From Leon H. Wolf at RedState.com:
None of the abortion advocates who constantly and perpetually moan about these regulations have ever offered any convincing reason why abortion as a surgical procedure should be treated differently on the merits from any other outpatient surgery such that these regulations are fair as applied to ortho clinics performing knee arthroscopies or cardiac catheterization labs but not as applied to abortions. …
Look, everyone who operates a business gets their ox gored by the regulatory state from time to time. When literally anything other than abortion is at issue, liberals always view these regulations as good and necessary things – especially when they even potentially deal with health and safety. In those cases, liberals assure us, no cost is too great for private industry to bear – the people must be protected! Cost-benefit analysis be damned!
But when it’s abortion clinics’ turn to comply with the same health and safety regulations that apply to everyone else, suddenly it’s a political witch hunt and the worst thing that has ever happened to women. And, paradoxically, it’s also an attempt to send women back to the days when getting an abortion was unsafe. These two things are often said in the same article with no sense of irony or shame.
The reason is simple: they have no interest in the safety of women. Their only interest is in the legality of abortion.
Read the whole thing here.
If abortion advocates were really concerned about the health and safety of women, one would think that they would be fighting to stamp out abuses and improve the standard of care in abortion clinics. Instead they have repeatedly fought efforts to regulate clinics or implement other common-sense measures — such as screening for coercion and pre-existing risk factors for post-abortion psychological problems — that would protect the rights, health and lives of women facing abortion.
Further, evidence of physical and psychological harm to women is routinely dismissed and attacked by abortion advocates and their allies. Nancy Russo, a spokesperson for the American Psychological Association, admitted that a study linking abortion to increased rates of mental health problems among women (a study conducted by a pro-choice researcher, no less) would have no effect on the APA’s position on abortion because “to pro-choice advocates, mental health effects are not relevant to the legal context of arguments to restrict access to abortion.”
Kermit Gosnell, the Back Alley and the Front Door
Exception or Rule? Gosnell’s “House of Horrors” Not So Rare
Abortionists Are Not Held Accountable for Mistakes
Forced to Abort? Don’t Count on Clinics to Help