Join Our Community!
Share
Debate Forums > Abortion Debate Forum > So what's the scoop? Someone is lying... (Page 1)
User Profile
Q: So what's the scoop? Someone is lying...
asked by: Birch on July 24th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
Are they closed, or ain't they?

Quote:
South Dakota abortion clinic appears closed, despite Planned Parenthood denial

Sioux Falls, Jul 24, 2008 / 05:22 pm (CNA).- During what one pro-life advocate called “a great week in South Dakota for unborn children,” a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Sioux Falls, South Dakota has apparently closed. The abortion provider on the other hand, disputes the alleged closure.

Local pro-lifers believe that the clinic has closed its doors because it refuses to comply with a state informed consent law upheld by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals last month.

The South Dakota law requires any physician who performs an abortion to obtain “voluntary and informed written consent” from a woman seeking an abortion, except in cases of medical emergency. The woman must also be provided with information about the health risks and legal consequences of the procedure.

The information the woman must be provided includes the knowledge “that the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being” and “that the pregnant woman has an existing relationship with that unborn human being and that the relationship enjoys protection under the United States Constitution and under the laws of South Dakota.” Further, she must be informed “that by having an abortion, her existing relationship and her existing constitutional rights with regards to that relationship will be terminated.”

The state law went into effect on Saturday after an attempted injunction filed by Planned Parenthood was rejected on July 17. A spokesman for pro-life protest groups outside the Sioux Falls Planned Parenthood location said that even though women who had apparently scheduled appointments appeared at the clinic, no abortionists arrived.

“I think Planned Parenthood cannot figure out a way not to comply with the law," said Dr. Allan Unruh, a leader in the state’s Vote Yes for Life campaign, WorldNetDaily reports.

We don't know if they will open again," he said. "Personally, I don't think they are going to find any abortionists who want to take the risk of losing their license."

Leslee Unruh, the Founder of the Alpha Center Pregnancy Center in Sioux Falls, on Thursday told CNA that the abortion clinic continues to be closed. She noted that pro-life counselors have talked with several of the clinic clients scheduled to have abortions this week.

“One for sure has changed her mind and is going to have the child,” said Unruh, who has advocated on behalf of the informed consent legislation.

“It’s historical, it’s wonderful what is happening. We’re hoping the other states will follow our lead and put the same laws in through their legislatures that can also shut down abortion clinics this way,” she continued. “It’s a great week in South Dakota for unborn children.”

However, Kathi Di Nicola, a Planned Parenthood spokesperson based out of Minnesota, flatly denied that the clinic was closed.

“That is absolutely false. We are open and committed to providing for women’s health services in South Dakota,” she said.

When asked whether abortion services were still be provided at the Souix Falls clinic, Di Nicola responded affirmatively.



http://catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13 350

I posted this because you've got a Catholic news source saying one thing, and PP saying the diametrically opposite. What's the deal? Someone is lying. If they aren't closed, and their website doesn't indicate that, then the individuals quoted in this press release are 100% lying.

I think it's another tale of prolife lying tactics taken from Paragraph 1, section A of the prolife advocate handbook: Lie to get the propaganda across at all costs.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Replies(31)
Avatar
aochriss
replied on July 26th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
I read a book by a doctor who performs abortions. She said her clinic did this, too, they made it look like they weren't open by having the staff sleep over in the office, but they were actually open and receiving patients.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
anniek
replied on July 28th, 2008
Experienced User
I don't live very far away from SF about 2 hours and as far as I know they are open. I have friends who live there. I've never heard they had closed their doors. Who knows maybe they changed some things had to close their doors for a little bit to implement these changes and someone took it as being closed for good.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Birch
replied on July 28th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
aochriss wrote:
I read a book by a doctor who performs abortions. She said her clinic did this, too, they made it look like they weren't open by having the staff sleep over in the office, but they were actually open and receiving patients.


Hey-sous-christo. It's an [insert expletive here] MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT!

