July 15, 2013

Vascillations and WWDD

Posted by davidlgunnjr under Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Centers, Abortion Clinic, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Escorts, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Rights, Abortion Terrorism, Abortion Violence, David Gunn, David Gunn Jr., Doctor David Gunn, Dr. Tiller, Free Speech, Free Speech Constraints, history, Pro Life Terrorism | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[18] Comments 

If you have been following my recent posts, you know I am supporting the Abortion Rights Freedom Ride set to kick off on 23 July 2013 in New York City and San Francisco.  I discussed this summer’s action with a number of people I respect, and there is a divide in the abortion rights community on whether or not it is wise to embark on this action.  I did not reach the decision to support and join with the Riders without giving the decision due diligence; nor, did I neglect to consider the multiple outcomes of the action.

When facing a dichotomous debate among two sides of the community, two camps who should be working together toward common goals, I ask myself now as I did in the past, What Would Dad Do?  Would he shrink back into the shadows, rely solely on private action and influence, or would he advocate, and actually engage in, direct action and response to those who tormented, stalked, and eventually killed him?  Obviously, we know the answer:  he did not back down!  As I wrote a couple of posts ago, I also cannot and will not back down.

Upon the 20th year after my dad’s murder by a Christian terrorist, as we face continued threat of violence, and as state after state passes draconian anti abortion legislation, I reflect not only on what my dad would do but also consider the words of Yeats:

Things said or done long years ago,
Or things I did not do or say
But thought that I might say or do,
Weigh me down, and not a day
But something is recalled,
My conscience or my vanity appalled.

Knowing I will be appalled by remaining silent, I resolved the vacillation by opting to support what I believe is the right course of action.  To that end, I co-authored a piece on the merits and need of the Abortion Rights Freedom Ride with one of its primary organizers Sunsara Taylor.  I want to share with you our recent missive so perhaps more of us will come together on the need for direct, vocal, and mass support our clinics, our doctors, and our rights

Abortion Rights Are At a Crossroads:
This is NOT a Time to Lay Low – It is Time for Massive Uncompromising Struggle!

By Sunsara Taylor and David Gunn, Jr.
July 12, 2013

Across the country, people are waking up to the state of emergency facing the right to abortion. As legislators in Texas push hard to close down 37 of 42 abortion clinics statewide, new laws in North Carolina would close four of their five remaining clinics. Meanwhile, Ohio’s recently passed budget could close as many as three abortion clinics. North Dakota, on August 1st, may become the first state to effectively ban abortion. Already Mississippi’s last abortion clinic is merely an appellate ruling away from closure. We could go on.

If we do not reverse this trajectory now, we will condemn future generations of women and girls to forced motherhood, to lives of open enslavement, terror, and life-crushing shame. Women will be forced to have children they do not want, trapping them in abusive relationships, driving them into poverty, forcing them out of school, and extinguishing their dreams. Women will go to desperate and dangerous measures to terminate unwanted pregnancies, once again flooding emergency rooms and turning up dead women in cheap motels with blood caked between their legs.

We face two divergent roads: Either we seize control of the debate and reset the terms and whole trajectory of this fight; or we continue down the road of “established conventional wisdom,” only to awaken before long to an unrecognizable and untenable situation for women. What each of us does matters,and matters tremendously.

It is in this context that we initiated an Abortion Rights Freedom Ride. Our echo of the Civil Rights Freedom Rides is intentional and fitting. Women who cannot decide for themselves if and when they have children are not free. On the contrary, they are mere child-bearing chattel whose purpose is to serve and not actively chose their destinies.

Volunteers on this Freedom Ride will caravan from both coasts to North Dakota, traverse through the middle of the country into Wichita, and head due south to Jackson, Mississippi. Our aim is threefold: one, we must move beyond localized fights andlauncha national counter-offensive; two, we must radically reset the political, moral, and ideological terms of this fight so that millions understand that this fight is about women’s liberation or women’s enslavement; lastly, and of paramount importance, we must call forth the mass independent political resistance that is necessary to defeat this war on women.

