Donate search
close

Share

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • send Email
  • print Print

Wait, Wasn’t This Supposed to be About Women’s Health?

Indiana’s Attorney General Curtis Hill has hastily appealed a recent ruling from pro-abortion federal judge Sarah Barker.  For almost two years, a dangerous abortion mill from Texas notorious for poor sanitation and health conditions has been fighting the state of Indiana over their licensing requirements.

Long story short, Indiana has passed laws requiring abortion clinics to meet basic health standards that medical facilities are required to meet, given that they are performing invasive and dangerous procedures on women.  The Orwellian named Whole Women’s Health of Texas doesn’t want to be forced to abide by those standards.  After all, they have been busted for multiple violations at their Texas facilities:

Health inspection reports show numerous problems with sterilizing and disinfecting instruments that were used on multiple women. The abortion chain also failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment at many of its Texas facilities, according to state inspection reports. State inspectors also found rusty spots on suction machines that had the “likelihood to cause infection” and other issues that put women’s health in jeopardy.

So it’s no surprise that Whole Women’s Health did not want to have to pass Indiana’s health and sanitation requirements in order to operate.  What is a surprise is that a woman judge, at the behest of a movement proclaiming themselves to be concerned with the health and well-being of women, did their bidding.

Whole Women’s Health is preparing to begin offering abortions with weeks – who needs time-consuming health and safety precautions in preparation when there’s money to be made?  And that’s the point, isn’t it?  Things would be so much easier if everyone could be honest that abortion is a multimillion-dollar industry.  Killing children for convenience is highly profitable for groups like Whole Women’s Health, Planned Parenthood, and others. 

It merely comes at the cost of dead innocent children and the endangering of women’s health and safety.  That’s a cost that Judge Barker finds agreeable, apparently, as she horrifically wrote in her opinion these chilling words:

“Finally, we hold that the state stands to lose little if an injunction is issued, but women in northern Indiana stand to lose a great deal if it is not.”

The state of Indiana will lose hundreds upon thousands of its children as well as the safety and security of hundreds upon thousands of women who now access this mill.  Don’t let anyone ever tell you this is a movement about the rights and well-being of women.

Share

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • send Email
  • print Print

Advertisement

More Top Stories

The Passion of the Zealots

A young person concerned about climate change joined sixteen year old Swedish activist Greta Thunberg at a congressional hearing this past week. Jamie Margolin is seventeen and part of a lawsuit filed …

My Advice to #StormArea51 Moonbats: Don’t Go

This is who awaits the caravan of moonbats. My advice to the idiots, the adventurous, and the curious today: Don’t Go. You’ll be glad you listened to me.

A Tale of Two Democrats

One is a surprisingly moderate, pragmatic politician. The other is running for President.