Letters to the Editor

Stand clarified

June 30, 2011


To the editor:

In the June 27 Associated Press article, “Abortion clinic regulations get more detailed,” Kansas abortion opponents misrepresent the National Abortion Federation’s Clinical Policy Guidelines (CPGs) in their attempts to justify the state’s new onerous and unnecessary abortion regulations.

Our CPGs are evidence-based and set the standard for quality abortion care in North America.

The Kansas regulations, on the other hand, do not ensure safe patient care. By imposing numerous and unreasonable rules on abortion providers — including dictating the room temperature and exact sizes of cabinets and janitorial closets — they just make it more difficult for abortion providers to remain open and for women to access the abortion care they need.

Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures provided in the United States due in large part to the skill and expertise of abortion providers who offer high-quality care. There is no medical justification for imposing new regulations on abortion providers in Kansas, and certainly nothing in our CPGs to support targeting abortion providers in this way.

The new Kansas regulations are politically motivated and are not about ensuring that abortion care is “safe.” They are about ensuring that abortion care is non-existent.


P Allen Macfarlane 6 years, 10 months ago

I always love it when conservatives (read that as Republicans) talk about the need for less regulation and control over the lives of individuals. This is one of many instances where they are definitely more controlling than the Democrats.

rtwngr 6 years, 10 months ago

If you don't like it, too bad. We don't like the "murder for money" that you all seem to justify under human rights. What a joke! You allow the dismembering of a child in the womb and then lecture us? Sorry, there is no moral high ground here on which you can stand.

Crazy_Larry 6 years, 10 months ago

Hey, idiot, we all die eventually. Why don't you just mind your own bees wax and everything will be just fine. The quicker you get to heaven the better off we'll be.

Cait McKnelly 6 years, 10 months ago

This is the kind of attitude and statement that will make judges sit up and take notice when this comes before the courts. It won't take much for the clinics to prove that these regulations have nothing to do with "patient safety" and everything to do with harassing, limiting, restricting and shutting down women's clinics.

Kathy Theis-Getto 6 years, 10 months ago

You are so right, cait. They may have a tough time proving equality discrimination, but based on due process, or the lack thereof - I believe the clinics will prevail.

Cai 6 years, 10 months ago

So....you'll murder for free then?

In order to regulate it properly, it needs to be legal, and have avenues which are legally able to provide the service. If you don't, then women will turn to the illegal, non-regulated, not nearly as safe, not job creating (etc) black market.

And we end up, statistically, with more children in foster care, more children in state custody, more children abused (both before and after the state took custody), more children neglected, and more money (which, historically, right wingers haven't supported) required to keep them happy and healthy.

Moreover, this regulation and law flies in the face of what conservatives and right wings are supposed to stand for - limited regulation, limited government involvement.

Besides, the way to stop abortions is to INCREASE education and availability of protections and birth control. People, married, unmarried, college age, teens, adults, elders, rich, and poor will all continue to have sex. Its a biological imperative, and we're not all going to forego that biological imperative for God. Like it or not, most of us aren't even going to try.

Moral highground is absolutely worthless when the people below you are suffering.

Jimo 6 years, 10 months ago

"Sorry, there is no moral high ground here on which you can stand."

This from a perv who can't keep his hands out of women's bodies.

Getaroom 6 years, 10 months ago

rtwngr, sounds like you feel you are standing high on the mountain of morality. You better step down a fair bit, it seems you have gone deaf from the altitude. Narrow minded does as narrow minded is.

somedude20 6 years, 10 months ago

OK, you don't like abortion and I agree, what is to like other than it is a personal choice for her or them not anyone else. You say to be careful, that abortion is not needed but then you cut the funding for birth control resources which (as I hope you know) that BC helps to eliminate the need of an abortion by stopping the egg and cream from mixing and making a fetus. If you are a fan of math, let me give you a problem No access to BC + No access to get an abortion = http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/jun... Yeah, I bet your mythical god will love that!

Bob Forer 6 years, 10 months ago

To those of you who are against abortions, the answer is simple: don't have one. And as a man who will never have to face an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy, what a woman does with her body is none of my damned business.

Cai 6 years, 10 months ago

unless she's YOUR woman, right on!

Cant_have_it_both_ways 6 years, 10 months ago

The guy that had a couple of beers intends on killing no one. The woman that goes to an abortion clinic went there for the very reason of killing someone.

Lets see, if you need a lock out device for DUI, would it be fair to say, while they are in there digging out the kid, you get spade. Lets call getting spade a "Lock out device" for unwanted babies. I don't want to hear rape or incest arguments, these are different.

Isn't it a wonderful world when you can pass judgment on someone else, while things that benefit you are just fine?

You cant have it both ways.

Cai 6 years, 9 months ago

thats a fundamental piece of the argument though. not everyone agrees with you that a fetus is a person at the same point. does it happen at conception? ...3 months? 6 months?

regardless of your opinion, its clear that not everyone agrees with you. thus, congress (state or federal) can't classify it as a murder or homicide in the legal sense.

as far as 'killing someone' goes, thats....harsh.

you also don't want to hear arguments about rape or incest (which...I'd disagree with the incest bit. 'f It was voluntary on both sides incest, I'm not sure it should be deserving of 'special' case rules like rape would be).

But wouldn't those women still be 'killing someone' who hasn't committed any crime? Yes, these are special cases. Fine. But either you're now justifying 'killing someone' that's innocent, or you're acknowledging that it's simply not the same. Either way, it's clear that the debate has a long way to go.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.