As the Abortion Rights Freedom Ride evolved from conception to genesis, many have responded by with enthusiastic and unequivocal support. Regular people from across the country as well as those who have been on the front lines of the abortion rights struggle are joining with us in demanding abortion rights without compromise and thanking us for daring to travel to where women’s rights face harshest threat.

However, some who share our passion for the cause have raised concerns and even opposition to this action. They fear the Abortion Rights Freedom Ride will be too confrontational, too vociferous for abortion, and may turn off avenues of support.
Some have argued that it is wrong for people to come into local areas from the outside. Others argue that mass political protest will endanger the chances of winning important court cases and that it is better to rely on official channels of politics.

Because the future of women is at stake, we feel it is critical to address these concerns head on. In fact, it is exactly the faulty logic at the root of these concerns that has contributed to all of us finding ourselves in such a dire situation.

First, while local ground conditions are different and unique in some ways, the fact that every clinic and every state is facing heightened assault is not unique nor is it local. We all face a national assault on abortion rights which requires a national counter-offensive. Not only is it utterly immoral for us to abandon the women living in the states most under direct duress, it is delusional to think that what happens in states like Arkansas, Mississippi, North Dakota and Kansas will not come soon to a theater near you. Our futures are bound together and we all share the responsibility to take this on and turn the tide where the attacks are the most severe.

Second, while it is true that a great many people – including many who support abortion rights – are defensive about abortion, they should not be ashamed and this defensiveness and shame is precisely something we must eradicate.

Among the reasons many are defensive about abortion are decades of propaganda by those who oppose women’s equality but posture as defenders of “babies”; meanwhile, supporters of abortion rights have too often been conciliatory, muted, and compromising. This must stop. This fight has never been about babies. It has always been about controlling women. This is why there is not a single major anti-abortion organization that supports birth control.

If we want to turn the tide, we have to tell the truth: there is absolutely nothing wrong with abortion. Fetuses are NOT babies. Abortion is NOT murder. Women are NOT incubators.

A great many people are hungry for this message. They are furious and searching for a meaningful vehicle to make their outrage felt. It is only by asserting the positive morality of abortion rights that we can call forth and mobilize the tens of thousands who already share our resolve. Only through direct action and a polemical shift can all of us stand together and change how millions of others are thinking. Shouldn’t this emergency situation awaken us to the need to change public opinion, not accommodate it?

History has proven that directly confronting oppressive social norms can be disruptive and scary; yet, it is a necessary and uplifting part of making any significant positive change. Many argued that it was wiser for LGBT people to stay closeted until society was more accepting; others counseled against the Civil Rights Freedom Rides out of fear that it would only rile up the opposition, but it was only when people took that risk and got “in your face” that broader public opinion and actions began to change.

We must create a situation where being anti-abortion is seen to be as socially unacceptable as it is to advocate lynchings, anti-LGBT violence, or rape (although, if you listen to some on the Right, rape advocacy is not necessarily off their table).When we reach that summit, we will be on our way to turning the tide.

Third, while court cases are important – even essential – it is only through truly massive independent political struggle that we stand a chance at defeating the truly unyielding and powerful foe we face. Every setback the anti-abortion movement experiences only makes them more determined and every victory only makes them more aggressive. They will not be appeased if we lie low. No court case or election or new law will stop them. Not only has the existing power structure proven unwilling or unable to do so, people who believe they are on a “mission from God” are not bound by human laws and do not yield to public opinion.

But they can be defeated. Forced motherhood is deeply opposed to the interests of humanity. If we get out there and tell the truth, if we resist, if we clarify the stakes of this battle, and if we mobilize wave upon wave of the masses to get off the sidelines and into the streets with us, we can win. There is a tremendous reservoir of people who can and must be called forth to join in this struggle. We have seen this vividly in Texas. Let us not underestimate the potential that exists in every state across this country.

We stand at a crossroads. For the future of women everywhere, let us refuse the worn pathways that have allowed us to lose so much ground. We must not lay low, hope these attacks will blow over, and allow women in some parts of the country to be forced into mandatory motherhood while hoping to preserve the rights of a shrinking few. We cannot continue to foster the attitude that abortion is the 21st Century’s Scarlet Letter while allowing abortion providers to be further stigmatized and demonized. We cannot recoil from the massive fight that urgently needs fighting at this moment in this time.

