Abortion apocalypse: Denial of treatment for woman in danger and protection from intruders seems to be ‘pro-life’


Talking about the Arkansas Poll findings on attitudes toward abortion. Do you think some respondents might want to reconsider their feelings about the Arkansas ban if they knew this:

A Missouri woman was denied a medically necessary abortion

At 18 weeks, the woman, whose waters had broken, was told that her pregnancy was no longer viable and that she was at risk of a serious infection if she continued with the pregnancy. The Missouri hospital denied an abortion. She was forced to travel to Illinois to get one. Arkansas is subject to the same cruel law. Abortion is only allowed if a doctor is willing to say death is near.

Federal authorities have encouraged an investigation into whether Joplin Hospital violated federal law on emergency medical treatment and active labor. Good.

And from Louisiana, take that

The Louisiana Department of Health refuses to answer doctors’ questions about the state’s abortion ban, making it difficult for doctors to determine what medical care for pregnant women could expose them to charges criminals.

Health Department lead counsel Stephen Russo said his agency was not responsible for clearing up doctors’ confusion about when pregnancies can still be legally terminated. Instead, doctors with questions should contact Attorney General Jeff Landry’s office for help, he said.

Jeff Landry? You might as well ask for medical advice or advice on nuclear fission at Leslie Rutledge.

Several doctors said they did not feel comfortable contacting Landry’s office for clarification because the Republican attorney general sent a letter to all doctors in the state threatening to sue them. penalties if they violate the ban.

“As for the comfort of individual physicians contacting the GA, I suspect they would not [feel comfortable reaching out to him]said Dr. Joseph Biggio in an email response last week.

This is the situation in Arkansas. It’s awful. Families will suffer. Some will die. All in the name of the Arkansas State Religion as defined by the Arkansas Legislature.

Perhaps federal law will override state prohibitions in certain limited circumstances such as the Missouri case. But that assumes that facilities and doctors with the proper training are available to do the job.

And now is the perfect time to mention another anti-abortion case that was due to go to trial this week in Little Rock Circuit Court. It was a retrial of six out-of-state anti-abortion protesters who obstructed access to Little Rock’s only abortion clinic before the new ban forced it to close. . They were convicted in district court, but appealed their one-day jail sentences and $350 fines for misdemeanor trespassing. their lawyer, Republican attorney Clint Lancaster, asked for a delay because defendants charged in Arkansas face federal charges for blocking a clinic in Tennesse. One is also indicted in Washington, D.C. He said the outcome of the Arkansas case could be used against protesters in federal cases.

Judge Cathleen Compton reset a hearing in the Arkansas case on February 6.

I invite you to read Lancaster’s tendentious argument asking for a postponement of the case. It’s loaded with political rhetoric, totally unrelated to the simple question of whether his clients have blocked a clinic aisle.

NOW COMES the defendant, by and through counsel, and for his motion declares:

1. That this case involves individuals who advise women entering abortion clinics not to kill their unborn child in the hope that their words and actions will change the mind and heart of the mother and save the life of an innocent baby.

2. That since SCOTUS’ decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Justice Department, led by liberal workhorse Merrick Garland, has decided to use the DOJ’s civil rights division to prosecute those who stand in the way of people who want to murder their infants. to be born.

3. That to that end, the DOJ has begun charging people who are pro-life supporters.

Merrick Garland and the Little Rock police offer to enforce the law as written. The district court did it in Little Rock. Maybe one day a circuit court will do the same.

If intrusion were to be condoned in the name of free speech, as Lancaster seems to suggest, imagine what you could protest without fear of the law. PETA could block the evisceration station of a Tyson factory. A modern-day Carrie Nation could block the faucets of the flying saucer. Constitutionalists could block entry to the Arkansas Senate ahead of roll call on yet another unconstitutional bill.


Comments are closed.