I'm thinking, not many. Because the law is written ambiguously enough to make many of them stop prescribing RU486 altogether. There's another provision that I don't see mentioned here that might leave the prescribing physician open to prosecution if the patient fails to show up in person for aftercare.

Common sense used to allow a patient to have the aftercare done by her regular local medical provider. No longer. And how does a physician physically compel a patient to keep an appointment, especially if significant travel is involved?

@Greg So you are not against abortions if there is a quid pro quo for you to have unfettered access to guns --- does that make you a believer in post partum abortion?

David,
My comments were not for or against abortion, they were about the process. The same people that want me to get a federal background check and go to a licensed dealer to be able to give a gun to my son, want abortions in vending machines. If the law has ambiguous requirements, fixing them will do nothing, PP wants no requirements and they will bitch until that's what they have.

I disagree that Planned Parenthood wants no requirements at all. It isn't just Planned parenthood that is affected by this law, you know. What PP and other physicians are worried about is laws that require medically unnecessary procedures and office visits or risk prosecution on the part of the provider.

@ KHD
That was the authors tone not a direct quote from the principal in the article. Don't Judge.

Guns are legal too. Why have laws restricting them. Guns may end in a death. Abortions ALWAYS end in a death.

@Mr Lundt....No one is advocating taking your right to own and bear arms. It is unfortunate that you feel compelled to link a right to privacy and the right to bear arms. Two completely different issues.

Lyle
No one is advocating taking away abortions eiter. That is why we both used the word encumbered.

I simply usd your argument against you...you don't like it.

Life is about choices. Government should not allow bad choice. Murder very very bad choice.

Welcome back Hoffa!

Hoffa!!! I'm glad to see you. I'm sure my joy will last for all of three posts,tops, but I'm glad to see you just the same.

@Hoffa
Stop trying to trick liberals with your logic and truth.

Welcome back.

Sorry Greg, I just flagged your comment as I do any concerning either non-issue regarding that poster. I wearied of both long ago.

Oh well, you could always self edit. It's what I do with many of your off topic anti Walker/ALEC rants.

Sorry Bren. I just flagged your comment for being very off topic. Please stay on topic or leave this very serious place where all worlds problems are solved.

Welcome back Hoffa. This young liberal thinks that her Obama provided birth control is to blame. So basically this is Obama's baby.

OMG Hoffa is Back !! The first Hoffa is still the fodder of a great urban myth --- I just wonder if the re-apperance of the 2nd Hoffa is akin to rising from the dead -- hmmm would that make you a Ghoul?

Actually I thought that as I still think you are a Republican Troll that maybe you were temporarily unemployed -- maybe the RNC was re-doing its budget, or the politician you work for lost an election ?

Whatever the case, I think it is a smart move by either the RNC or whoever (Koch Bros) --- you really do a good job, and you very seldomly ever go into personal diatribes.

Good luck --- enjoy your writing skills.

Greg and Steve, see moderator Jim Price's comments below, "The comment about the "debt" supposedly owed Hoffa over some long ago bet has also been deleted and anything more about that nonsense will also be deleted." So careful with those "flag" button, buddies! I'd hate to "see" you join WPN1488 in the penalty box.

; )

@Bren
Now you are issuing threats. Way to stay civil.

Was the 'debt' finally settled? I thought I saw Keith post that the check was in the mail. I haven't heard from Hoffa acknowledging the receipt of it though...

We can't talk about that anymore, CD. Please stick to topics nobody ever gets sick of hearing about, like ALEC and the Koch Bros and Ayn Rand and the like.

I just honestly posted what was on my mind, saying hi and asking a simple question of my neighbor and Patch friend, about a promise that was made in a recent post. From now on I will attempt to not post about things that Bren wearied of long ago. Not that I fear the "penalty box", but Bren please don't associate me with WPN1488, that is insulting. I just may have to flag that comment.

Do you think the un-intended consequences of being 'known' as the 'Tattle-Tale in Residence' are greater than not settling-up on a financial commitment?

:::Beware of the tattle-tale:::

Interesting question, Jay. I guess we'll find out, won't we? One might even be tempted to wager...

You're not by buddy pal

I will still be Bren's buddy.

White Album, yeah. I have it in vinyl.

Its not the same Nuitari. The first one is a political statement to hurt a Republican-leaning lobby. Abortion isn't killing. It is a womans right to decide what happens with her body. DUH!

In the end libs dont care about life. They care about themselves only.

Liberals/Conservatives...Why does ANYONE think it's OK to kill kids?

@Rose
Truth is no longer reality. As it turns out what we thought of traditionally as truth turned out to be bigoted and sexists. Therefore liberals have chosen to replace truth with a subject idea of what they want truth to mean.

In abortion for example. We will replace the truth of a life and replace it with the subject idea that life has no objective starting point. Hence, as they weaken the morals within society that subjective idea of life can slowly move further away from conception and in some medical journals be extended as far as 2 weeks post full term birth. Simply put, we can thank Clinton for changing the meaning of 'is'.

@J.B. Schmidt -- One religion's 'truth' has nothing to do with reality, except to the followers of that religion. You are free to adhere to your own truth, forgoing abortion or even contraception if that's your choice. You cannot make that choice for other people based on your own version of reality.

Does this really have anything to do with religion, Randy? Certainly there are atheists that define life as beginning at conception--it isn't a concept that is defined by religious beliefs.

@Randy
Religion, is that now your fall back when you can't argue your point. I expect that from John Wilson, but I thought better of you.

@Cow Dung -- Yes, religion does have a lot to do with it, since different religions disagree on the point when human life/personhood begins. The Supreme Court cited this in the original Roe decision.

@J.B. Schmidt....This is not an issue of morality and morality is not in decline, but is in a state of change from one understanding to another. At one time slavery was deemed moral. No one is compelling any woman to have an abortion. Just as in owning a firearm, it is a choice, not a command. You view morality in one way others view it differently. What makes you think that your definition and view of morality is the correct one?

@J.B. Schmidt -- If your 'truth' isn't inspired by your religion, then what is it? What makes your version of the truth any more in accord with reality than mine?

Randy:

My point was that different people have different opinions on when life begins, it isn't really a matter of religion. Lots of women change their opinion about when life begins after being pregnant with a child they want to keep. Their change has a lot more to do with the caretaking they do for the child they are carrying rather than a change of their religion.

@Lyle
Because the view of morality that I hold saw less single mothers, less broken families, less government dependency, less inner city crime, etc; prior to the progressive movement of the 60's. While yes some of those might be on the decline now, it is on a decline from its sicking heights post 1950 and will now reach a point where these higher levels post 1950 will be the new normal.

It was the progressive movement that stole the idea of personal responsibility from our country and replaced it with government knows best. Now because of that we have a women lacking personal responsibility and is instead a slave to her birth control and pregnancy tests.

@Randy
You are attempting to define my view point as religion and yours as something else. What is religion other then a set of beliefs? Your set of beliefs define your view point as well.

The act of sex has not changed since the beginning of time. Are you seriously trying to tell me that in the 1950 Lyle could make a comment about an unborn child being a fetus without being laughed out of time?. What has changed in that time? At no point in history did people believe that an unborn child was not surviving off its mother. It was simply an adjustment to truth and convincing the public that we could subjectively determine what was life and what was human as Lyle is attempting.

@J.B. Schmidt -- You're right. You (although you weren't around back then) saw less of all you've mentioned. That's not because it didn't exist, it's because it was kept hidden from sight and swept under the rug. Women went out of town and gave away babies. Or they had back-alley abortions and either lived or died. Married women with sympathetic doctors got their 'D&Cs' on the quiet.

Slaves to birth control and pregnancy tests? Please.

@Randy
That's anecdotal, please provide proof that all that was happening at the rate you claim.

Why not a slave? She was convinced that a pill was going to take care of her. She was convinced that since she was granted that right over her own body (slavery in its self since she never need that right granted to her) and thus was protected. She was then forced to take multiple pregnancy test because the pill and her newly granted rights to her body put her in a situation that lead to increased risk. Sounds like a great life. Thank you feminism.

@J.B. Schmidt -- You know nothing. And yet you opine.

@Randy
Thanks. I had forgotten you were one of the enlightened.

@J.B. Schmidt....You demonstrate that you know absolutely nothing of what was going on prior to the 1960s. Back then things went on just like they do today but they were like cats in a sandbox, covering their s..t up. One of the things that came out of the 60s was less hypocrisy and more transparency. You also need to take into account a nation less than half the size that it is now.

@Lyle
Where is your proof?

Since roe v wade, nearly 55 million abortions have occurred. Please provide proof that comparable amounts of cat s--t was buried in the 50's and earlier?

@J.B. Schmidt....You ask the impossible. Since the nation was in denial, records were not kept, especially for abortions that were illegal at the time. You are bemoaning that the nation's dirty little secrets have been exposed. All sorts of negatives were kept under wraps including: drug addiction in housewives, the levels of mental illness, domestic violence, child abuse and neglect, etc. It wasn't the Land of Oz.

@Lyle
Then it is your word that we use to determine the health of the country?

Better the word of people who were around at the time than the credulous illusions of someone who wants to believe the picture of American life we saw on Leave It to Beaver was the norm.

@Randy
Right, because you and I don't have different impression of the 80's in which we both lived.

How small do I look with perched up on that horse of yours?

This mean Patch hide real truth.

My sarcasm font must not have gone through Rose. Relax.

@-;-'---- Rose.....Looking at the situation objectively, the growing fetus is a parasitic growth within the female host's body. It is totally dependent on her body to continue to reach actuality; therefore, the choice is entirely hers whether she continues the pregnancy or terminates it. This is clearly how the matter has been determined by the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe v Wade; it is her body and the yet unborn has no agency.

Only evil empire allow murder.

An unborn child is a parasite? Yeah, it just a tumor. Does this mean you will defend a man accused of murder for kicking his pregnant lady in the gut?

The overriding principle behind Roe vs. Wade was the individual's right to privacy. That means the ability to make a medical/spiritual decision without interference from the government until such point as it becomes the government's business to interfere.

There are many reasons why a woman would consider terminating a pregnancy, social, medical, whatever. This is the business of the woman, her doctor, and her clergyperson, if any.

@Kathy
Why should the man be responsible? I thought it was the women's body and her right to choose? Does the man get a say in her abortion?

Abortion is legal. Agree or disagree it is legal.

Guns are legal. Agree or disagree they are legal.

Libtards want HUGE restrictions on guns, intense background checks, etc.

Libtards want abortion on demand with NO restricitons. Why?

Any liberal answer this....

Should we have restrictions and waiting periods on gun sales when at least 99% of those who go through the legal process are law abiding, upstanding citizens with nothing to hide? (remember, the hoodlums and criminals arent buying them legally so you will NEVER stop them).

If no, you are lieing.

If yes, would you support a 48 hour waiting period and intense background and pyschological testing for those demanding an abortion?

In the end libs dont care about life. They care about themselves only.

Kathy, how about this...

It is the woman's right to choose to abort. Fine. The man has no choice. So be it.

The man decides he DOES NOT want it. The woman does. The man has the right to sign away all rights and is not at all responsible for the child.

You cool with that?

She made the decision to have sex without using a condom. It's her body, she chooses what enters and exits it. In this case it is a penis and a dead child.

Kathy,
The article was not about Samantha not being able to get an abortion of her choice, it was about convenience. "Abortion is legal. It is a woman's right." fine and well, but just because you want an abortion it does not mean that it has to be un-regulated.
There are regulations for Samantha getting a tattoo, it's her body, she should be able to get a tattoo when and where she wants, correct? She doesn't have time, between her classes and her job, to get her tramp stamp at a licensed parlor. It's all about convenience.

Judy: I reckon you can make that comment because you kept you're legs closed and never had premarital sex? Or wait you are still a virgin. Ya Okay. *cough* Don't Judge because last time I checked no law regulating sex. *burp*

I agree, the "knuckle dragging neanderthals" are thoughtless and childish.

And Kathy, when thrice divorced broads like you can reproduce with the help of what the man provides, then you can also have 100 say in the outcome of the human life and being that is created.

Actually with the tools available today, it doesn't really take two.
Then there are those types who prefer several.

@ Liberalism is a mental disease (as a forum name is a mental disease)

WOW! Thrice divorced broad like me eh? I'm 48. I am in the midst of my first divorce. I'm a bit old now to have children,besides Im still in treatment for breast cancer. Assumptions are the termites of everything in life. Ya took my banter a bit too serious m'dear, step away and get some air hun.

Does it make you hot? Me Tarzan...

Oh hell, someone mark the calendar.
Greg will be paying 'till October 2031.
Stay strong Greg, keep your legs crossed!