Now is the time for courage, for truth telling, for stepping out and launching an uncompromising counter-offensive. We have right on our side. We call on everyone who cares about the future of women to join with us in strengthening the national impact and influence of this Abortion Rights Freedom Ride. Join with us at our kick-off rallies in New York City and San Francisco in July 23. Caravan to meet us in North Dakota, Wichita, Kansas, and Jackson, Mississippi. Send a donation or a message of support. Reach out to individuals and religious communities that can provide safe passage to the courageous individuals who are giving up their summers and putting everything they have into winning a different and far better future for women. Most importantly, let us together take the rough road to victory. It may be less traveled, but only through struggle can we reap the benefits of love’s labor won.

To learn more about and get involved with the Abortion Rights Freedom Ride, go to: http://www.stoppatriarchy.org/

Sunsara Taylor writes for Revolution Newspaper (revcom.us) and is an initiator of the movement to End Pornography and Patriarchy: The Enslavement and Degradation of Women (StopPatriarchy.org)

David Gunn, Jr. is the son of David Gunn, Sr., the first abortion doctor to be assassinated by an anti-abortion gunman, and blogs for Abortion.ws

 

July 7, 2013

Protect the Masturbating Fetuses!

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion Information
[25] Comments 

I swear I am not making this up.

A short while ago, the U.S. House of Representatives considered (and passed) legislation that would ban abortions after 20 weeks.   They picked 20 weeks because all of a sudden the anti-abortion movement has come to a consensus that at 20 weeks the fetus can feel pain.  Not 22 weeks, not 19.5 weeks.   Nope, at twenty weeks the litter critter can feel pain.  Case closed.

During the debate, Texas Congressman Michael Burgess stood up to deliver an impassioned defense of the bill.  He is anti-abortion right down the line and so he could be counted on to toe the anti-abortion line all the way.   He did – and he went a few steps further.

You see, at one point he was trying to demonstrate his intricate knowledge of when the fetus can feel pain.  No, he’s not a doctor but, uh, well he’s a legislator so that makes him qualified to opine on this subject that has confounded the experts for years.  In arguing that the fetus can feel pain at that point, he actually said this.   I mean, get ready, this is an exact quote from a man who has been elected by tens of thousands of people back in his home state.  He said:   “If they are a male baby they may have a hand between their legs.  If they feel pleasure, why can’t they feel pain?”

Yep.   He really said that.   No, don’t laugh.  I’m being totally serious.   This is what an elected official from the great state of Texas said in the United States House of Representatives.  This is the level to which the discourse on abortion has sunk.  We are now talking about trying to protect masturbating fetuses.

Now, I wanna try to be objective here.  Those of have been reading my blog for years know that I am very pro-choice but there are times when I question the messages and motives of the pro-choice movement.  I try to keep an open mind on the work of the crisis pregnancy centers, I defend the right of anti-abortion protestors to stand in front of a clinic, I cringe at the thought of an abortion on a viable fetus unless there are extenuating circumstances.   I basically try to see both sides and, yes, that approach has gotten me into hot water.   So, once again, I’m gonna try to  understand Congressman Burgess’ views.

So, my first question in my quest for the truth is what exactly is the object of the fetus’ fantasy?   I mean, you guys especially know that you’re not just sitting there when the ole dip stick suddenly comes up like a periscope in a submarine, right?   Nine times out of ten you were thinking of something or, more likely, someone. Or you may have been thumbing through the latest edition of People, in that section where they have the candid shots of Demi Moore or Jessica Alba romping on the beach at Cannes in a skin tight bikini.  C’mon, admit it boys.  Let go of that Catholic guilt.

So, what is this fetus thinking about when it grabs its teeny weenie microscopic weiner?  Oh, wait a second, can the fetus even think at that point?  If so, is it thinking about that embryo in that other uterus that will become the next movie starlet?

