Here's a new tactic being employed to shut down abortion clinics: buy it.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
I would think abortion providers have a fair amount of money themselves. What stops them from buying buildings to practice in, rather than renting?
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
*checks watch*
I predict two hours, tops, before this thread becomes a full blown abortion debate, complete with at least one instance of the phrase "killing babies."
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Too late. Someone already used the phrase.
Why wouldn't you comment on the likelihood of the phrase "women's choice"?
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I am 100% in support of property rights, if a pro-life group buys the building they have the right to shut down the clinic. If an abortion provider buys a building, he has the right to operate a clinic in it.
I can't see where anyone would have a problem with this - it's pefectly legal and a much better approach than harassing or threatening providers.
Posted by Demonstrocity (Member # 9579) on :
KILLING BABIES IS WOMEN'S CHOICE!
Bwahaaa!
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
It's perfectly legal, but it has a big problem.
It is addressing the act of the abortion rather than the causes behind why women get them. Until those causes are directly addressed, buying out and shutting down abortion clinics won't stop abortions. It will just stop medically performed/supervised abortions from being available, and "back alley" abortions may become more prevelant.
At least that's the way I see it.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert: It's perfectly legal, but it has a big problem.
It is addressing the act of the abortion rather than the causes behind why women get them. Until those causes are directly addressed, buying out and shutting down abortion clinics won't stop abortions. It will just stop medically performed/supervised abortions from being available, and "back alley" abortions may become more prevelant.
At least that's the way I see it.
I agree, complete waste of funds on their part.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
Well, I'm just saying that putting money toward the problem rather than the symptom might be a better idea for society as a whole.
Posted by Angiomorphism (Member # 8184) on :
Are abortion clinics all that rare where the one was bought? I mean, here in Toronto, there are at least 6 of them, so even if one was bought and closed, it really wouldn't make a big difference. Although I'm guessing the situation is different in the US??
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Did you read the article? In at least one case, they opened a pregnancy crisis/counselling center in the property. And they specifically said that if their clients chose to have an abortion after all, they would still welcome them back and help them deal with the fallout from that.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
I did not read the article, no. I plan to when I get home from work, however. If that is the case Icarus, then awesome, that's a great idea.
Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
Can we agree to disagree, link to the bazillion previous abortion threads, and close down this link?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Can we agree to disagree, link to the bazillion previous abortion threads, and close down this link?
You are free to go participate in other threads and leave this one alone.
quote:It is addressing the act of the abortion rather than the causes behind why women get them.
Let me point out that there are many situations where as a society, when we want to prevent something, we use tactics which address only the act and not the cause.
It is not an inherently bad thing, especially if people are attempting to address the cause with other methods.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
It is better than some of the other options, IMO, although I doubt it would work in most places.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I agree -- it seems that it's a tactic which can only work for a short while.
Posted by Evie3217 (Member # 5426) on :
Let's see, it's been 11 hours, and we've all been able to remain reasonably calm. I think this is a new record!
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Notice the really really subdued topic I gave the thread?
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert: It's perfectly legal, but it has a big problem.
It is addressing the act of the abortion rather than the causes behind why women get them. Until those causes are directly addressed, buying out and shutting down abortion clinics won't stop abortions. It will just stop medically performed/supervised abortions from being available, and "back alley" abortions may become more prevelant.
At least that's the way I see it.
People like that do. They call it abstinence-only education.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Somewhat related.
I don't what's behind it, but yesterday's Washington Post had an article somewhere in there about some faith-based pregnancy counseling clinics giving out false information about the dangers of abortion.
This could all be partisan politics (it's a Democratic report), or the Post digging for something that isn't there (the clinics involved are among the small %-age that get federal funding -- for abstinence programs). But they did find apparent misinformation on websites for some of these places.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz:
quote:Originally posted by Javert: It's perfectly legal, but it has a big problem.
It is addressing the act of the abortion rather than the causes behind why women get them. Until those causes are directly addressed, buying out and shutting down abortion clinics won't stop abortions. It will just stop medically performed/supervised abortions from being available, and "back alley" abortions may become more prevelant.
At least that's the way I see it.
People like that do. They call it abstinence-only education.
That would be great. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be terribly effective.
Correction...abstinence is 100% effective. It's the programs that aren't always effective.
Posted by Shawshank (Member # 8453) on :
I've never understood why so many people find abstinence-only education to be that much of a problem. Because in truth it is the only method in which a girl can't become pregnant- and especially for young teenagers.
I really feel that it is bad to teach children that "sex is okay at your age as long as you do these 'safety' procedures" because in all honesty- I would venture that it shouldn't be a healthy choice at their age.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Let's see, it's been 11 hours, and we've all been able to remain reasonably calm. I think this is a new record!
I take partial credit -- no one likes to be predictable.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Because many of us feel that teaching only "don't do it" is not enough. And studies seem to support that belief.
There is no sex education program I know of that teaches "sex is okay at your age." And all of them stress abstinence as the only sure-fire method of birth control. But the attitude is more "you shouldn't do it, but if you must here's how to stay safe."
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shawshank: I've never understood why so many people find abstinence-only education to be that much of a problem. Because in truth it is the only method in which a girl can't become pregnant- and especially for young teenagers.
I really feel that it is bad to teach children that "sex is okay at your age as long as you do these 'safety' procedures" because in all honesty- I would venture that it shouldn't be a healthy choice at their age.
Well, I can only speak for myself, so I will.
I don't think that abstinence education is a bad thing. The reason it's a problem when it is the ONLY education is that the children who choose not to be abstinent go out and have sex with absolutely no knowledge or protection.
In a perfect world we could teach children to be abstinent until they had a certain level of maturity and it would work. Unfortunately, kids go out and have sex. Because of that, I would much rather educate them on how to do so safely than write them off because they choose not to be abstinent.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I like the stories of people opening pregnancy centers in place of the abortion centers.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Because in truth [abstinence] is the only method in which a girl can't become pregnant- and especially for young teenagers.
That's not completely true. You can't get pregnant from purely homosexual activity.