Wednesday, October 13, 2010

40 Days, and the big threat

You've probably already heard that New York wants to require pro-life crisis pregnancy centers to disclose to their patients that they don't do abortions or provide abortion referrals:

The City Council plans to unveil legislation Tuesday that would establish strict disclosure requirements for crisis-pregnancy centers, some of which, abortion-rights advocates charge, deceive women into believing they're full-serve reproductive health facilities by masking their antiabortion agenda.

The legislation, backed by Speaker Christine Quinn, would require the centers to disclose to clients that they do not provide abortion services or contraceptive devices, or make referrals to organizations that do. Centers that don't have licensed medical providers onsite would also have to disclose that information.

Under the bill, the centers would be required to hang disclosure signs in their offices and post statements on websites and in advertisements.

Denounced by abortion-rights opponents as government harassment and a violation of their First Amendment rights, the legislation is similar to laws in Baltimore, Montgomery County, Md., and Austin, Tex. In Maryland, there are two pending lawsuits claiming the local laws violate free-speech rights. [...]

"These are anti-choice centers masquerading as health clinics," said Ms. Lapin, a Manhattan Democrat. "Women who are scared and vulnerable and having a very tough decision to make have a right to factually accurate medical information, and the fact that these folks would purposely try to mislead them is not right."

Ms. Lapin apparently believes that free ultrasounds and detailed scientific information about embryonic and fetal development is "anti-choice...factually inaccurate medical information."

The real reason the abortion industry's shills and kept women oppose crisis pregnancy centers is not because they are worried about inaccurate medical information being handed out. The real reason is because women who go to crisis pregnancy centers are unlikely to choose abortion--and for every woman who chooses to keep her baby instead of killing him, the billion-dollar abortion industry loses anywhere from $350-$900 for a first trimester abortion, and up to $3000 (or more) for a second trimester feticide.

So, for every 100 women who choose life, the abortion industry loses a minimum of $35,000. For every thousand women who choose life, the abortion industry loses a minimum of $350,000. Or, to look at it another way, if just 370 women per day of the 3,700 per day who kill their babies via abortion in America were to choose life for their babies instead, in one year the abortion industry would lose more than forty-seven million dollars of revenue. (370 x $350 x 365 = $47,267,500)

And if that number kept going up, pretty soon we're talking about real money.

I have an idea. If crisis pregnancy centers, which are non-profit, operate on shoestring budgets, and help hundreds of women choose life for their children every year are going to be required to disclose that they don't do abortions, how about we also require abortion clinics to disclose that they are not interested in helping women choose life and that in fact they have a financial interest in "selling" the women who enter their doors an abortion?

Maybe we could also make them disclose their profits, so that women would know ahead of time how much of that billion-dollar abortion industry slice the clinic she's going to earns each year. And the IRS could crack down of the habit some of these abortion clinics have of paying their abortionists in cash, so they won't be able to under-report their abortion earnings in order to keep from having to pay the federal income tax on the full amount.

The biggest threat to the abortion clinics of America doesn't come from the possibility that the legal climate will change--at least, not yet. The biggest threat to the abortion clinics of America involves women waking up and realizing that the clinics are a business, and that they exist to sell a rather expensive product--that, in fact, they profit off of the blood of the unborn humans they slaughter, and view the women who enter their chop-shops merely as customers. It involves these same women realizing that they actually do have a choice--and that the crisis pregnancy clinics, which are not selling anything and are only offering help and hope--are the ones who make the choice not to kill their unborn children a possibility.


Anonymous said...

The description "industry" is apt. I don't doubt that some providers view themselves as offering some sort of medical relief to the victims of abortion, but mostly, it's a paycheck they'll do just about anything to protect. Safe - meh, when we get around to it. Rare - don't even think about it.

kkollwitz said...

If the abortion industry has to fight fair it will lose.

I'm reminded of the title of Christopher Hitchens' book about the Clintons:

No One Left to Lie To

priest's wife said...

So- will the abortion clinics have to reveal that they don't offer alternatives to abortion?

Siarlys Jenkins said...

I suspect some of the crisis pregnancy centers do engage in a little well-intentioned deception, to lure genuinely undecided women in and then pour on the charm, or pressure, or whatever works, to make sure they do NOT choose to abort.

However, the pro-choice voices pushing this regulation doth protest too much. Yes, they do seem to think they will lose ground, which contains a strong implication that they think fewer abortions is an affront to themselves.

My solution would be a comprehensive Reproductive Services Truth in Advertising law. Any organization offering services related to pregnancy, or testing for possible pregnancy, would be required to post that they do / do not, offer pregnancy testing, ultrasound, adoption services, counselling, whether that counselling does or does not include contraception or abortion as options... A case might even be made in court that "equal protection of the laws" requires broadening any regulatory scheme to this level of comprehensive oversight.

Then, hopefully, there will be demand for agencies offering ALL of the above, or testing followed by a choice of counselling, and referral to agencies actually offering specific services, since abortion providers and pro-life adoptions agencies are never going to co-exist in the same building.