Election Results for the House of Representatives

Okay, now that I’ve recovered from my Election night (and, by the way, birthday night) hangover, let’s try to figure out where the hell we are.

By now, everyone knows that the House of Representatives went to the Dark Side by a wide margin.  And while The Force still controls the U.S. Senate, it is by a razor thin margin.  But the one thing you must remember is that there are a number of Senate Democrats who vote pro-life.  I have yet to see an analysis by the pro-choice groups, but although the Democrats still run the Senate, the pro-life forces are in pretty decent shape over there as well.  In the House, they are firmly in control.

So, what this means is that the House of Representatives will pass any pro-life piece of legislation that is offered.  They will no doubt come up with all sorts of ways to make abortion less accessible.  We will probably see some kind of national 24 hour waiting period, so-called “informed consent” measures requiring women to view photos of the fetus, etc.  Anything that is proposed will pass.  However, the Republican Party is not dumb enough to go all the way and try to pass a bill or constitutional amendment banning abortion.  That ain’t gonna happen folks.  That’s because there’s no guarantee that they have the necessary two-thirds vote in both houses.  And the Republicans are thinking that if they’re gonna lose, why ask their folks to stick their neck out on this controversial issue and piss off a bunch of possible pro-choice independents when the measure is unlikely to become law?

So, the House will pass some things and then send it to the Senate.  Pro-life forces basically need 60 votes to pass something in the Senate and those votes over there will be close.  But, let’s say they do pass a 24 hour waiting period.  Fortunately, sitting down at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue (at least for now) is pro-choice President Barack Obama.  If any pro-life bill comes to his desk he’ll veto it and that will be the end of it.

So, as far as attacks on the accessibility of abortion, there will be a lot of talk.  You will get a lot of fundraisingletters from both sides asking you to contribute money to help their lobbyists fight the good fight but, at the end of the day, ain’t nothing terrible gonna happen.

House of Representatives

There is one real problem, however, in the U.S. Senate.  And that has to do with the situation when/if Obama gets to nominate another justice to the U.S. Supreme Court.   That’s where it will get very interesting.  Without having seen the exact numbers, I can virtually guarantee you that the pro-choice forces do not have the necessary sixty votes to confirm an obviously pro-choice justice.  And while great deference is often given to the President’s nominee, if Obama nominates a clear pro-choice justice, there will be a major battle.  That’s because the Court right now favors Roe v Wade by a 6-3 margin.  If they can pick up another pro-life vote, then it becomes a 5-4 margin in favor of abortion rights.  So, come nomination time the pro-lifers will be smelling blood.

So, the bottom line is that Obama will have to nominate some “stealth” candidate who has no clear position on abortion.  It will be a crapshoot.  And as history shows, other presidents have found themselves in a similar situation where they nominated someone hoping they would follow the President’s ideology only to find them on the other side of the fence.  This could happen to Obama.

Stay tuned folks.

A short rant, if I may.

I read with interest the October 24 edition of “Evening Hours” in the New York Times which

NYT Evening Hour

reported on events around the city benefiting the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian, the Korean American Community Foundation, the Frick Collection, the Norman Mailer Center and the International Fine Art and Antique Dealers.  Lots of pictures of people in evening gowns and tuxedos.

Then, in the middle of the page, there was mention of a “dinner” at the Pierre hotel where people were celebrating “50 years of women’s advances since the birth control pill.”  There was no mention of who was having the party.

Was not that dinner hosted by a particular organization?  Or did a bunch of folks, including Cybill Shepard, just happen to be in the neighborhood and decided to party for the night?

I know exactly what is going on here.  Even the liberal New York Times felt they shouldn’t stir things up by mentioning that the party was hosted by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League.

Shame on you, New York Times…

On January 22, 1973 the U.S. Supreme Court handed down the Roe v Wade decision which declared that the constitutional right to privacy extended to abortion.  Supporters of legal abortion rejoiced, although some did object to the fact that the decision allowed some restrictions on the procedure.  At the same time, the pro-life movement declared it as a dark day in history.