You may think I have lost my mind but this is a serious line of inquiry.   All across the country, anti-abortion legislators are enacting laws that ban abortion after 20 weeks.  They are doing so because they are convinced that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks so they’re trying to protect them from that discomfort.  Oh, sure, they don’t mind if thousands of volts of electricity are being zapped into that murderer on death row.  No.  That’s different, right?    But that itty bitty wittle baby in that other person’s body needs to be protected because we now know that it feels pain because, as Congressman Burgess has shown, it can also feel its mojo.

As Captain Kirk used to say:   Scotty, beam me up!

 

July 1, 2013

Eternal Damnation

Posted by davidlgunnjr under Abortion Information | Tags: , , , , , |
[19] Comments 
David Gunn, Jr.

David Gunn, Jr.

Sitting in Mrs. Croom’s third grade classroom during recess, copiously copying text from a random text book as punishment for some nine year old transgression I cannot recall or name, a girl sitting next to me on one of those round white tables with a black plastic border looked up from her science book, regarded me seriously and full of unmitigated and undeserved hate, and told me I was going to hell. Here I was nine years old and condemned to hell wondering just what I did to deserve soul annihilation at the hands of an angry Satan and even angrier third grade girl.

It was quite an odd statement from a fellow classmate, and one that felt irrationally unjustified since my sin to innocence ratio at age nine, though I had smoked a cigarette, drank some beer, and had the beginnings of what would eventually become carnal thoughts (not hard to develop when you’re the son of a gynecologist and overly hormonal even for a nine year old), were nonetheless relatively new and certainly not worthy of eternal damnation in my estimation. Being a damnation virgn so to speak, I asked her what justified my condemnation to everlasting suffering, and I recall she pointed to my T-shirt.

You have to realize, I discovered rock music at an early age and developed what we might now call a man crush on Kiss at age six or seven. I had most of their records by third grade, even the shitty solo efforts each member released of which Ace’s was my favorite. In fact, I was a proud card carrying member of the Kiss Army, and my room was adorned with all sorts of Kissmobelia. Of course, in 1979, Kiss was widely known as Knights in Satan’s Service in certain circles in America especially those in the Bible Belt where I now found myself firmly planted. Even at nine I realized the proposition that four New York pop rockers who wore clown make up and sang incessantly about sex were not Pied Pipers to Hell’s gate; yet, my first taste of damnation stung and troubled me for longer than I wanted to admit. In fact, though I’m loathe and embarrassed to admit, they served as an introduction to fundamentalism to which I later succumbed as a result of relentless pressure and more eternal damnations.

Of course, this was not the first time I contemplated my immortal soul’s fate or experienced fundamental Christianity. It was, though, the first time I was damned to hell–and by a nine year old ne’er-do-well sitting in detention with me at that! My dad’s parents were about as fundamental as fundamental could be in the late 1970s, belonged to the Church of Christ, and were absolutely committed to their perceived duty to God. Fortunately or not, during my early years up until I was around 11, I, like many others of my generation I suppose, was shipped off to my grandparents’ house each summer for at least a two week tour of duty. Looking back on it now, it is odd how I relished going to visit my paternal Kentucky grandparents yet was oftentimes dismayed at the prospect of reciprocal time with my mom’s more progressive parents.

GodJudgeGaysAB

I believe my Kentucky preference was highly influenced by the fact I had other cousins who stayed at my grandparents’ home who were the same age as me, served the same sentence as me, and ultimately made the stay enjoyable. While we spent much of our time exploring the woods surrounding my grandparents’ house, a standing expectation was we attend any and all church function at the local Church of Christ. If there was a teeming casserole potluck, we were at church. If it was Wednesday afternoon, we were at church, and if it was Sunday—morning and night—we were at church.

