The leftists are out to paint Sen Susan Collins as anti-woman. That’s because she refuses to support Chuck Schumer’s abortion bill he is introducing this week. Collins, who is pro-choice opposes the bill because it goes far beyond Roe v Wade. The bill allows abortions for the entire months of pregnancy, which means viable babies would be murdered. Maybe we should call them “guest children” or undocumented babies.” Would the left allow them to live?
Collins objects to the bill because it does not exempt doctors who oppose abortion and forces them to perform the procedure themselves. The same is true for religious hospitals. They could be in trouble with the failure to perform abortions.
“It supersedes all other federal and state laws, including the conscience protections that are in the Affordable Care Act.”
“It doesn’t protect the right of a Catholic hospital to not perform abortions. That right has been enshrined in law for a long time.”
Schumer denied that the bill would do those things:
“Some are saying that this legislation would tell hospitals — certain religious hospitals — that they have to perform abortions., That is simply not true. This bill simply gives providers the statutory right to provide abortion care without medically unnecessary restrictions. That’s plain and simple. So, this rumor is false.”
If that were true, they would have written it into the bill. Dollars to donuts, if a Republican offers an amendment to protect doctors and hospitals, Democrats would vote it down. Anyone who trusts a Democrat on anything is a fool. The House version of the bill would deny federal funding to doctors who will not perform abortions. There is no religious exemption.
“Under H.R. 2975, doctors and nurses who conscientiously refuse to participate in abortion could lose their jobs and Catholic and other religious hospitals could be forced to provide abortions or lose public funds,” The Charlotte Lozier Institute reported at the time.
“Section 4(a)(10) creates a statutory right to provide an abortion without any limitation ‘on a health care provider’s ability to provide immediate abortion services when that health care provider believes, based on the good-faith medical judgment of the provider, that delay would pose a risk to the patient’s health,’” Lozier explained.
“As defined in Section 3(2), the term ‘health care provider’ includes entities as well as individuals,” the research non-profit continued. “Laws that prohibit hospitals and other entities from discriminating against doctors and nurses who conscientiously refuse to participate in abortion would fail under H.R. 2975 if the entity health care provider could show that such laws limit its ability to provide ‘immediate’ abortion services and it believes based on it.”