Skip to content

SC’s Governor and VA’s Attorney General: For The Children

August 26, 2010

My latest post at RedState:

This past week, Republican South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and Republican Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli displayed how the GOP is the party who is actually For The Children, and not just in the talking points way. First up was Governor Mark Sanford, who signed bill H 3245 into law. The law now requires that women have a 24 hour waiting period before obtaining an abortion. Prior to this law, there was only a one hour waiting period. It also requires that abortionists offer women the ability to see their unborn child on an ultrasound before aborting the baby, but does not require that they view the ultrasound. They must merely be given the choice. Choice is important, right? Next, came Virginia Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, who concluded last week that state agencies in Virginia can legally regulate abortion clinics as medical establishments.

This should just be common sense and shouldn’t raise the ire of even the most vociferously pro-abortion, right? I mean, it does not make abortion illegal, but it does make it safer – and hopefully rarer. Safe, legal and rare is the mantra, no? Apparently, by safe, legal and rare, pro-abortionists really only mean one out of the three. They actually want it to be unsafe, legal, and not rare at all. As is indicated by their fierce opposition to such simple, decent and potentially life-saving measures.

Governor Sanford had this to say when he signed the new South Carolina law:

“I believe life is sacred, and in the debate over when life begins, I think we as a society should always err on the side of life,” Gov. Sanford said. “Given current federal law, I think it’s imperative that a decision of this magnitude only be made with the fullest and most accurate knowledge available. It’s our hope and expectation that this new law results in a substantial decrease in the number of abortions carried out in South Carolina.

How draconian, huh? I thought knowledge was power? Not so for pro-abortionists. They are infuriated over a mere 24 hour waiting period. In most states, the waiting period to simply obtain a marriage license is longer than that. Ideally, a marriage lasts a lifetime, but an abortion always does – there is no going back. Once a life is taken, it is gone. Forever. Is it too much to ensure that a woman take ONE DAY to contemplate it? A woman who may be scared and make a rash decision due to said fear – a decision that not only takes a life, but will haunt her for the rest of hers. Taking just those 24 hours of contemplation may save both those lives.

In Virginia’s case, it is clearly a measure of safety. Abortion clinics, often functioning as mills, are not regulated in Virginia as medical establishments. As such, they have no standards of safety to meet.  Says a spokesman for AG Cuccinelli:

“The state has long regulated outpatient surgical facilities and personnel to ensure a certain level of protection for patients. There is no reason to hold facilities providing abortion services to any lesser standard for their patients,” said Brian J. Gottstein, a spokesman for Mr. Cuccinelli.

“Even pharmacies, funeral homes and veterinary clinics are regulated by the state,” he said.

Right. How is it safe – at all – to have no standards for abortion clinics? According to NARAL, safety is no big whoop. What concerns them is that some clinics may not meet those standards and will have to close.

Abortion-rights advocates said they are not surprised by Cuccinelli’s decision and predicted that if the Board of Health acts on his opinion, the regulations could prompt the shutdown of 17 of the state’s 21 clinics performing abortions.

“We’ve been waiting for the attorney general to take on abortion providers, and it looks like this is his first pitch,” said Tarina Keene, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia. “These so-called regulations are only an attempt to shut down abortion clinics in the Commonwealth of Virginia.”

Good. That should help with both the whole safe and rare idea. Plus, maybe it’s just me, but even if you are pro-abortion wouldn’t you think that if a facility can’t meet minimal safety standards, then they should be forced to close? Excuse me, what am I thinking. That requires common sense, decency and actual concern for women, which is utterly lacking in the pro-abortion agenda. Susan B. Anthony List’s President Marjorie Dannenfelser’s debate with NARAL’s Tarina Keene about AG Cuccinelli’s decision proves it:

By the way, the Democrat nominee for Governor in South Carolina, Sheheen, declined to answer any questions about South Carolina’s new law. Again – there is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat.

Polling indicates that more and more Americans are identifying as Pro-Life and that changing hearts and minds is working. Now, so is changing laws.

May it continue.

For the children.


Originally posted at RedState

Follow Lori on Twitter and read more of her stuff at RedState here

11 Comments leave one →
  1. August 26, 2010 10:21 am

    I was actually shocked to read that there are abortion clinics anywhere that aren’t regulated. Really? It’s a medical procedure, and should absolutely be regulated. If part of their argument is for “safe” abortions, then they absolutely need to be regulated. You’re right, that is common sense.