Now a fundamentalist Church of Christ, for those uninitiated in their machinations was a fairly terrifying prospect for a young person, and I was there each summer from post toddler age up to prepubescence. They landed somewhere on the continuum of Cotton Mather/Jonathan Edwards on one hand and Pat Roberts/Jim Jones on the other: apocalyptic, hyper suffocating, and always damning us to hell for half thoughts, half deeds, and potential eventualities which never came to pass. In fact, if you recall, the late 70s and early 80s was a boon year for what became the moral majority and I was there to soak it up in all its majestic and twisted intimidation. My uncle was the church choir director which was an interesting proposition as music in our church was strictly verboten aside from the unadorned human voice. I guess a piano, organ (it referenced a sexual organ as everyone knows), or God forgive, a band was simply too indulgent for the fundamental faithful. Moreover, my grandfather was a guest sermonizer who could pound his fist and speak of the approaching fall of man with the best of them. As I grew up in this community each summer, not only did it become somewhat normal, but it exposed me to adults I found influential as well as cousins and peers in the community who were as want to list off mortal sins as the third grader who damned me to hell for a wardrobe choice. As a result of warm embrasure in this close knit and insular community, I continued to wonder what I was doing to contribute to my soul’s eternal torment in a hell of rendered human fat while simultaneously wanting to please those around me.

By the winter or spring of 1980, I took to wearing three piece suits, carrying a Bible with me everywhere I went, and essentially succumbed to numbing fundamentalism: one which is inclined toward judgment and condemnation as opposed to unconditional love and forgiveness. I also questioned my every action and motivation and wondered how they would contribute to my eventual residence in Satan’s abode. Coming home to deep southern Alabama certainly reinforced my newfound rebirth as Southern Baptists are kissing cousins of the Church of Christ, and I eventually tried to purge myself of sin by burning the symbol of my selfish and sinful indulgence, my Kiss record collection. Though it was one of my most shameful acts, the neighborhood Christjihadists urged me on to destroy the symbol of my eternal ruin. Once the offending records of my sin were burned in their own hellfire of my creation, I felt a sense of what I can only describe as orgasmic bliss though I had no referent for orgasm at 10 or 11. What I did have was an enduring fear that nothing I did would save my soul and even my pithy attempt at a burnt offering would fall on God’s deaf ear.

Oddly enough, in the summer of 1981 I returned to my paternal grandparents’ house for my yearly pilgrimage full of religious zeal and commitment. Where I had been a rock-n-roll hellion on the proverbial Highway to Hell to some, I now accompanied the church on an out of state missionary trip to Illinois where we were housed with strangers, impressed with the worthiness of our cause for the eight hour or so bus trip, and spent the next few days going door to door attempting to sell Bible sets for our lord and savior to the unsuspecting public in the non-descript Illinois town in which we found ourselves. I found the missionary trip stifling and intimidating, and, in retrospect, I wonder what the fuck the church was thinking when they sent tweens out unsupervised in a strange neighborhood to sell Bibles without the slightest concern of abduction, assault, or worse.

On the way back to Kentucky, as I thought over the experience, an older girl who accompanied us on the trip introduced me to what I can only affectionately call a dry hump but was probably closer to pedophilia. I was certainly taken by her interest in me—and mine in her—while also absolutely terrified that her Eveish actions were ruining the yearlong soul searching salvation I so desperately sought to save me from the Lord’s rage. As we pulled in to Benton, then separated into individual cars, and headed back to my grandparents, I was filled with awe and shame: awed that a teenager would find an 11 year old the least bit interesting and attractive but shamed I let down God by acquiescing to bodily sin. My misgivings were only reinforced when I heard my cousins talking about a girl they knew—or knew from a friend who knew—about a teenager who allegedly had sex. I was rapt as they described how she would certainly go to hell for her sexual misconduct, and I thought about my brief bus arousal and was confronted again with damnation even in the face of blind devotion.