Over the next few years, however, the pro-life movement actually took “possession” of January 22.  They started organizing large rallies on that day across the country and ultimately launched the annual “March for Life” where hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers came to Washington, D.C. to express their opposition to legal abortion.  The pro-choice movement could only watch feebly from the sidelines.

Abortion

In late 1997, as a staff person for the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, it dawned on me that the next January 22nd would be the 25th anniversary of Roe v Wade.  I started to think about how we could “take back” that day.  Remember that this was a time when abortion providers were under attack.  The bullets were flying, clinics were being bombed, every day was another battle in the constant war.  Ironically, I came up with the idea of actually having a party, a celebration commemorating the work of the doctors and staff at the abortion clinics.  Indeed, for years at the annual NCAP conference, we always had a dinner dance to help us wind down after a full day of seminars and lectures.

But I started wondering why we shouldn’t go a step further?  I had been in Washington, D.C. long enough to know that other organizations, from the realtors to the bankers, regularly had formal, black tie parties.  Why couldn’t we do the same thing?  Why not have a real “grown up” party?

At first, some of our members were reluctant.  It was almost as if it would be a sacrilege for the doctors and staff to “dress up.”  But within a few weeks, the idea spread like wildfire.   On email and over the telephone, people started talking about what they were going to wear, how they needed to rent a tuxedo and other logistical issues.  While they were still nervous opening up their car doors, I could tell they were even more nervous about how they were going to do their hair that night.

To make the evening extra special, I booked the main ballroom at the famous Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C.  I then spent weeks looking for a live band and finally found one that I liked.   Everything was in place.

Since they were in town anyway, we offered our members a series of lectures during the day.  They sat through speeches on “head and heart” counseling and how to advertise on the Internet, but it was clear that no one was concentrating.   They were thinking of their “coming out” party.  Finally, the time arrived.  My staff and I got there early and stood at the door greeting folks as they shuffled in.  I was literally taken aback.  I had gotten to know these folks intimately, had talked to them for years about the protestors and the murders, was accustomed to seeing them in their scrubs or casual “clinic wear,” but now they were coming into the room with flowing gowns and jewelry that had been in storage for years.  Instead of bullet proof vests, the male doctors now had shiny tuxedos.  They were different people.  They were finally having fun, getting all “gussied up” as one person put it.  The music, the food and, yes, the booze flowed all night.

A few weeks earlier, I had spoken with a writer for the “Style” section of the Washington Post and she thought it was fascinating that abortion providers would even consider having a party.  I invited her to come and she readily accepted.  The next morning, after a very long night of revelry, our conference attendees had copies of the Post delivered to their hotel rooms and there on the front page was an article entitled “Dinner Break From a Hot Issue.”   The joy of those interviewed jumped from the pages.  Doctors who drove to

Abortion

their clinics with blankets over their heads for security purposes openly talked to the reporter about the great time they were having for that one evening.   Clinic owners spoke candidly about how proud they were of the work they performed.  Directors of clinics talked about the women they served and about whose gown they were wearing.   We had created an alternate world for one magical evening.

Within a few days, everyone was back at their clinics.  Waiting for them were the local protestors, the anonymous phone calls, the nasty unsigned letters and the myriad of issues that come up daily in a medical facility.  But for weeks, they just talked about “the party.”

On that night, we had taken back Roe v Wade.

 

Abortion Issue

 

Besides being the day before my birthday, November 2 is Election Day.  If you are concerned about the abortion issue, this is a rather important election.

At this moment, both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives are controlled by the Democratic Party and, for the most part, the Democrats support abortion rights.  Still, the votes in the House and the Senate are often very close because there are a number of Democrats who are pro-life.  We saw the impact of that situation when the Congress considered health care reform and a number of pro-life Democrats who supported the bill forced President Obama to assure them that the new law would not fund abortions.  Desperate for votes, Obama took the extraordinary step of signing an Executive Order confirming that the new law would not pay for abortions.  That satisfied those Democrats, so they voted for the bill.

