Skip to comments.
Surgi Center: Abortion Clinic forced to allow both sides of the issue now
Being a part of the Good Friday -- Holy Saturday Prayer Vigil
| April 21, 2003
| Vanity -- topher
Posted on 04/21/2003 3:15:43 PM PDT by topher
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
There are two other aspects of Surgi Center that should receive Government attention.
One is that the abortionist, in this late term abortion, starts the procedure on one day, then releases his/her patient before the procedure is done, and then completes it the next day when the patient returns.
Sometimes these "patients" end up at the emergency ward at Grady Hospital or even Northside Hospital in Atlanta. But this is covered at Grady, at least, by people who know people in the emergency room at Grady Hospital.
The other problem with this Abortion Clinic is that there are rumors of Medicaid fraud. Dr. Malloy has a normal practice where he can charge Medicaid, and it has been found in the past that abortionists use a legitimate practice for delivering babies for changing abortion charges to.
How do we get the government to investigate and prevent such fraud? How can the women be better protected by sanity conditions? How can women be protected against abortionists who start a procedure on one day, and complete it on the next day -- releasing the patient inbetween?
1
posted on
04/21/2003 3:15:43 PM PDT
by
topher
To: topher
There were times in my earlier days when I was a little fuzzy on the right and wrong of abortion; not proud of that. Occasionally, Id see those protest signs which graphically depicted the realities of abortion. The pictures were so a shocking that I had to reject even thinking about them.
Consequently, I did not think about the subject at all. Later, when I examined the honest facts of abortion and all of its implications, without the shocking reality that caused me to recoil from the subject, I became a devout pro-lifer. How can we claim to be a beacon and purveyor of light and life to the world, while this atrocity at home continues?
IMHO, it is much more effective to enlighten someone with the truth, then to shock them with reality.
God bless you in your good work. For the ideals you fight for here at home, our brave men are fighting for abroad. You honor their sacrifices with your work.
2
posted on
04/21/2003 3:42:46 PM PDT
by
Search4Truth
(When a man lies, he murders part of the world.)
To: topher
"But the real meaning of choice is to allow women to have the "Right to Know""
BINGO!
3
posted on
04/21/2003 3:46:46 PM PDT
by
ALS
To: topher
I have a question:
If abortion clinics are required to give their patients information about adoption, etc., shouldn't adoption services be required to provide their clients with information about abortion? Should Catholic couseling services be required to hand out information about birth control?
4
posted on
04/21/2003 3:56:30 PM PDT
by
RonF
To: topher
read later
To: topher
This may be something yall have already covered but I have been thinking lately that these women also need to be aware of what happens to their aborted baby afterwards. They need to have a choice about donating the child to research or not and be aware of how much money PP will receive for their baby. This is a business (a horrible business, I know) and until it's not profitable they have no incentative to stop.
6
posted on
04/21/2003 4:02:02 PM PDT
by
CindyDawg
To: topher
Supposedly some of those were involved in witchcraft.Uh-huh. Love the solid "journalism" here.
Surprised you didn't have a thrilling expose' of an actual Black Mass.
7
posted on
04/21/2003 4:14:26 PM PDT
by
Illbay
To: Illbay
The individual in question boasts of her witchiness on her website, found
here. But like other apologists for abortion, I don't suppose you'd let the facts interfere with your prejudices.
8
posted on
04/21/2003 4:31:14 PM PDT
by
madprof98
To: madprof98
But like other apologists for abortion, I don't suppose you'd let the facts interfere with your prejudices.My, aren't we certain of our relative positions based on no data whatsoever?
FWIW, the only thing I'm prejudiced against is hyperbole and amateur journalism.
9
posted on
04/21/2003 4:45:44 PM PDT
by
Illbay
To: madprof98
The only comment I would have about the woman's web-page is, I wonder why a lesbian worries about "abortion rights?"
10
posted on
04/21/2003 4:48:14 PM PDT
by
Illbay
To: RonF
I have a question:
If abortion clinics are required to give their patients information about adoption, etc., shouldn't adoption services be required to provide their clients with information about abortion? Should Catholic couseling services be required to hand out information about birth control?
Well, let's look at it this way: abortion is a medical procedure. That part is not in dispute. With all medical procedures, doctors are normally obliged to give the patient all of the details involving steps in the procedure, health risks, AND alternatives, if there are any. In this case, the alternative would be to have the baby full term and, considering that the nature of abortion is generally such that the baby is unwanted, presenting that alternative would necessarily include what you can do with the live baby afterward (adoption, etc.). This course of action is not unreasonable to expect from a "medical" facility.
An adoption agency, however, has nothing to do with medical procedures. Their primary mission is to place live babies with families. For them to provide information promoting any medical procedure would be inappropriate, let alone a questionable one. Moreover, the adoption agency assumes a live baby and works from there, the two major alternatives being either keep the baby in the family, or give it away. Therefore, they have neither obligation nor authority to insert themselves into the process before the baby is born, otherwise you'd find adoption agency workers running around high schools handing out comdoms.