Later that summer, before heading back to Brewton, Alabama from Benton, Kentucky, how was I to know that a somewhat trivial accident involving a broken lamp would shake my youthful faith to its foundation? You see, there were six of us staying at Mae and Pete’s that summer: my six year old sister Wendy, our six year old cousin Kristen, my 11 year old favorite cousin Hannah, and her 13 or 14 year old sister Courtney. Hannah, Courtney, and I were in my grandparents’ bedroom talking on the bed. They did not particularly like us in their room as kids were supposed to be outside, in church, or in bed; yet, there we were on the bed dicking around as close southern cousins are want to do—nothing incestuous; that came earlier and prior to my birth yet colored my entire existence. Unfortunately, our hefty cousin Kristen decided to run down the hall after my sister. As she came barreling toward the bed, she attained what I can only describe as a miraculous airborne height similar to how Douglas Adams describes flight, “falling but missing,” and landed full force on the bed knocking over an antique—and sentimental to my grandmother—lamp in the process. Of course, all parents and grandparents recognize the distinct sound of their shit breaking at the hands of their spawn, and swept in the room to lay final judgment on the potential damned. Though the oldest of us were sitting still and my sister was hiding as Kristen took porcine flight, crashed, and created the necessary reverberations resulting in broken lamp, Wendy and I were blamed for the incident.

As I listened to my elders’ harsh criticism and unfair sentencing, it occurred to me then that I was a vainglorious fool. If ones as purportedly wise and Christian as my grandparents could erroneously condemn innocents, how could an ineffable wise grandparent to all be expected to unerringly pass judgment on the masses? How foolish was I to believe salvation lie through denying flesh and indiscriminant art burning. I do not know that I was familiar with past censorious art massacres, but I could not believe a creator God would condone such abhorrent and wanton destruction. Though I was not philosophically acquainted with a free will defense, the problem of evil, and had certainly never heard anyone dare utter God is dead, he died for me that day just as my respect in my father’s parents suffered an irrevocable foundational shift. To me, that summer of contradictions whose trajectory started roughly two years earlier when an unnamed girl damned me to hell for a T-shirt, ended in an unrecoverable loss of faith. I realized, then, a loving, all knowing, and ever present god would not subject me to hell for my grandparents’ erroneous judgment, my choice of wardrobe, or my innocent almost dry hump in the church bus. Yet, here were the so called redeemed acting as “purblind doomsters” readily strowing “blisses about my pilgrimage as pain.” Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 6.57.54 AM

Though I subsequently discovered many contributing and primary causes for my sister’s and my unfair persecution, I never regained the youthful exuberant blind faith I cherished for perhaps a year and a half. Later that year, I almost joined my parents’ less radical (ie. Episcopal) church—they joined because it was expected that a doctor and his spouse in a small Bible Belt Alabama town conform to societal norms and join a congregation to fit in with the social elite–my many conversations with the priest prior to Christening or whatever could not shake my newfound conviction theism was a fraud and a tool used to manipulate and control. Though I now think of myself as possessing some sense or form of individual strength and slight intellectual capacity, I am utterly ashamed at how easily fundamentalism seduced me as a kid; moreover, it is blatantly obvious that its survival greatly depends on fearful indoctrination of children; otherwise, it would wither and die as hatred and fear require careful and consistent cultivation which explains, to a certain degree, white flight, Islamaphobia, homophobia, xenophobia, and the never ending persecution of women.

Also, looking back on those formative individual philosophical and political moments–though I could not name it as such at the time—I cannot help but question whether or not dad’s decision to embrace and perform a newly legalized medical procedure, a procedure misunderstood and unpopular six to seven years after it started to slough out from the shadows into the mainstream, contributed to my initial damnation since there are no secrets in a small Alabama town. I know now, as I grew older and the 70s ceded to the 80s and Christjihadism and Reagan’s social conservatism spread, that dad’s profession darkly, if unjustly so, colored everything that came afterwards.

PS. Shameless plug time: Please check out the following link for information regarding this summer’s planned Abortion Rights Freedom Ride set to kick off in late July:

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/abortion-rights-freedom-ride

 

June 23, 2013

Old Media, New Media: The Abortion Landscape

Posted by DrK8 under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion MisInformation, Abortion Terrorism, Abortion Violence, Capitol Hill, Christian Terrorism, Church
[22] Comments 

Screen Shot 2013-06-23 at 12.57.32 PMIt makes sense that a healthy media system, one with widespread informed public participation, would be essential to a flourishing democracy. Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism states that the “central purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with accurate and reliable information they need to function in a free society” and identified nine core principles. Among the nine principles is the obligation of loyalty to the public and the obligation to truth, both principles which seem suspect in most of mainstream journalism. Problems with loyalty to the public and variations of truths are part of our current media system and that’s not healthy. As media scholar Robert McChesney claims, our current media system is set up to maximize profit for a relative handful of large companies and not to maximize public participation. Moreover, rather than act as watchdogs, the current media system operates more like lap dogs who act primarily as megaphones of government, military and corporations. The implications of the erosion of mainstream news reporting for women’s reproductive health means that stories are told but are not interpreted, investigated or contextualized.