Since the Democrats are the majority party in both houses, it means that every chairman of every committee is a Democrat.  And it is in the committees where all the action is.

Every year, pro-life Members of Congress introduced legislation that would in one way or another outlaw abortion.  These bills can take different approaches but the bottom line is they want to make abortion illegal again.  When those bills are introduced, they are usually referred to the Judiciary Committees.  The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is John Conyers, who is pro-choicer.  When he sees these anti-abortion bills, he says thank you very much and proceeds to stuff them in a drawer, basically killing any chance of their being considered.  They are DOA.  The same thing happens in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

Abortion

 

But this November, it is very possible that Democrats in the House will lose a number of seats and the Republicans could actually be in the majority.  If that occurs, come next January, when the new Congress is sworn in, a bill that is introduced to outlaw abortion could very well go to a new Chairman of that committee who would probably be pro-life.  In that case, it is very possible that that chairman could then take steps to move that bill for consideration.  Then the battle will be on.  Yes, President Obama will be there for us to veto any bad bill but the pro-choice forces will have to mobilize, raise money, etc. to fight the bill.

Then there is the U.S. Senate.  When President Obama has to nominate someone for the Supreme Court, the nomination goes to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is run by pro-choicer Pat Leahy.  The current chairman will do everything he can to assure that Obama’s nomination is granted smooth sailing in the committee and on the floor of the Senate.

But should the Senate fall into the hands of the Republican Party, then you will have probably Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah as chairman and he is very pro-life.  So, a nomination that is sent to his committee will have a much tougher time of it.  Indeed, if the Republicans take over the Senate, there is a good chance that Obama’s pro-choice nominations will be defeated and he’ll have to nominate someone who is “neutral” on the issue of abortion.

So, the bottom line is you need to vote.

You need to do your research, find out who is running and vote for the one who is pro-choice.

You’ve got the power – use it.

Abortion

When I joined the National Coalition of Abortion Providers in the early 1990’s, I was excited at the prospect of representing these courageous doctors and clinic staff who put their lives on the line for hundreds of thousands of women.   I was overwhelmed at the thought of representing them on the national scene.

One of my first tasks was to raise money.  After all, you can’t have an organization without money so I started communicating with as many abortion doctors or clinic owners as possible to try to convince them to join our fledgling organization.  I was a little anxious but confident that I could persuade them that they needed someone combing the halls of Congress to protect their unique interests.

To compile a list of potential members, I asked the founders of NCAP who I should contact and the name of one doctor came up several times – Doctor Gary Dendres.  I was told he was important because he was the owner of a large chain of clinics in Florida and New York.  He was a player, a powerful one and we needed him on our team.  I was also told that he never joined anything and preferred to stay under the radar.  He was very much the “mystery man” in the world of abortion clinics.

After weeks of persistent calling, I was finally told that Doctor Dendres would meet with me.  I gulped and jumped on a plane to Tampa.  From the airport I took a taxi to his small corporate office a few miles away.  I was very nervous, didn’t know what to expect and I sat in the waiting room for 45 minutes.   Then, suddenly, there he was, standing right in front of me.

“Hey, are you Pat Richards?” he asked.  Before I could get a word in, he interrupted.  “Well, c’mon in, I don’t have much time.  I have a tennis lesson.”

Abortion

He was nothing like I had imagined. He was about 50 years old, 5 feet 9 inches, a little on the rotund side, a very expressive face and, by the way, a long pony tail.  In true Florida style, he was wearing a bright orange flowered shirt, shorts and sandals.  It was clear he had no use for me and I started thinking about catching an earlier flight out of Tampa.

“So, tell me why you are here again,” escorting me into a very small room.

