Breaking News
Loading...
Wednesday, March 9, 2011




So I finished the book that I reviewed/ranted about a couple weeks ago. Learned a lot and I highly recommend. Makes you very angry about the state of pro-choice affairs, especially internationally. And though I really don't need another reason to hate antis even more, I found one thanks to Christina Page. I'm even shocked that I, in my infinite wisdom, hadn't though of it before.


Why can docs/pharmacists opt out of learning about abortion/performing life-saving abortion services/writing scripts for or dispensing contraceptives, but pro-choice professionals can't opt out of reading the slime to their patients that abortion takes the life of a "little, tiny" person that is a separate being independent of the woman carrying it?

Take a look at all the states that have so-called "conscience clauses", reserving the right of providers and pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs. Consider a doctor in, say, THE GREAT STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, where the conscience clause exists, plus doctors are required to read this tripe to patients before an abortion:


Why can't that doctor refuse, based on his/her deeply-held scientific - or even religious - conviction, to speak to something that s/he does not believe? CAN THIS CASE NOT BE MADE?! WHY CAN'T WE TAKE THIS TO COURT?!

Legitimate questions, not just my own anger speaking. Why has this point not been brought up or acted on? (or am I just unaware?) It seems airtight to me, but then again I have common sense. THOUGHTS?!


0 comments:

Post a Comment