Define Health of the Woman, for me - would ya?

I try not be decisive or political on this blog.  Just because I would like to keep it as a catholic girl's journey through life - the ups and downs on the roller coaster that is the single life.  I don't want to become a place where comments can become uncharitable or, quite frankly, ridiculous.  I have a bad habit of getting all hot over those situations and it drives me nuts.

However, I cannot ignore or not write about things that shouldn't even be controversial.  If we (both sides of the pro-life movement) are claiming to be 'pro-woman' and 'pro-family' and 'pro-health' then we really need to decide what that means.  We already have different definitions of words: fetus, for instance.  Some of us think that is actually a baby that is growing and developing - then there are others who believe it is a clump of cells that is actually harmful to a woman's body.

So I bring you the most ridiculous part of the pro-choice, or whatever they call themselves these days, movement. 

How one can be 'pro-woman, pro-human rights, pro-women's health, pro-family, pro-dignity' (drawtheline.org) and still be against this part of the recent Texan bill, I will never have any idea:

The new rules, as summarized by the Texas Alliance for Life, would have “increase[d] abortion facility safety standards to the level of ambulatory surgical centers to shut down Gosnell-like abortion providers in Texas,” “require[d] the 18,000 RU-486 abortions performed each year be done according to FDA safety standards,” and “require[d] physicians who perform abortions to be qualified to treat life-threatening complications after botched abortions and have privileges at a local hospital.” source

This bill fights for two basic things: clean and safe environments where the procedures occur and tacked on is a restriction on abortions after 20 weeks (viability - I have a cousin who was born at 5 1/2 months and is living and doing well - it's possible, hard, but possible).

I realize that we are not on the same page about this - the baby part, but I thought we were all for the safety and health of the woman.  I mean, that's the only really legal reason that makes sense about why abortion is even legal.  For the health of the mother! Heaven forbid we create an environment where women might have to risk their health carrying a child full-term when they could die!  That is what the fight began about, right?  Health is so loosely defined that is includes physical, mental, emotional, social, career, economical, and an unimaginable number of other things.

My point - IF your entire premise is resting on this sloppy foundation entitled 'Women's Health and Safety' then why on God's green earth are you against standards for health in the clinics???

This I will never understand - women are dying because greedy doctors don't want to splurge for bleach, clean towels, a mop, and proper hazardous waste disposal.  That's what happened with Kermit Gosnell (watch this if you want your skin to crawl and have nightmares tonight:  3801lancaster.com).  Additionally, PA stopped inspecting abortion clinics - SURGICAL PROCEDURES that will soon be defined as 'health care' by the Federal Government and covered by insurance occur there - WHY are they inspected less than McDonald's, nail salons, and Vets?

Let's get one thing straight - we will never agree about this if we cannot at least decide that a clean environment is necessary for any medical procedure to occur.  We may never agree with the definition of fetus, but for the sake of women stop blocking bills that improve the health of women, that's what you've been supposedly fighting for the last 36 years!

My rant is done - agree, don't agree - whatever, the Truth will prevail and one of us will be right and the other will be wrong and devastated that they were so blinded by Satan.  Praying I'll know what side to stand on!