I was ready with my pitch.  I told him how abortion providers needed a presence on Capitol Hill and before I could detail what I would be doing for the organization, he stopped me.

“Okay, let me tell you something” he said.   “I don’t give a crap if Roe versus Wade is overturned so don’t even go there.”

With a puzzled look on my face I asked “what do you mean?”

“Okay, so if Roe is overturned then the issue is left up to the states, right?  Well, I’ve got clinics in Florida and New York and they’re pretty liberal states.  So, if all of those other backward states outlaw abortions and my two states keep it legal, then all of those women are going to have to come to me.”

It was my first lesson in the business of abortion.  I suddenly needed a new approach to woo him.

From the beginning, I recognized a New York accent.  I inquired where he was from and he said Long Beach.  Since I was from Brooklyn, I thought I’d try to make him more comfortable by talking about my love for the New York Yankees.  At one point, I mentioned that I had been a pretty good ballplayer in my day but I know he didn’t believe me.   Suddenly, he jumped from his seat and said “Crap, I forgot about my tennis lesson!”

He ordered me into his car and we drove out to his club.  He introduced me to Bob, his tennis pro.  It was a typical muggy Florida day, very breezy.  I took a seat and watched the good doctor volleying with his pro.  I was impressed at how light he was on his feet.  I could tell he was an athlete in his day.

“Okay,” he yells at me.  “You say you were a ballplayer, huh?   Well, I’ll make you a deal.  I’m gonna have Bob hit three balls as high in the air as possible.  If you catch all three, I’ll join your organization.”

I was puzzled but, heck, I really had nothing to lose except my pride.  I was very concerned about the wind but I said “okay, you’re on.”

Bob hit the first ball a mile up into the wind and I had to run all over the court, but I caught it.  I then caught the next two balls as well.  Piece of cake.  I think Doctor Dendres was impressed but he didn’t say a word.   He then asked how much it cost to join the organization.  At that point, NCAP had no set fees, we were just trying to collect as much money as possible.  I also had no idea what was a lot of money to these folks.

I gulped and said “$3,000.”  He didn’t say a word.

Abortion

We spent more time together that day.  He entertained me with stories about the “old days” of abortion.  He performed them for years but had stopped to focus on running his clinics.  Like any businessman, he wanted to make money but I learned also that his prices for abortions were not that high and, indeed, his clinics often performed them for free for women in need.

Over the years, we have become very good friends.  Our families know each other, he constantly asks about my kids (he offered them both their first cigar).  He is also one of the few people that I can go to to get a straight answer.  The staff at his clinics love him and most of the directors have been with him for twenty years or more.

Oh, and by the way, a week after catching those three tennis balls we got a check from the good doctor for $3,000.  And over the years, he became a player in our organization.

Here’s looking at you, Gary.

Abortion

Abortion

Yesterday, to escape this blasted heat, I went into Washington, D.C. to catch an exhibit of Norman Rockwell paintings that had been donated by Stephen Speilberg and George Lucas.  It was nice just taking my time walking around, examining every amazing detail in Rockwell’s works.

At one point I came across a piece entitled “Free Speech.”  The piece focuses on one man, standing in the middle of a crowd.  The caption next to the painting said this was a man who disagreed with the crowd on some issue, but his opponents were listening to him intently, respecting his right to say what was on his mind even though they ultimately would not support him.   I was almost brought to tears.

Today, of course, that person would have been shouted down, totally discounted as some nut ball by his opponents.  That’s just where we are as a society these days.  We just don’t listen anymore.  Worse, when someone tries to suggest something contrary to our beliefs, we try to silence him with harsh words, with guffaws, with rolling eyes, as if this person could never say anything that was remotely of some benefit.