  2. Mike C permalink
    August 26, 2010 5:14 pm

    Usually I view “state regulation” as another term for “rent-seeking” – but, what the %$#@? Are there any other aspects of medical practice which are similarly unregulated in VA?

    My concern is this: there is no social problem so troublesome, that government intrusion can’t make it worse (see: drugs [including alcohol], poverty, illiteracy, health care). Should we advocate adding abortion to this list?

    “Man’s got to know his limitations.” – Harry Callahan

    Great blog – as another “conservatarian” I’m enjoying it very much.

  3. August 27, 2010 6:48 pm

    It is sad (I was going to say amazing, but that would give it too much nicety) that these Pro-Choice advocates aren’t really pro-choice. They don’t want women to be given options so they can choose (with any modicum of intelligence or morals). They don’t allow the child to choose, it has no say at all if it is to be aborted. They are merely pro-“convenience” and anti-choice. If you argue* that the unborn fetus has a heart beat at 22 days and brain waves as early as nine weeks, that has forming and developing neural systems at 22 weeks and reacts to pain (touch) in 8 weeks and it has its own circulatory system within 21 days, they dismiss it and say that the evidence is subjective. Sad that these people have such little regard for life. (*

    • Obamablindedmewitantiscience permalink
      August 28, 2010 10:32 am

      the only choice pro-choicers are for is death btw this is my first time on this blog but my 2nd post overall

  4. bkeyser permalink
    August 27, 2010 11:16 pm

    I’ve gotta pic like that.

  5. Molten permalink
    August 29, 2010 9:07 am

    That photo Lori uses is an obvious fake. The photo could never take place physically because of the inches of tissue between a baby’s foot in utero and the skin of the Mother’s abdomen.

    Lori has a habit of using phony photos. She used the one of Obama with a cigarette hanging out of his mouth in a previous post.

    You can see the real photo and the photoshopped fake here:

    Lori, it’s your right to post deceptive and fake photographs if you choose to, but the least you could do is to tell your readers that you’re doing so. If you fashion yourself to be someone who spreads the “truth,” you probably should not post fake photos to begin with.

    • August 29, 2010 10:12 am

      Damn, I clicked that link thinking you had an “original” of the pregnant belly photo. Everyone already knows about the Obama photo, but everyone also knows he’s a smoker, so who gives two shits and what does it have to do with this particular subject?

      Have you ever been pregnant? I’m guessing no… if so, maybe you’re a smidge overweight (no offense to the “Big and Beautiful” out there) because I’ve been pregnant. Twice. Both times I could see hands, fingers, feet, and toes through my belly. And I’m not exactly “skinny”. I’ve seen appendages through the bellies of pregnant friends and family, as well.

      Also, we’re talking about medically safe abortions here, women’s safety. So why, pray tell, would you go so far off topic as to focus on something so completely irrelevant as you have? Whether or not that photo has been doctored is completely irrelevant to the need for abortion clinics to be state monitored for safety. The fact that you’d attempt to draw the discussion away from that just goes to show me that so much of what the conservatives say about liberals is true, and only serves to push people like me even further away from the left.

      There are women out there who have been damaged by the supposedly “safe” abortions they’ve received at supposedly “legit” clinics, and my guess is that it’s because they’re not up to snuff. Did you know that, as with any medical procedure, a woman could get a serious infection if the environment isn’t properly cleaned before she gets this procedure? An infection in the reproductive system can render a woman infertile. For life. That’s just one of the problems women could face in unregulated abortion clinics. As far as I’m concerned, it’s no “safer” than if women had absolutely no access to “safe” abortions… may just as well be doing it in a rented storage unit on the sly.

      Before you even go there, I’d like to point out that I’m “pro-choice” (not to be confused with “pro-abortion”, because I’d seriously try and talk a friend or family member out of it.) I think that, should a woman choose to abort, she should be able to do so in a safe, clean, regulated environment, and then be given access to the therapy she will need afterward.

      So, do you care to comment on the topic at hand, or on the piece itself, rather than distract?

  6. Molten permalink
    August 31, 2010 6:49 pm

    My comment on the topic at hand:

    First off, it seems ironic to me that conservatives would promote government oversight and rules pushing businesses into potential closures or bankruptcy because they can’t afford to keep up with the mandates imposed on them. Anyone remember Obamacare?