Obscene that in 21st century U.S. people have to do this kind of thing.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
aochriss
replied on August 5th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
I agree 1 million percent.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
Few
replied on August 6th, 2008
Experienced User
Birch wrote:
aochriss wrote:
I read a book by a doctor who performs abortions. She said her clinic did this, too, they made it look like they weren't open by having the staff sleep over in the office, but they were actually open and receiving patients.


Hey-sous-christo. It's an [insert expletive here] MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT!

Obscene that in 21st century U.S. people have to do this kind of thing.
than what is all the fuss over female circumcision if that is done at medical establishments?
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
motherofhighspiritedones
replied on August 7th, 2008
Moderator
Female circumsision is NOT done at medical establishments. Female circumsision is often performed in THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES where people dont have medical establishments. And the so-called doctors are not really doctors, therefore you cannot call it a medical establishment.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Sydney123456
replied on August 7th, 2008
Experienced User
Well, to be perfectly fair...there are women (for example, living in America) who have the circumsion done on the younger females at medical establishments if they can. A lot of establishments/docs won't perform it though in the US.

The rest of what you say it true however; mostly done in Africa. Frequently performed by a member of the community of the area; even worse, if they can't find anything sharp, they use broken glass or other contaminated utensils.

**Edit: I claimed it was a Muslim practice, when really it is practiced by many religions within Africa.
**Edit AGAIN: FRICK! I said it was exclusively done in Africa...it's MOSTLY done there, but also in other areas.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
motherofhighspiritedones
replied on August 7th, 2008
Moderator
Wow you learn something new every day. I did not think that female circumsision was being performed in the US!!! However, if abortion was not available, I think females would be subjected to just as worse conditions (medical) by going to unauthorized medical establishments, DIY, etc. just to abort. That is why I do believe that having a readily available licensed medical staff for abortions shoud be a necessity. So that women don't screw themselves up by having a shady abortion done.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
Few
replied on August 7th, 2008
Experienced User
motherofhighspiritedones wrote:
Female circumsision is NOT done at medical establishments. Female circumsision is often performed in THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES where people dont have medical establishments. And the so-called doctors are not really doctors, therefore you cannot call it a medical establishment.
someone is lying. just because circumcision sometimes is not done at a medical establishments does not mean circumcision cannot or is not done at medical establishments.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
Few
replied on August 7th, 2008
Experienced User
motherofhighspiritedones wrote:
Wow you learn something new every day. I did not think that female circumsision was being performed in the US!!! However, if abortion was not available, I think females would be subjected to just as worse conditions (medical) by going to unauthorized medical establishments, DIY, etc. just to abort. That is why I do believe that having a readily available licensed medical staff for abortions shoud be a necessity. So that women don't screw themselves up by having a shady abortion done.
women are not required to have abortions. and if abortion was not available the only thing that they would be subjected to is the children that they are intended to bear.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Birch
replied on August 8th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
The only thing female circumsision has in common with abortion is that providers of circumsision and prolife advocates are both interested in the submission of the female gender to their fantasies.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
Few
replied on August 8th, 2008
Experienced User
Birch wrote:
The only thing female circumsision has in common with abortion is that providers of circumsision and prolife advocates are both interested in the submission of the female gender to their fantasies.
the providers of circumcision and the providers of abortion are doctors. and neither of which have anything to do with prolife advocates.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
motherofhighspiritedones
replied on August 8th, 2008
Moderator
Few wrote:
motherofhighspiritedones wrote:
Wow you learn something new every day. I did not think that female circumsision was being performed in the US!!! However, if abortion was not available, I think females would be subjected to just as worse conditions (medical) by going to unauthorized medical establishments, DIY, etc. just to abort. That is why I do believe that having a readily available licensed medical staff for abortions shoud be a necessity. So that women don't screw themselves up by having a shady abortion done.
women are not required to have abortions. and if abortion was not available the only thing that they would be subjected to is the children that they are intended to bear.

