In October, the Supreme Court of the United States temporarily blocked a provision in HB2 requiring abortion mills to meet the same health and safety standards as ambulatory surgical centers. In the same opinion, SCOTUS also gave abortionists at two abortion mills in the Rio Grande Valley a pass on the admitting privileges requirement, which now applies to every other abortionist in the state. When the SCOTUS handed down this decision, liberal media trumpeted headlines praising the decision as a “reprieve” for women seeking the “right to choose.” What these publications – and abortion advocates across the state – refuse to recognize, however, is that unregulated abortion practices are sub-par medical procedures and dangers to women.
“The U.S. Supreme Court gave Texas women a tremendous victory today,” said the president of the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights, which initiates legal battles seeking to overturn Pro-Life laws, rules, and regulations in the states. Is the overturning of provisions specifically designed to safeguard women a victory, though?
Based on their own rhetoric, one would think that abortion advocates would stand behind any form of legislation that demanded higher standards—measures that would ensure abortion is routine, safe, and uneventful to fulfill their propaganda. Instead, abortion advocates have sacrificed women's health in favor of “access” that will enrich abortionists and endanger pregnant women. The failure of so-called “feminists” to stand behind the pro-woman provisions of HB2 speaks volumes about the real principles and motives governing the anti-Life movement.
Abortion advocates claim that the SCOTUS ruling affirms the “right to choose,” but HB2 never considered eliminating that contrived right. Without HB2 in effect, women are assured this “right to choose” abortion mills that are ill-equipped to respond to emergencies, not to mention other health and safety standards. Do women have the “right to choose” equal standards of health care across the board when they seek out an abortion facility or treatment of a miscarriage—or a botched abortion? They do not.
Women avail themselves of this so-called “right to choose” abortion in Texas, but as long as the abortion lobby obstinately insists that abortion is health care, they will need to start backing up that assertion by advocating that abortionists and abortion facilities are held to the same standards as real doctors and real medical facilities. Pro-woman? No. Pro-profit, pro-agenda, and pro-abortion? Indeed.