    Second, this isn’t about the safety of the woman having an abortion, it’s about the fetus, and it’s about closing the doors of abortion providers.

    In Virginia, abortion clinics are regulated the same way as offices where patients receive oral or plastic surgery.

    Women die or have serious complications during elective plastic surgery in office settings every day. I don’t see conservatives being at all “pro” about those particular lives. Why? Because they’re not pregnant, that’s why. So don’t try to act all concerned about the safety of women, because that’s just a political game that anyone who has been around the block can see.

    The Supreme Court has determined that the constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman’s decision to have an abortion. That’s the law of the land. The Court has also dictated a balancing test that ties state regulation of abortion to the mother’s current tri-mester of pregnancy.

    It is pretty obvious that states can regulate abortion clinics as long as they adhere to the law that is in place right now.

    My question is why is it that conservatives don’t respect the constitutional right to privacy?

    As far as the photo goes, I don’t believe that you’ve ever seen any baby part as perfectly defined as in the photo that Lori uses. Check out the many videos on YouTube, you’ll not see definition even close to Lori’s fake photo.

    As most parents can attest, you see a bump if a limb or other body part is poking the abdomen, but not with as much detail as Lori’s fake photo. The only way a very detailed foot could show is if the uterus has ruptured (a medical emergency) and the subcutaneous fat is missing (very rare and unlikely.)

    A simple test of this is to actually place two fingers together into your mouth and push your cheek out. You’ll see one bump, not two distinct finger tips.

    If you open the file in Photoshop and expand the photo, you’ll notice that the foot is very detailed when compared to the rest of the photo (especially when compared to the belly button) This is evidence of digital manipulation.

    The foot is a fake, an anti-choice hack job. I don’t think that’s irrelevant to this conversation.

    • September 1, 2010 12:47 am

      There absolutely should be oversight where medical procedures are concerned. And the fact that you’d compare getting an abortion to getting a nose job is very telling… and disturbing. One is far more invasive than the other, just for starters. Also, some women are compelled to seek out one of those procedures out of fear. I’ve never heard of a woman getting a nose job because she was afraid of what life might be like otherwise.

      It absolutely is about the safety of women. If a clinic is not up to code, they should not be allowed to perform the procedure.

      Have you seen what the expectations are for clinics who perform this procedure? Maybe you aught to do a bit of research on that before you decide that it’s worth putting women at risk of serious, permanent injury (or worse.) You may come to realize you’re arguing the wrong side.

      And why are you so fixated on the photo? Who gives a rat’s left nut if that particular photo was faked or not? First of all, I have actually seen toes and fingers through the bellies of healthy expectant mothers (including my own belly…. and I had very healthy pregnancies.) Second of all, the photo was used to make a point. If you look at just how pregnant the woman in that photo is, only a complete asstard would claim that the baby growing in her belly wasn’t alive, and beyond any rational point of justifying an abortion.

      • Molten permalink
        September 1, 2010 3:56 pm


        I made my comment on the topic at hand, and I stand by it. I’ve read enough of Lori’s abortion posts to know that she doesn’t want safe, legal, or rare abortions. She wants abortion criminalized, period.

        There is nothing wrong with her view. She should fight tooth and nail with every device at her disposal to achieve her goal. But I don’t believe for a second that she cares whether abortion is safe or not. A safe abortion is still an abortion, and Lori’s agenda is to stop abortion.

        And I never said “nose job”…Don’t put words into my mouth. Check out some liposuction videos and then tell me that’s not “invasive” surgery.

        Here’s a good video, go to the 2:00 minute mark, and try to watch the next 3 minutes.

        You said:

        “Have you seen what the expectations are for clinics who perform this procedure?”

        In Virginia, the expectations are the same as those for clinics who perform cosmetic and oral surgery.

        Why don’t you just show me what you believe the “expectations” are? Since it appears that you’ve already done that “research.”

        Then you say:

        “I have actually seen toes and fingers through the bellies of healthy expectant mothers (including my own belly…. and I had very healthy pregnancies.)”

        I don’t believe you, my wife doesn’t believe you, and her OB/GYN doesn’t believe you. You cannot distinguish toes or fingers through several inches of flesh. You can only see lumps and bumps.

        Show me a link to another photo or video that proves your statement, and I will apologize for thinking that your full of it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: