Here in Olympia HB 1366 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1366&year=2011) is being considered.
Among other things, it would define pro-life pregnancy centers as a “limited service pregnancy center” because they do not offer abortion and (usually) contraception. Restrictions follow, along with the ability for ANY person who is ‘aggrieved’ by a violation in this bill to file a lawsuit – the results of which can be up to three times the damages sustained.
This is a blatant attempt to silence and suppress efforts to save our unborn children.
Please pray.
[Update - 2011-01-25, 1426]
Did you know you can find out your district & your representatives (at least in Washington) online? There is a “Find Your Legislator” tool. Clicking on any of the legislators brings you to their profile with a link to e-mail them. After confirming your address, you can e-mail one or all (!) of them from the same form.
Here is the e-mail I just sent to my legislators:
Dear Representative Hunt, Representative Reykdal and Senator Fraser,
Foremost please accept my thanks for your continued service to our state as representatives of the people of Washington. Your willingness to spend yourselves in this vocation helps ensure that Washington remains faithful to the needs and dreams of its citizens.
I am corresponding with you today to express my dismay at HB 1366, Concerning limited service pregnancy centers. My first concern is as a citizen who firmly believes that life begins at conception and as such, should be protected from that moment forward. Pregnancy centers helping to support frightened, disadvantaged and often abandoned mothers to bring their children to term and support them throughout their childhood are an important part of that belief.
HB 1366 threatens the very existence of these centers by requiring that they either provide prenatal medical care, comprehensive birth control services, and abortion or referrals for abortion OR by placing undue burdens that are specifically intended to punish them for not holding to these services – which are intrinsically opposed to the mission of these centers.
Moreover, HB 1366 gives the right to ANY person to file a lawsuit against a center that is alleged to be in violation of these unfair measures, potentially even if that person has never been in any relationship with that center. Given the polarizing effect of this issue, it is not hard to imagine how easily this provision could be abused.
Because of this, I urge you to NOT permit this bill to go beyond the current stage of committee consideration. As it is written it is unfair and subject to misuse. It is a dis-service to those citizens who work in these centers and those citizens would desire their assistance.
Respectfully yours,
Father Jacob Maurer
PrintPrint
emailemail
Add to favoritesAdd to favorites
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Help me out Father. I read the bill after following your link.
I’m failing to find where in it, the proposed legislation requires the services you mention:
HB 1366 threatens the very existence of these centers by requiring that they either provide prenatal medical care, comprehensive birth control services, and abortion or referrals for abortion OR by placing undue burdens that are specifically intended to punish them for not holding to these services – which are intrinsically opposed to the mission of these centers.
The only requirements I read are –
The centers must say they are using over the counter testing supplies and let the women self administer the test upon request, if this is the case, and they must surrender any health information they collected upon request, if they still have it.
Where does it dictate the provision of these other services?
Hello Kathryn,
Thanks for the clarification request – I see that I phrased that poorly. That line should read:
The point I hoped to make was that by putting these burdens on so-called ‘Limited service pregnancy center” (a new term that this bill would establish), the bill implicitly puts pressure to try to force them to provide these services. A legalized ‘do it or else’ scenario. The dictate is implicit, but still very present.
The things that this bill would require of so-called ‘Limited service pregnancy center’s would include:
- posting notices of services that it does not provide in six different languages in size 30 font on the premises
- posting the same notice on the front page of the site
- provide the same notice verbally to every person who comes in (on their first visit)
- provide the same notice in writing to every person who comes in (on their first visit)
- provide the same notice on any advertisements
What this stress on services offered & not offered does is attempt to establish a(nother?) legal precedent as well as a social basis (in the minds of those reading the signs) for the claim that these services – especially comprehensive birth control services, abortion & referrals for abortion – are mandatory for any organization that would want to have a voice in a woman’s decision regarding the birth of her child.
‘If you can’t beat them, shut them out’ seems to be the point of this bill.
If this bill passes there will need to be a change in operating strategy.
A free pregnancy test, and a safe, private place to administer it, upon review of pregnancy and fetal development information.
I have crazy pictures in my head of the organizational sponsors for such locations.
Father,
thanks for the tip – I just emailed my legislators. I didn’t know it was that easy!