As far as the Catholic counseling goes, I think the answer to that is obvious. A religious organization should not be forced to violate their own beliefs. For-profit organizations (or even non-profit) that receive government (read taxpayer) money simply aren't guaranteed the same protections under the Constitution. Nothing more needs to be said about that.
A more crucial point, though, is that there is no way to seperate the moral aspect of the abortion question from the procedure itself. It is morally questionable and it violates the core beliefs of a great many people. Asking whether adoption agencies should have to give out abortion info as an alternative assumes that the two things are equal, but they are not, and therfore cannot be treated the same way. A clinic promoting a morally questionable act being required to present the question-free alternative of birth is not the same as an agency which services those who have made that moral choice being required to promote a morally questionable act.
11
posted on
04/21/2003 5:34:38 PM PDT
by
fr_freak
Comment #12 Removed by Moderator
To: RonF
Should doctors be used and allowed by our government to kill unwanted children?
To: Illbay
Because many women who have aborted because of the desertion of their fathers or their sexual mate become lesbians and they never have to worry about being pregnant again
To: topher
bump
To: Aunt Ina
I like your reply to RonF the best especially the "... dumbest stump ever to sprout". If you don't mind I may just use that one myself. LOL.
16
posted on
04/21/2003 9:18:03 PM PDT
by
cebadams
(much better than ezra)
To: RonF
Should Catholic couseling services be required to hand out information about birth control? posted by RonF If abortion is counted a 'rite' of the religion of Secular HUmanism ... but even that would not fit since the state cannot dictate what a religion may believe (that same old church and state issue, don'tcha know).
17
posted on
04/21/2003 9:18:58 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
To: fr_freak
In order for an adoption agency to place live babies with couples, they have to first get live babies. Adoption agencies get involved with the source of those babies before the birth of said babies all the time. Those babies are their product, and they need to make sure that they have a supply of babies or they don't make money. They want to make sure that they know where the babies are coming from, and they often want to make sure that the babies meet certain health standards. Sure, some are babies whose moms just walk in the front door, but a lot aren't. So it's in the interests of adoption agencies (an industry just as abortion providers are) to ensure that the kids are 1) born, and 2) given up. I doubt you'll hear them discuss the risks of childbirth with any single mother, or the mental health aspects of the years of later regret and guilt after giving their child up for adoption that many such women suffer.
18
posted on
04/22/2003 5:45:04 AM PDT
by
RonF
To: RonF
I have a question: If abortion clinics are required to give their patients information about adoption, etc., shouldn't adoption services be required to provide their clients with information about abortion? Should Catholic couseling services be required to hand out information about birth control?
Abortion Clinics are secular services. Catholic counseling is not.
It does not follow about adoption services requiring information about abortion. For one thing, abortion is against the ethics of the medical profession (the Hypocratic oath forbade killing and forbade giving women potions for abortions). This aspect of the Hypocratic oath -- almost 3200 years old -- sticks in the crawl of NOW and Planned Parenthood.
In the other place, Christians for 2000 years have been against birth control as being immoral. The exception in 2000 years in that in the 1930's certain prominient Protestant churches decided that Birth Control was okay.
But true Evangelical Christians are opposed to abortion. For Catholics, they have the support of the Pope, their Bishops and most of their priests (though not all).
One of the earliest church documents the Didache, also known as the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, forbade homosexuality and abortion, as well as infanticide.
The teachings of the Didache was rolled into the teachings of the church after the Council of Nicea -- which also gave Christians the Bible -- Old and New Testament.
So from a medical perspective, abortion is wrong (from a 3200 year tradition started with Hypocrates) and has always been wrong with Christians (and Jews) alike. The Chapter after the 10 commandments in the book of Exodus speaks of very harsh penalties for harming a pregnant woman and her baby (Exodux 21:22-26).
Islam also forbids abortion as well.
It is only in recent times that certain "Christian" religions have embraced both abortion, infanticide (Partial Birth Abortion), homosexuality, and birth control.
19
posted on
04/22/2003 6:09:39 AM PDT
by
topher
To: Illbay
Uh-huh. Love the solid "journalism" here. Surprised you didn't have a thrilling expose' of an actual Black Mass.
I had visited Darlene's website a while back. I am not an expert on witchcraft, but she had some interesting things in her website.
I just can't give first hand account that they are involved in witchcraft or solid evidence.
But some of these people would physically "force" the women into the abortion clinic, and not allow them to talk to the Pro-Lifers. If nothing else, they are interfering with the freedom of the women who are going to have an abortion, and they have very strong convictions about helping these women have abortions.
I would not want any of them to enter my house for fear of the evil they might bring with them, nor would I enter their house.
20
posted on
04/22/2003 6:15:05 AM PDT
by
topher
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson