Tag Archives: common sense
While answering questions before the legislature last week, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey reiterated that West Virginia currently allows abortion for any reason up to the moment of birth. Controversy erupted last summer when Morrisey, in response to a lawsuit filed against the largest abortion clinic in the state, announced that his office would conduct an investigation into current abortion laws in the state.
The results of that investigation is that Morrisey has concluded that West Virginia does indeed allow abortions for any reason up to the moment of birth. In other words, West Virginia currently does not regulate the abortion industry operating within its borders. In fact, tattoo studios and hair salons are subject to more regulation than abortion clinics.
Morrisey told the legislature:
The percentage of Americans that are pro-life is growing, that much is sure. As that number grows, so does the percentage of people that favor other common sense measures. A mandatory waiting period before an abortion is a common sense measure that is gaining support nationwide. An article at LifeNews.com comments:
Are you able to defend life and marriage against the arguments people may throw at you?
If the answer to that question is no, I recommend a little study in order to be better prepared to defend these positions. There is no need to be afraid to engage someone because of the arguments they might use against your views; with a little study you can be thoroughly prepared to offer sound logic and biblical support against popular arguments.
The following two articles do an outstanding job of combating popular notions against life and traditional marriage. The first article, from Matt Walsh, addresses the specific arguments of an obviously “logical” pro-abortion advocate. Walsh’s responses are common sense, logical, and show just how absurd some arguments against life can be.
The second article, by Matt Chandler, addresses four basic arguments often used by advocates of homosexuality and other sexual sins. Chandler’s answers are biblically sound but culturally relevant as well.
I highly recommend taking a look at both of these articles then passing them on to someone else. Enjoy.
Planned Parenthood vehemently opposes any laws requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at local hospitals. Abortion advocates often refer to such laws as TRAP laws – Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers – and say their sole purpose is to put undue burden and stigma on abortionists. But is that the truth behind these laws?
First, let’s be clear about what laws requiring admitting privileges are. These laws simply require that any medical professional that performs any type of invasive surgical procedure hold admitting privileges at a hospital close to the clinic where the procedures are being performed. Admitting privileges simply means the medical professional is allowed to attend to the needs of their patient should something go wrong and the person need to be admitted to the hospital.
So, in essence, all these laws are doing is to require a person performing medical procedures be allowed to serve their patient at a local hospital should something go wrong. That seems like an easy to understand, common sense requirement for any medical professional; one that a doctor would gladly endorse in an effort to serve his or her patients.