In our country there are many types of
restaurants. Some cater to the wealthy,
some to the frugal. But all are free to
go to and eat from these establishments provided they can pay the price.
To ensure public health, whether for rich or poor,
each of these restaurants are required to meet basic health guidelines for
cleanliness, preparation of their product, proper disposal of waste and other
conditions. They are routinely inspected
and verified to be in compliance.
There
is also a mechanism for a restaurant to be reported by customers. Should any restaurant repeatedly fail, they
can ultimately be closed.
Is this a legitimate role for government? Of course it is. Ensuring public health by regulating the food
industry is necessary and warranted.
But imagine with me that there was an exception to
the aforementioned standards. One chain
of restaurants, a fast food place that is most commonly found in poorer and
minority communities, does not have to meet these criteria. It is not required to meet basic health
standards for cleanliness—no requirement to wash or sterilize their
dishes. This restaurant can serve cat,
horse, kangaroo or any other kind of meat they want and call it beef. They don’t have to dispose of their waste
like all the other restaurants but can leave it sitting around for as long as
they want. Of course if anyone asks,
they say they’re doing it right, but since there are no inspections allowed,
it’s hard to say what is going on. All
it does is provide cheap, affordable and tasty food.
Would there be any public outcry? Would there be any charges of racism,
discrimination or economic targeting?
There should be.
More at home, however, would you want to eat
there? What if your daughter wanted to
go there for her birthday because they have the best fries or playground? Would you take her? When she moves away to go to college and she
has limited money, would you want her going to this place on her own?
What if there are numerous customer complaints,
health incidents, employee whistleblowers who come forward decrying what’s
going on in the food chain and even people dying?
Should the government step in and require
health standards and inspections?
Surely, that should be a no brainer.
Then you find out that this restaurant chain
donates big money to politicians for protection from any regulation. Whenever anyone proposes regulation
legislation, these politicians are right there to defend the chain’s
exemption. Would you be outraged? Would you demand action from your government
and want the exemption revoked? Would
you believe the charges against regulation from politicians on their payroll?
Even though you would never take your daughter
there, does that mean other’s health and safety are not important?
You’re probably reading this thinking I’m kidding,
that such a restaurant doesn’t really exist.
Well you’re right… kind of. It’s
not a restaurant.
The name of the chain, you ask? Planned Parenthood and other Abortion Clinics
which are not held to the basic health and safety standards for surgical
procedures. These clinics have largely
gone unregulated, uninspected due to political pressure and money since 1973. The Gosnell trial in Philadelphia and the similar
trial in Houston, TX are only recent highlights of just how
much of a threat to women’s health unregulated abortion clinics can be. Sadly, these are only recent examples.
The full number of women who have died, been
sterilized, contracted a disease or injured in other ways is unknown because
the government turns a political blind eye to what goes on in such
clinics. Because the right to an
abortion (and the money generated from it—never forget that) in the name of
women’s health is really more important the actual health practice of the
facility in terms of standards of sterilization of equipment and emergency
protocols required of all similar surgical facilities.
According to this
article, 37 of 42 abortion clinics in Texas may close; due
to the new law just signed by Gov. Rick Perry.
Abortion funded politicians decry this as an assault on women. I look at that number and cringe, thinking
that 37 clinics that are supposed to serve women’s “health” do not meet basic
health standards for clinic and doctor related care. The fact that the government allowed such
places to stay open so long should scare you and infuriate you, certainly more
than you were getting upset over a fast food chain.
If your love for abortion prevents you from seeing
this truth, then you are the one truly unconcerned with women’s health.
Opponents charge:
“Proponents of this bill are not really concerned about women’s
health,” Carla Holeva, CEO of Planned Parenthood of West Texas, said in a
statement. “This bill places onerous requirements on health centers,
requirements that do nothing to improve the health or safety of women.”What are some of those “onerous requirements?”
- (1) the
construction and design, including plumbing, heating, lighting,
ventilation, and other design standards necessary to ensure the
health and safety of patients;--
(This is truly a terrible and unreasonable expectation)
- (2) the
qualifications of the professional staff and other personnel;
(you mean they can no longer use volunteers with no medical training to assist with medical procedures? How offensive)
- (3) the
equipment essential to the health and welfare of the patients;
(they have to have proper medical equipment—how could politicians demand something so outrageous?)
- (4) the
sanitary and hygienic conditions within the center and its
surroundings; and
(they’re making them wash and sanitize things—they must hate women)
- (5) a
quality assurance program for patient care.
(follow up to make sure the women have been well cared for and are truly recovered from the procedure and not left to bleed out on a table—that’s too much to ask of any clinic isn’t it?)
I am
thankful this new law has gone into effect—the lives of many innocent children
will be saved. The lives of many women
will be saved as well.
This article shows that the only reason these
clinics are open is to perform abortion.
All of the other “services” they provide are not important to stay open—mostly
because they are not money makers. It’s
not like the organization doesn’t have the money, they’re just more interested
in abortion than “women’s health”