Of course, we see this kind of behavior all the time in the abortion debate.  Indeed, the harsh back and forth is probably more pronounced when discussing the abortion issue than any other issue.  We are so locked into our beliefs, the battle lines are drawn oh-so-clearly and you cannot cross them lest you be accused of ceding some valuable territory to the opposition.  Just watch an abortion debate on television.  You know exactly what I mean.  It’s a constant screaming match.    “Abortion is murder!”   “A woman has the right to control her body!”   And on and on and on.

No one is communicating.  They’re just yelling over each other.  Actually, years ago I stopped watching these “debates.”

I’m pro-choice, I’ve worked for pro-choice organizations for years.  But, much to the chagrin of many of my colleagues, years ago I started reaching out to pro-life people in an attempt to try to get inside their head, to learn more about them and, hopefully, to allow them to learn more about me .  I actually started engaging the other side after I learned that a number of the abortion clinics that I represented engaged in the same discussions with their local anti-abortion activists.

At the same time, I challenged my pro-choice colleagues to address the tougher questions about abortion.  When I visited the clinics, I talked to the women and it became clear to me that they were not there to make a statement about their constitutional rights or to promote some feminist ideology.  They were there because they were in a difficult situation and they needed help.  They also had to deal with something that pro-choice organizations would rather not address – they were carrying a baby that they didn’t want.   I soon discovered that the bottom line was that abortion is all so complicated.

So, amidst the screaming and yelling, the women continue to seek abortion services.  I think that anti-abortion folks owe these women more respect and the pro-choice activists should not try to reduce this issue to a simple bumper sticker.  Both sides should listen more to the other side with the goal of having a civil debate about abortion – kinda like that group in the Normal Rockwell painting.

Let’s talk about the “Nuremberg Files.”

Just go to www.christiangallery.com and you’ll see this graphic and wacky website.  It was created years ago by some yahoo named Neal Horsley and for years it struck fear in the heart of many a pro-choicer.    Then, there were some of us who actually found it quite amusing.  More about that later.

I recall we first got wind of this site right after Doctor David Gunn was murdered in Pensacola in 1993.    The site is a list of abortion doctors, clinic staff, clinic owners, pro-choice legislators and leaders of pro-choice groups.  The list was supposedly a list of people who would be “brought to trial when abortion became illegal.”    You know, like the Nuremberg trials.  To add flavor, the site is adorned with lots of red, dripping blood.

What got everyone’s attention was that soon after David Gunn was killed his name, which had been on the list of doctors, had a mysterious line drawn through it.  The pro-choice community went nuts.  Look, they cried in horror, it’s a hit list!  They’re gonna get us all!   The feds jumped all over it but couldn’t do much about it.  Then, the next year, Doctor Baird Britton was murdered by Paul Hill and, oh my God, his name suddenly had a line through it!  The pro-choice community couldn’t believe what was happening, they begged the federal government to shut down this website which they alleged was encouraging, if not commanding, less than normal people to go out and kill those who were on the list.

Mass hysteria paralyzed the pro-choice community.

But then there were those of us who were privately laughing about the whole thing.  Those who had been regularly harassed, terrorized and stalked for years just looked at this list and chuckled.  Then we started comparing notes and found it amusing that some of the folks on the list had retired years earlier or had died years before from natural causes.  We also laughed that anti-choice legislators like Senator Bob Dole were on the list for some bizarre reason.

Still, the media had something sexy.  They had a legal “hit list” and, as a result, Neal Horsley became an overnight talk show sensation.  Or course, he denied that it was a hit list, but he was smart enough to sound like it was one without risking an indictment.  And he knew the pro-choice community was scared shitless.

As for me, I was at the National Coalition of Abortion Providers at the time and I was ticked off that my name was not on the list.   After all, all my colleagues were on it:  Susan Hill, George Tiller, Eleanor Smeal and others.  How come I wasn’t important enough to be on the list?  Others in the field who were not on the list had the same reaction.

So, I picked up the phone and called Neal Horsley, who lived in Georgia at the time.  He didn’t answer but I left a message asking him to please put me on his list.  A few days later, I was on it!

