[Entropic]

Originally Posted by Solumina

How is this "interfering with Church business"?

This law targets church run organizations. Unless you can name any other organization that this law effects, it's targeted.

Originally Posted by Solumina

All that this law is saying is that they need to post that they are not a health clinic unless they actually have medical professionals there.

Either I'm misreading the law, or this isn't true. It's a law that requires health clinics to post saying whether or not they provide abortions, irregardless of whether or not they have medical professionals.

Originally Posted by Solumina

They post a sign on a building and if they really want to go over the top they can post a little line on their website. This doesn't interfere with shit unless misleading people is part of their business, in which case you would agree that they are doing something wrong.

It targets a religious group. That's interference. Again, unless you can show me other non-religious organizations who are effected by this, it's specifically targeted at religious organization.

Originally Posted by Solumina

Plus I know that the evidence I have given is anecdotal but this law is something that people in Baltimore have been demanding for years, which is my the lawmakers actually did something (cuz lets face it local politics just don't do shit without an active voice from the community) if you think that the law is wrong then you need to prove that it is hurting the Church or that it is somehow infringing on the rights of the Church, instead of bitching that the information that Saya has given you isn't good enough because it is too bias.

I have been pointing that out since the beginning. It's a targeted law at religious groups that doesn't effect anyone but religious groups in practice. In theory this would apply to secular groups, but if we're going based purely on anecdotal evidence, then I think you and I both know that arguing it targets anyone else is insane.

The law is also wrong because it is essentially the legal version of carpet bombing. Instead of targeting individual offenders for misleading women, it is a blanket law which effects all organizations, whether they mislead women or not. As far as I know, and I'm not a lawyer, there are laws against providing

In other words, in it's current form the law either doesn't go far enough, or it goes too far.

Originally Posted by Solumina

There are legitimate church based clinics that do have medical professionals on staff, there are also legitimate church based clinics that only give advice and admit to not being sources for medical information, I have no problem with these, and to my knowledge neither does anyone else here. The involvement of religious organizations in reproductive health isn't the problem, it is the attempts to trick and mislead women.

And I've said that I don't take issue with lying anywhere in my posts. If they lie, then they should be punished. However, if what you are saying is true, then the conclusion I've come to is this:

1.) Not all church based clinics are misleading people.
2.) There isn't strong evidence supporting the fact that church based clinics are misleading people.
3.) This law targets all church based clinics who refuse abortion without strong evidence.
4.) Therefore, there shouldn't be a law.

Originally Posted by Saya

Yeah, I give up at this point. I don't understand why a guy who defended Nation Master is getting so picky about sources.

I defended NationMaster because I can read the United Nations report they cited. By extension, I can defend the United Nations report because I can review the methodology they used. Just because it's an aggregation, doesn't mean it's invalid.