Back on April 16th, Ellen Kolb, writing on her blog, reported that EMILY’s list had decided who it would support for Governor of New Hampshire in the 2018 Election.
Fresh off a victory by its preferred candidate in the Manchester mayoral election, EMILY’s List has announced that it is throwing its endorsement and cash into the New Hampshire governor’s race in support of Molly Kelly.
This reminded me of a question I asked five years ago.
If you support live birth abortion, what is the best way for “doctors” to kill those babies?
EMILY’s list demands that their candidates support conception to live birth abortion and that taxpayers fund abortion providers. One of the more infamous actors in the macabre play of live-birth abortion is Kermit Gosnell. His preferred method was to,
“…take the crying newborns and snip their spines to kill them. But that is not necessarily the way every abortion doctor kills newborn babies, so we should pose the question to those in the New Hampshire Democrat party who not only support the practice but enrich their political careers because of it.
As a public official looking to earn a taxpayer-funded salary so that you can give taxpayer dollars to “abortion” providers as defined by the Special Interest Group and campaign donor EMILY’s list, I think we have a right to know. How would you kill them?
Are you at all concerned about the cost-effectiveness (taxpayer exposure) of the options available for live-birth abortions?
Do some live-birth abortion procedures present more risk to the mother than others? Which ones and why?
If women’s health is that important to you, will you provide the CDC with generic data on procedures and outcomes that impact “women’s health care” like frequency, cost, and postoperative status of the mother to ensure her “health” and safety ‘needs’ were met? If not, why?
If there is a safer, more effective way to terminate an infant’s life during a live-birth abortion that improves women’s health care outcomes what it and why do you deem it”‘safer?”
As a defender of women’s health care, (and a supporter of government intercession in health care to ensure things like ‘reproductive justice’) would you establish a ‘blue ribbon committee,’ or an ‘interagency task force’ to examine and report on abortion In Nw Hampshire to protect women from unscrupulous health care “professionals” who might perform unnecessary procedures or unnecessarily expensive procedures, or put women’s health at risk? If not, why not?
By ignore these sorts of questions or refusing to answer how can you call yourself a defender of women’s right to healthcare?
These are important questions, and not just for Democrat “candidate” Molly Kelly. Most Democrat women in New Hampshire running for Public Office (and some Democrats who dare to call themselves “men”) agree with EMILY’s list or at least the women EMILY’s list funds.
Women of all ideological stripes deserve to know where candidates stand on these questions of “women’s healthcare” as do taxpayers whose money Democrat candidates are spending.
So, before we agree to let them cash a paycheck with our money so they can then funnel more of our money to pay for these sorts of medical procedures, we should expect some appropriate level of transparency.
EMILY’s list donated to your campaign. They require you to support live birth abortion and taxpayer support for abortion. What is the most cost-effective way to kill those babies and how will you guarantee women’s safety or ensure that our tax dollars are being used effectively?