I was back home with my friends.

March for Life

During the annual “March for Life” on Friday, I happened upon a “pro-choice” rally.  Listening to the speeches of various leaders of the movement, I suddenly realized why we may be losing the battle.

Throughout the hour that I was there, no one with a microphone in their hands said “abortion.”  It was all about “choice” this and “choice” that.   Protect our “freedom to choose.”  The A word was conspicuous by its absence.

I understand that we want to preserve the right of women to have a choice in their reproductive decisions, but let’s face it, folks, everyone with half a brain understands that one of those “choices” is, dare I say it, ABORTION.    When we say we want to give women that option it implies that we approve of that option, just like we all approve of adoption or childbirth.

When we do not talk about the abortion option, we contribute to the stigma of abortion.  Why can’t we just say we support legal abortion, that legal abortion has saved hundreds and thousands of lives over the years, that it can be a good decision?   Even when the word is mentioned, it is in the context of an apology.    “Abortion is the most difficult, emotional decision a woman will ever make.”    Perhaps true for some people, but can we actually make such a broad, sweeping declaration?     Poppycock.   For many women, it was not a difficult decision.  Indeed, it was a relief when they decided and when they had the procedure.

Let’s start talking about the benefits of legal abortion.   Over one million women a year get one.  Why the heck are we hiding behind the mantle of “choice?”   Why not face the issue head on?

By not talking about abortion, we cede that very important part of the debate to the anti-abortion movement.  They get to define what abortion is, they get to stigmatize those courageous doctors and their staff who help women every day.   They get to prohibit the so-called “partial birth abortion” which was just another option for women and their doctors.

I don’t know when that public relations consultant came out with the word “choice.”   It was certainly decades ago.   And now we are one vote away from having “choice” eliminated by the Supreme Court.   What does that tell you about that strategy?

We need to be honest with the public.  We need to stand up for LEGAL ABORTION and toss out the buzz words that mean nothing to a younger generation.   Abortion is a benefit to the health of women.   Abortion is okay.   Just say it.

Abortion

The Liberty we recognize today, stands so immensely tall, proud, and strong, it’s message of glowing hope and freedom travels through the minds of the world, and resonates, drawing individuals who suffer under tyranny to our shores in our third century still.  We are the flagship of freedom in a sea of that tyranny.

An example for the world.  Women shall not be subjugated in this country.  They will not tolerate it.  Neither will men, as we all are determined that no one regardless of their attributes be denied the inalienable rights so well articulated.

Our Republic evolves and continue to create the most optimal society. We prove over time, people can govern themselves. There is no other option.

Liberty in her Statuesque form stands literally in concrete and steel, on the impervious massive pedestal of righteousness. She stands as a metaphor, and as an image, enduring, and indelible, unknown to few, celebrated worldwide.

Roe v Wade is in the company of the most important decisions that the Supreme Court has accurately ruled upon.  The decision reaches back through the historical events that were the maturation of our Republic. Now, again, a precedent etched in the Granite of Freedom, IT WILL ENDURE.  It is in our self governance, our own implicit contract with society, the binding of freedom, that we are in comfort that the flaw has been fixed, and shall stand. We will continue this effort on all fronts, tearing down any barriers as we find them.

The sentinels of freedom shall never be unaware of attack. The guard never let down.  There is still work to be done, and it shall. We are a Union of self governance that proves to the world that it can be done. There is no other choice, except the choice to abide by the laws we construct for ourselves.   And we take comfort in that knowledge.

Rejoice on this blessed day the Anniversary of Roe v Wade.  As few in this world have what we do, as we routinely do not even notice as we journey though our lives in freedom.  Freedom to control our own bodies, and make our own decisions.

The old notions will die off as they have over the generations, and freedom will endure and the people of our nation will cradle in that joyous comfort.

It is obvious that the Florida legislature mounted a multi threaded attack on reproductive rights this week. 

