Letters to the Editor

If abortion supporters are mainly concerned with the health and safety of women, why do they fight so hard against legislation requiring abortion profiteers to meet the same medical standards as legitimate out-patient surgery clinics?

Many people assume that because abortion facilities call themselves clinics, they meet the same standards as hospitals. They couldn't be more wrong. And women die as a result.

Experience shows that when standards are raised for any industry, the people most likely to feel the impact are the ones providing the lowest quality service. As long as abortion remains legal, the government has not just a right, but a responsibility to make sure that abortionists meet the highest medical and safety standards possible.

Any time legislation is proposed requiring even the most benign standards, the National Abortion Federation is right there with their fellow abortion industry goons

--the National Abortion Rights Action League and Planned Parenthood--"protecting women's rights" by making sure that abortionists can carry out their grisly business with as little outside interference as possible. Anyone who thinks these organizations are looking out for women's best interests is dreaming.

A pro-abortion activist is fighting the proposed abortion clinic regulations. "Medical practitioners look after the best interests of their patients without government interference," she said.

Abortionists all over America are being sued and/or closed down for unsafe, unsterile, and often fatal practices. In a 60 Minutes broadcast on Maryland's notorious Hillview abortion mill, State Senator Mary Boergers said that when "pro-choice" legislators like herself push for what she characterized as responsible legislation to deal with this problem, pro-choice groups treat them like they are the enemy!" Pro-abortion groups say abortion clinics can police themselves and should be allowed to do so. But the National Abortion Federation admitted they knew about Hillview and just hoped nobody would notice because it would be a political disaster for their cause. It's painfully obvious that abortion advocates are willing to let filthy mills continue with business as usual as long as no one else finds out. Boergers added, "When we say what we're trying to do is guarantee safe abortions, and eliminate back-alley unsafe abortions, and yet you can demonstrate that there's a woman who's died, and another woman who's paralyzed, then not only that argument, but all arguments from the pro-choice community can become suspect."

I couldn't have said it better myself.

A pro-abortion activist opposes the proposed abortion clinic regulations. "Medical practitioners look after the best interests of their patients without government interference," she said.

How trustworthy abortionists can be is seen in Magda Denes' In Necessity and Sorrow. While observing an abortion, the very pro-choice Denes hears a sound like "the rhythmic horrifying howl of a dog." She finally realizes the sound is coming from the oxygen-starved patient. During the next abortion, the anesthesiologist discusses his daughter's graduate school plans. He shows Denes signs of cyanosis in the patient's fingernails and lips. "The Brevital," he tells her, "can knock respiration out completely for a while. So they don't breathe at all. Well, which school do you think?" Denes expresses alarm that the patient might be brain damaged by the lack of oxygen. He responds, "She wants to go to Michigan, but my wife says either Columbia or Storrs." Denes points out that the patient seems to have stopped breathing. "She is all right. I myself think she would go to Michigan, provided it's just as good a school." Denes continues to express alarm. "You worry too much," he tells her. "She has stopped breathing just this second." He puts the oxygen mask on the patient. "Watch her fingernails. There she goes, you see? The color is coming back. In another second she'll be breathing on her own again. Michigan it is then, right?" Denes wonders how anybody gets out of surgery alive.

Many of them don't. That's why we need the clinic regulations.

An abortion fanatic is fighting the proposed abortion clinic regulations. "Medical practitioners look after the best interests of their patients without government interference," she said.

American people need to realistically examine the motives behind these abortion-on-demand fanatics. They need to find out why the people who constantly scream that abortion needs to be legal so it can be clean and safe, are the same people who fight tooth and nail against any legislation designed to ensure that it's clean and safe. And they do all this at the same time they're claiming that their only interest is in protecting women. The only interest these people have in women is a financial one. When you honestly evaluate the motives behind people who reject even the most minimal standards for these abortion mills, one thing becomes crystal clear: Their interest is not in protecting women but abortion industry profits. And regardless of what someone's feelings are about whether abortion should be legal, they'd have to be really naive not to see that.

The abortion fanatics were out in force yesterday screaming about the proposed abortion mill regulations.

When the idea of legalized abortion was first sold to the American people, we were told that it had to be made legal so its safety could be regulated. Now that it is legal, these same people refuse to allow any safety controls at all. They complain that it would "limit access," "eliminate options," or "drive up costs."

We were told that the point of legalization was to make abortion clean and safe, not cheap and widespread.

If legalizing abortion didn't make it clean and safe, what was the point of making it legal to begin with?