Posted on 05/22/2023 6:21:59 PM PDT by marshmallow
SPRINGFIELD, Illinois (LifeSiteNews) — On May 10, SB 1909 was passed by both chambers of the state legislature, paving the way for further persecution of pregnancy resource centers by classifying their pro-life services as “unfair methods” of assisting expectant mothers. The bill now heads to the notoriously pro-abortion Democrat Gov. J.B. Pritzker for signing.
Democratic lawmakers claim that because the state allows for abortion on demand until viability, pregnancy centers seeking to serve both mothers and babies are infringing upon the “rights” of women to murder their unborn children. Under Illinois law, abortion is also legal for vague “health” exceptions until birth, funded by taxpayers through Medicaid and available for minors without parental consent.
“The laws and public policy of this State have established the fundamental rights of individuals to make autonomous decisions about their own reproductive health, including the fundamental right to use of refuse reproductive health care [sic],” the bill reads. “Despite these laws, vulnerable State residents and nonresidents seeking health care in this State have repeatedly been misled by organizations and their agents purporting to provide comprehensive reproductive health care services, but which, in reality, aim to dissuade pregnant persons [sic] from considering abortion care [sic] through deceptive, fraudulent, and misleading information and practices, without any regard for a pregnant person’s [sic] concerns or circumstances.”
After accusing pro-life pregnancy centers of promoting “misinformation,” the bill language amends the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act to include organizations that refuse to commit abortions.
“Limited services pregnancy center” is defined as “an organization or facility, including a mobile facility, that: does not directly provide abortions or provide or prescribe emergency contraception, and has no affiliation with any organization or provider who provides abortions or provides or prescribes emergency contraception and has a primary purpose to offer or................
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
Unconstitutional.
People do not have to promote any laws they oppose.
If so we must require all anti-gun groups to purchase and distribute firearms to anyone who asks for one.
The continuing societal damage done by the seven Scotus lawyers some fifty years since Roe v. Wade is incalculable.
Will they outlaw no-kill animal shelters too because they really, really want some dead kittens and puppies to go with the dead babies?
Why does Pritzker promote the killing of defenseless Americans?
Illinois ranks with Ca, NY, NJ, MD, and CT as communist cesspools...
Pritzker is demented.
Our state is now a cesspool of evil people, from feral teens to groomer teachers to legislators and a governor who promote and hasten the decay of civilized society.
It was much easier to have the feds act on, when they really couldn’t, the determination of the abortion issue. Leaving it to them took it out of the states and their responsibilities to their voters. Now the local government is going to have to be held responsible for actions concerning abortion and can’t pass the buck or kick it down the road. It’s right in their lap and they are going to have to act to please their voters. And that’s where the votes actually are counted.
wy69
Our state Supreme Court upheld a gun ban and gun registration, so I’m pretty sure it will.
Also,a few years back SCOTUS agreed to review a ruling made by the Massachusetts state Supreme Court on a 2nd Amendment case. In this case ("Caetano v Massachusetts) SCOTUS ruled,9-0,that the Massachusetts court's ruling upholding a conviction was "frivolous" and that the law it upheld was clearly a violation of Caetano's 2nd Amendment rights.
There are states...Illinois,Massachusetts and others...where politicians and judges cannot be relied upon to uphold rights enumerated by the US Constitution. But there's at least some hope when it comes to Federal courts.
Or, If I open an ER, advertised to help and cure injuries and sickness, will I be mandated to kill some patients?
Oh, I thought I was being smart, but Covid ‘treatment’ beat me to it.
Heres how they did it. “Using “science” as intellectual intimidation”:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FEADB8deeok
SCOTUS recently refused to hear our (IL) “assault rifle” ban and forced gun registry.
I have no faith in our court system right now. Period.
I think I recall that case. Wasn’t it that SCOTUS refused to hear it because a lower court was still considering it? I certainly could be be wrong on that.
Moloch must be fed.
No, the lower court considered it constitutional. I believe SCOTUS wanted the lower court to hear the appeal, but here in IL, it won’t change.
I’ll get an update the next time I go to my local gun shop/armory.
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.