For example, the Republican Party platform embraces anti-abortion language with no mention of exceptions for rape or incest. Stories about their platform on abortion have been dutifully reported in the NY Times and Washington Post. Meaningful journalism would go further by illustrating how a substantial number of Republicans, working from this ideological party platform, have become overtly aggressive in their efforts to restrict access to abortion. Calling these restrictions a seismic shift, the Guttmacher Institute claims that states have become increasingly hostile to abortion rights, especially during 2011. This seismic shift in the loss of abortion rights has been and continues to be addressed and contextualized in alternate media sources such as RH Reality Check, Moyers & Company and Democracy Now while mainstream media reports stories about individual state legislation without mapping out the larger picture. What this means for the public, particularly women of reproductive age, is that they are without accurate, comprehensive and reliable information about legislative actions in their state and, thus, are unable to fully participate as first class citizens. This may seem a bit of an overstatement but consider further evidence from polls that point to general approval for legalized abortion, from GOP survey findings that complain about attacks on abortion and from the rise of the Christian right–all issues that are essentially silenced in mainstream news.

Polls Favoring Abortion

In poll after poll (such as Pew, Gallup, CNN, WSJ), the majority in the United States has consistently shown general approval for access to

Screen Shot 2013-06-23 at 1.04.16 PM abortion, yet the Republicans legislators act according to their own party wishes, disregarding the voices of those they represent. Discrete stories about support for abortion in most circumstances appear in mainstream news sources. What is missing, I argue, are stories that illustrate the complexities of abortion rather than painting it as a black and white issue.

Young People frown on GOP’s Abortion Attacks

Another bit of evidence comes from the College Republican National Committee survey of young people. Among the findings is the call for Republicans to become more tolerant and open on women’s reproductive health particularly around the definition of rape, funding for Planned Parenthood, abortion access and even contraception. The GOP’s response concerning reproductive issues was to claim victimhood by responding that they had been “painted — both by Democrats and by unhelpful voices in our own ranks — in holding the most extreme anti-abortion positions.” Forget the fact, that no one forced Republicans to attack contraception or redefine rape or cut funding to Planned Parenthood.  Essentially, they opined that they needed to avoid allowing the abortion debate to be “conflated” (as if this was something done to Republicans instead of something they openly and oftentimes eagerly do to themselves) with debates over contraception, rape and Planned Parenthood but not change its stance on the issue of abortion itself. Again, mainstream media picked up the story about the findings in the survey but took it no further. It was other sources, such as Salon, Politico, RH Reality and Huffington Post, that connected the dots for those who follow alternate news sources.

The Rise of the Christian Right within the GOP

In yet another news oversight is the rise of Christian right as a powerful voice within the Republican Party and the Party’s further shift to the right in legislating morality and legitimating its ideological myths about America. Under the influence of conservative Christians, Republicans have sought to defend a traditional concept of family through debates that opposed abortion, feminism, stem cell research and gay rights. Religion is at the heart of these debates which blurs the boundaries between separation of church and state. And, according to evangelical radio broadcasters, this boundary blurring seems to be exactly what is desired as they march toward the front line of the culture wars fighting against their perceptions of judicial tyranny that legalized abortion and outlawed school prayer.