It started by the passing of legislation requiring an ultrasound prior to an abortion and coupled to more egregious terms.  

Terms that are simply rejected by the vast majority of Americans, and over 99% of Nobel prize winners.

That is defining human sentient life equivalent to a full experienced adult at the moment of the meeting of the one cell sperm and the one cell egg whence they fuse and form one slight larger one cell.  Thus a women who was desirous of an abortion must then pay for an ultrasound procedure and  mandated to view the ultrasound image. This would be done before having the abortion, again mandated by the bill passed by the House chiefly divided in a partisan fashion.

The puritanicals and misogynists are truly still lurking among us in droves. Must they die of old age until the generation of rational thinking adults are able to work their way through the political quagmire?  

Oddly also the vast majority of conservatives supprting the measure were older men greyed from age, apparently not from wisdom or a connection to the community.   

The Republican-led chamber also endorsed a “fetal homicide” bill that would create a separate murder charge for anyone who caused a pregnancy to be terminated through an act of violence against a pregnant woman.

This absurdity missed the slew of reasons women may opt for an abortion for very reasonablke reasons, that well over 95% of Americans support. A very limited example include, women with cancer, women with pregnancies in their tubes, women with life threatening heart anomalies (and all other threats to their life) that carry with them a near certain death sentance if they are to remain pregnant through their term of 40 weeks.  

This is well documented in the peir reviewed medical literatue, and is not disouted among proffesionals of either side of the issue to any measurable degree.  The list goes on and on.  

Many of these situations the Abortion Pill could easily solve the end of the pregnancy and save the mother’s life. There are numerous places a women in need of abortion may find an office that perform Abortions safely, securely, privately with respect and confidentiality.

Democrats argued the abortion bill and it’s terms were simply a government invasion into an obvious private health matter.The House’s ultrasound mandate (HB257) requires women who desire abortion to pay for the scans without any assistance, this is a major burden the government would be placing among lower socioeconomic women.

Costs for an ultrasound have great variance and are often a few hundred dollars, stated by an expert testimonial.The measures once again, are micromanaging the method by which a doctor takes care of their patient without regard to the doctor’s experience or training.  

Doctors practice differently because of a number of reasons.  The legislature rarely attempts to micromangae doctor methods of practice except when dealing with abortion care.  The well known safest procedure done in the world, when it is legal.  When it is illegal, women still get abortion, but because of the illegality have to have them performed in areas that are often dangerous and simply just a few decades hospital wards were willed to the brim with women suffering, dying,  and losing wombs to complication because abortion was illegal.  Once again this another fact that is not disputed.

“Are you sure you want to do that?” said House Democratic Leader Dan Gelber, of Miami Beach. “Just to constantly second-guess and challenge a woman who makes what I imagine is one of the hardest and most difficult decisions a person has to make. In that sense, it’s an offensive bill.”  

If the “fetal homicide” bill passed the Senate and became law, anyone who caused a pregnancy to be terminated by assaulting or killing a woman could be prosecuted for murdering the “unborn child” — even if they didn’t know the woman was pregnant.The bill also would apply to drunken drivers, who could be charged with vehicular homicide for causing a pregnancy to be terminated in a car accident.

“It elevates a fetus and an egg, frankly, to the status of an adult person,” said Adrienne Kimmell, executive director of Florida’s Planned Parenthood affiliates. “The purpose of this bill is to create tension with Roe vs. Wade. It’s a chipping-away strategy we’ve seen for years now.”

In this opinion, the imbicilic articulation from the Bill’s sponsor Rep. Ralph Poppell, stated that a fetal homicide bill is an attempt to “curb crime and save lives.”

Clearly it is just another attempt to harm women and march the limitations of reproductive, and private personal matters into the hands of those elite that show no regard or connection to the intelligent women who are quite capable of making decisions and managing their own bodies without a strange antagonistic man’s interference and intrusion.