Abortion in ignorance: The 'pro-choice' agenda
House Bill 483 was a reasonable, middle-of-the-road effort to ensure that no woman makes this unalterable decision without being fully educated about it. The "pro-choice" left rose up as one to crush it.
The bill would have required that 24 hours before any abortion, the doctor must provide the patient with "medically-accurate information that a reasonable patient would consider material to the decision of whether or not to undergo the abortion, including (1) a description of the proposed abortion method; (2) the immediate and long-term medical risks associated with the proposed abortion method including, but not limited to, the risks of infection, hemorrhage, cervical or uterine perforation, and danger to subsequent pregnancies; and (3) alternatives to the abortion;
"(c) The probable gestational age of the unborn child at the time the abortion is to be performed;
"(d) The probable anatomical and physiological characteristics of the unborn child at the time the abortion is to be performed; and
"(e) The medical risks associated with carrying her child to term."
Opponents denounced the bill as "theological," a deliberate mischaracterization. They absurdly claimed that every woman seeking an abortion already knows everything she needs to know. Does that sound like the argument of people who have women's best interests at heart?
The "pro-choice" left cares nothing for choice. It cares only about the political power it accumulates by being perceived as pro-choice. Offer women options and information that might turn them ever so slightly from the pro-abortion political machine, and watch it tighten its grip.