protected information.
Web sites are used by militant anti-abortion activists to publicize personal information about reproductive healthcare service providers and patients in order to threaten or incite violence against them, Evans said in a statement. This bill gives women and their physicians a powerful tool against these Web sites.
The bill specifies that the display of information would be prohibited if it intentionally incited a third person to cause imminent great bodily harm to the person identified, or if it would constitute a threat to the person, or place them in objectively reasonable fear for his or her safety.
Although the legislation is directed against abortion opponents who resort to violence, some are concerned that the bill has the potential to severely limit freedom of speech rights. Pro-life groups have at times identified doctors who commit abortions so as to allow pro-life women the option of avoiding them as ob-gyns.
The bill has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee and will be voted on by the Senate.
Abortion-provider Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California and NARAL have supported the bill, as have the California Medical Association, the California Nurses Association and the National Organization for Women of California.
& the rest of the world cares ?
The number of abortion providers is falling, and is certainly under the number of abortionists (2,042) reported 10 years ago, with the greatest decline among hospitals and physicians' offices rather than clinics. Eighty-six percent of counties have no known abortion provider.
Over 34% of the women in the United States live in counties had no abortion provider In 2000, 86 of the country's 276 metropolitan areas and almost all nonmetropolitan areas had no abortion provider.
For statistics: http://220.127.116.11/search?q=cache:e1xrTOGRziUJ:www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3634/is_199811/ai_n8815506+%22number+of+abortion+providers+in+the+United+States%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3&client=firefox-a
Your link doesn't work. Please no sources from LifeSite or its likes. I believe you have a lot of wishful thinking.
Most Ob-Gyns perform abortions and most hospitals do as well. It is possible that you are so rural that you don't see it.
Here is the link.
Most hospitals DON'T perform abortions.
Cut and paste this link:
Ob-Gyns are probably not conisdered to be "abortion providers" ... but most Ob-Gyns will perform an abortion and can do them at hospitals they are affiliated with.
Most ob-gyns will refer for an abortion, but most don't do them.
In NJ, most hospitals do perform abortions - that's why I choose Catholic hospitals - they don't.
You interview a doctor before becoming a regular patient of his/hers, no? You could ask that question to the person directly.
They all know how, whether they personally perform them or not. Any OB/Gyn who does not know how to do a basic D&C should not be in practice.
Yes, but D&Cs are done for non-abortive purposes - treating incomplete miscarriages and excessive bleeding for instance.
Ob-gyns all know how but most choose not to perform abortions.
So, do you believe that performing infanticide should be required ov OB/GYNs during residency?
If it's legally prohibited, then it's an infringement alright. Posting the name of a rape victim is a disgusting thing to do, but we shouldn't restrict speech just because we find it distasteful.
I wonder how any of that is to be determined, and by what standard.
ahhh but does it also stop homsexuals in radical groups from publishing the names of those who sign Marriage Amendment petitions so they may be harrased by homosexuals. (ie if name appears then go to their house and chastise them for "homophobia")
I support abortion providers living in fear.
If you read the articles of secession of the southern states in 1860-1, most of them complain first and foremost about outsiders invading the south and illegally freeing slaves under cover of darkness with more or less force while the federal government looked the other way. Talk alone never gave anyone a reason to stop what they ought not be doing. I support the government looking the other way.
California can't govern the internet anyway.
That's exactly right - there are many reasons for doing them, but the procedure is the same. Interview the doctor; decide whether or not to use that doctor based on whether you see eye to eye.
I said, that type of doctor has to know how to perform a D&C. You might want to look into the other reasons they are a necessary part of the practice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.