Archive for Thursday, April 8, 2010

Parkinson has until next week to decide what to do with abortion legislation

April 8, 2010


— Kansas Gov. Mark Parkinson has another week to decide whether he’ll veto a bill that rewrites a state law regulating late-term abortions.

Parkinson received the bill Monday from the Legislature and has until April 15 to act. He also could sign it or let the measure become law without his signature.

Spokesman Seth Bundy wouldn’t speculate Thursday on what action is planned by Parkinson, an abortion rights Democrat.

The bill would require doctors to report more detailed information to the state about the late-term abortions they perform.

Also, patients or their family members could sue a doctor if they had evidence that a late-term abortion was illegal under Kansas law.


Stuart Evans 8 years, 1 month ago

this bill should be aborted. We are all giving entirely too much information to the government as is.

Ernest Barteldes 8 years, 1 month ago

Last time I checked, Roe Vs. Wade was still in effect. Let's keep religion away from the state. Ah, that one is in the Constitution too, in case the religious right has forgotten

Richard Payton 8 years, 1 month ago

Then what about health care forcing someone to get it. The Christian Scientist should be forced because Obama mandates it? What about separation from religion now!

think_about_it 8 years, 1 month ago

Can you point me to where that is in the Constitution?

Larry Bauerle Jr. 8 years, 1 month ago

"Last time I checked, Roe Vs. Wade was still in effect."

True, but you need to read the Court's decision. It said states DO have the right to regulate access in the last trimester.

eudora_girl 8 years, 1 month ago

So the legislature, who is not in favor of health care reform, does not want the Federal government to come between you and your doctor - but the legislature is in favor of coming between a woman and her doctor. Hypocrites.

9070811 8 years, 1 month ago

yes yes yes! O, the hypocrisy of the GOP....

werekoala 8 years, 1 month ago


good point. But see, it's only bad if the government is making sure that children can have access to health care.... that would be SOSHULIZM, and a Bad Thing.

It's TOTALLY different when the government is making sure that women CAN'T have health care. That's a Good Thing, because it forces those dirty filthy women to face the consequences of their depravity. After all, what is going to keep women meek and subservient to a man if they have control over their own reproductive systems? Next thing, they'll want the vote!

After all, just because some Kansas Konservatives want to force women to bear children, doesn't mean they want to see those same children get medical care!

I think it was Jesus who said, "suffer the children to come unto me, and yea, I shall deny their claims..."

oldvet 8 years, 1 month ago

Ah yes, let's put Kansas back at the front for places to bring your viable child to have him/her murdered. Kansas, as violent as you think...

verity 8 years, 1 month ago

So I could [hypothetically, since I got no dog in that fight anymore] have an abortion, then I or [hypothetically] Uncle Pete or Grandma Susie or little sister Janie could decide that it was illegal and sue the doctor that I [hypothetically] asked to perform an [hypothetical] abortion on me?

If this law goes into effect, it will be challenged before the ink is dry and I doubt it will hold up. Opinion from someone who knows about law?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.