The latest madness on California campuses
Exclusive: Barbara Simpson offers ultimate advice for unwanted pregnancies
Abortion advocates had a field day rallying on California college campuses. They demanded free abortions on campus. Activists insisted that "women need easy access to abortion if they want to be free."
I'm sorry, but I need to take a breath here. These college age women are claiming that they will not be "free" unless they can get free abortions on their college campus?
Yes, that's what they said.
Moreover, as reported by LifeNews.Com. the state Lt. Governor Eleni Kounalakis said she would not have accomplished what she has professionally in her life had she "not had control over my own reproductive choices.
This is the key element of liberating woman."
There they go again – equating freedom with abortion.
Isn't that the same argument they used years ago when advocating easy access to birth control?
Whatever happened to the aspect of "responsibility" in dealing with sexual activity?
Surely, these young "women" know where babies come from?
I suspect the men in their lives also know, and they always have the "freedom" to decide how to deal with the reality of how nature works when it comes to making babies.
Oh, I'm sorry. There I go, being logical again.
What brought all this about is S.B. 24, passed by the California legislature and awaiting the signature of Governor Gavin Newsom.
The bill would force all 34 public colleges and universities in California to provide free abortion drugs to students on campus, up to 10 weeks of pregnancy.
Currently, pregnant students wanting an abortion are referred to an off-campus facility for the procedure.
The new program would be paid for by a new fund, the money raised privately, before Jan 1, 2020 and used to train staff and buy medical equipment.
A similar bill was passed in 2018, but then-Governor Jerry Brown vetoed it. Brown, a Democrat and a Catholic, said the bill was unnecessary because abortion clinics are located on average just 5 to 7 miles from campuses.
Newsom, also a Democrat and a Catholic, who was lieutenant governor at the time, said he would have signed the bill. As for the current bill, Newsom had not said what he will do, and he still has a couple of weeks to decide.
The abortion procedure requires the student take two drugs – Mifepristone and Misoprostol – which they'll get from the campus health clinics, up to 10 weeks of pregnancy.
They will deal with the expulsion of the fetus at home into the toilet and any complications would vary.
The FDA approved the drugs as "safe" in 2000, yet it has also documented at least 4,000 cases of serious complications, including some 1,000 hospitalizations and at least 22 deaths.
The issue of liability from the provision of the abortion drugs has not been addressed publicly; but clearly, the university/state would be in the middle of any such lawsuits and be required to foot the bill. Ultimately, that means the taxpayers would be on the hook.
In addition to the possibility of the state being liable in the event of any such lawsuits, there is also the very real aspect of the basic cost of the program.
As noted, preliminary money has been raised from private sources; but when and if that runs out and the state has to pick up the costs, it would eventually wind up with the taxpayers footing the bill along with tuition increases.
None of this is a pretty picture.
If the governor signs the bill, it would make California the first state in the country to mandate that college clinics carry and prescribe the abortion drugs. It would take effect on Jan. 1, 2023.
Pro-life leaders in the state objected to the proposal from the beginning. The California Catholic Conference said the bill overemphasizes abortion as an option and said it is "specifically written in such a way to exclude pro-life counseling."
Andrew Rivas, executive director of the California Catholic Conference, encouraged the governor to oppose the bill.
He said "No government-funded institution, medical or counseling center, should ever provide only one set of services.
If this bill is truly about providing choices for female students, the state should then also require and fund life-affirming services on campus."
Los Angeles Archbishop Jose Gomez and Sacramento Bishop James Soto also condemned the bill.
In his pastoral letter, Soto said, "The womb should not become tomb for any child, anywhere in our state. Women and children deserve better."
The issue has also been raised that students who object to such university funding of abortions would be required to pay for the services through their regular student fees.
All of this brings to mind a solution to unwanted pregnancies that a fellow talk show host told me about years ago.
He said it all comes down to a dime.
If a woman puts a dime between her knees, and keeps it there, she will never get pregnant.
Crude – and funny – and accurate.
No comments:
Post a Comment