MOST women are also not REQUIRED to be circumsised. And who says that a particular woman INTENDS to bear a child.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
motherofhighspiritedones
replied on August 8th, 2008
Moderator
Few wrote:
motherofhighspiritedones wrote:
Female circumsision is NOT done at medical establishments. Female circumsision is often performed in THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES where people dont have medical establishments. And the so-called doctors are not really doctors, therefore you cannot call it a medical establishment.
someone is lying. just because circumcision sometimes is not done at a medical establishments does not mean circumcision cannot or is not done at medical establishments.

Well, no kidding? Really? Already answered that post.
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
motherofhighspiritedones
replied on August 8th, 2008
Moderator
Few wrote:
Birch wrote:
The only thing female circumsision has in common with abortion is that providers of circumsision and prolife advocates are both interested in the submission of the female gender to their fantasies.
the providers of circumcision and the providers of abortion are doctors. and neither of which have anything to do with prolife advocates.

NOT EVEN GOING THERE.....
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Birch
replied on August 8th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
Few wrote:
Birch wrote:
The only thing female circumsision has in common with abortion is that providers of circumsision and prolife advocates are both interested in the submission of the female gender to their fantasies.
the providers of circumcision and the providers of abortion are doctors. and neither of which have anything to do with prolife advocates.


I beg your pardon. The providers of circumcision are not always doctors. For males in the Jewish religion they are called "mohels". Muslims use a similar system.

Female circumsicion is never performed by physicians and if a doctor provides such a service they are held legally accountable and charges are pressed.

I assert that prolife advocates and individuals who perform FGM are both solely interested in the submission and prostration of women. Both wish for women to submit to their will.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
Few
replied on August 8th, 2008
Experienced User
Birch wrote:
Few wrote:
Birch wrote:
The only thing female circumsision has in common with abortion is that providers of circumsision and prolife advocates are both interested in the submission of the female gender to their fantasies.
the providers of circumcision and the providers of abortion are doctors. and neither of which have anything to do with prolife advocates.


I beg your pardon. The providers of circumcision are not always doctors. For males in the Jewish religion they are called "mohels". Muslims use a similar system.

Female circumsicion is never performed by physicians and if a doctor provides such a service they are held legally accountable and charges are pressed.

I assert that prolife advocates and individuals who perform FGM are both solely interested in the submission and prostration of women. Both wish for women to submit to their will.
i am guessing that you have never been to egypt where female circumcision by medical professionals is a farly common occurance. and how on earth could a doctor be held legally responsible for circumcision if circumcision is never performed by doctors?
Did you find this post useful?
|
Avatar
Mabel
replied on August 8th, 2008
Moderator
Few wrote:
women are not required to have abortions. and if abortion was not available the only thing that they would be subjected to is the children that they are intended to bear.


Who decides what children I am 'intended' to bear?

Additionally, just because abortion isn't legal doesn't mean women aren't still doing it.

aochris give up some of your statistics on this, please tiphat
Did you find this post useful?
|
User Profile
Birch
replied on August 8th, 2008
Extremely eHealthy
Few wrote:
Birch wrote:
Few wrote:
Birch wrote:
The only thing female circumsision has in common with abortion is that providers of circumsision and prolife advocates are both interested in the submission of the female gender to their fantasies.
the providers of circumcision and the providers of abortion are doctors. and neither of which have anything to do with prolife advocates.


I beg your pardon. The providers of circumcision are not always doctors. For males in the Jewish religion they are called "mohels". Muslims use a similar system.

Female circumsicion is never performed by physicians and if a doctor provides such a service they are held legally accountable and charges are pressed.

I assert that prolife advocates and individuals who perform FGM are both solely interested in the submission and prostration of women. Both wish for women to submit to their will.
i am guessing that you have never been to egypt where female circumcision by medical professionals is a farly common occurance. and how on earth could a doctor be held legally responsible for circumcision if circumcision is never performed by doctors?


I said if a physician performs FGM/circumsicion they are prosecuted. Much in the same way "if" a physician performs an illegal abortion they are prosecuted.

"I am guessing" you are not up on the news that in 2007 Egypt banned FGM/circumcision.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_ea st/6251426.stm
Did you find this post useful?
|
12 >>
Quick Reply
Search