In 1995, amidst the tumultuous events of far-right militia actions against the perceived corrupt and tyrannical federal government and the Screen Shot 2013-06-23 at 12.59.12 PManti-abortion activists’ destruction and murders against clinics and doctors, Laura Flanders, writing for Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), astutely asked, “When will media see the connection?” Citing expert testimony that far-right militias and anti abortion activists were one and the same, as well as citing the 1994 Supreme Court’s agreement with pro-choice groups that anti-abortionists could legitimately be investigated for conspiracy, she argued that “the national media’s gentle handling of the anti-abortion story has amounted to a quasi-conspiracy itself” by turning a blind eye to the connections. In 2013, I would repeat Guttmacher that there has been a seismic shift away from abortion rights. The obvious lack of investigations about the actions of the far-right legislators (militia) documented attacks against a woman’s right to access abortion and other reproductive health care is more than turning a blind eye. The lack of better reporting is indicative of what Pew cites as the continued erosion of news reporting due to financial cutbacks, increased use of advertising dollars spent on digital technology, and a shift toward digital news consumption. The good news for reproductive rights is that majority of Americans have increased their news consumption after hearing about an event or issue from friends and family. Social networking is now a part of this process including sources such as Abortion.ws, RH Reality, Moyers & Company and others to provide in-depth news about reproductive health care issues.

So it seems that while mainstream news sources such as the NY Times and the Washington Post continue to report on discrete reproductive health issues, it will be up to us to connect the dots for ourselves, to act as cartographers to map the abortion landscape, and to share our work with our readers, particularly in the coming elections where we should seize opportunities to speak publicly about supporting the rights of women through political donations, petition signatures and plenty of Facebook and blog postings.

 

 

June 19, 2013

Abortion Providers Are Imperfect Too

Posted by Kimmie Farrell under Abortion Information | Tags: , , , , , , |
[15] Comments 

Given the challenging professional and political conditions for abortion providers, there is a tendency for pro-choice activists and organizations to speak of abortion providers at times as if they are infallible. They are not. Within their group, abortion providers experience the occasional normal risk-related patient complications. Like their colleagues in other areas of medicine, honest mistakes occur at times and the infrequent bad doctor does surface once in awhile.

Most who work at abortion clinics, or for the pro-choice cause, are so accustomed to misinformation and intentional deceit about abortion that many initially thought the news about Kermit Gosnell was too ghastly to be true.  How quickly should any of us judge the merits of any indictment? Pro-choice organizations eventually did publicly condemn the man for the criminal he was. It wasn’t enough condemnation for some and, I hate to say it but some of the criticism of the pro-choice leadership “silence” was fair.

Throughout the trial of Gosnell, abortion opponents supplied a steady stream of commentary indicating that pro-choice people protect bad doctors who provide abortions. It may seem off topic but how many adoption lawyers do anti-abortion people “protect” after an adoption has been mishandled? When a “crisis pregnancy center” misrepresents itself as an abortion clinic, how many of their supporters ignore the harm in the deception? More on those issues in a later post.

There should be no reluctance at all to discuss the facets of the Gosnell case that draw attention to a doctor who included abortion in his practice and did so recklessly and criminally. Holding pro-choice views or working in an abortion practice does not make one tolerant of malpractice or criminal conduct!  When a bad doctor is exposed in other medical fields people may respond with outrage but they don’t paint all doctors in the same field as bad. Nor do they label all workers in that field as protective. Once the doctor is censured or his/her license revoked, people are grateful for the systems in place to deal with such transgressions.

Unlike other doctors, abortion providers are under constant regulatory and political scrutiny. Like other doctors, they are conscientious and consider their patients’ well-being their chief priority. To hear what is disseminated by anti-choice groups, you’d never know any professionalism existed among abortion providers. Anti-choice leaders continuously strategize about how best to sully the reputations of abortion providers. One of the more destructive forms of anti-choice harassment is videotaping patients for whom an ambulance is called. They film it for two reasons: 1) to intimidate, and 2) to accumulate “data” to bolster their misleading claims about what is “normal” for abortion patients. In their world, risks are acceptable in other medical procedures but not abortion. It doesn’t seem to occur to them that when a clinic calls an ambulance, the doctor is being responsible and following professional medical standards and protocols.

Regardless of the unfairness in how doctors who provide abortions are treated, there are some bad guys. Brian Finkel, an Arizona abortion provider, was convicted in 2004 of sexually abusing 13 of his patients. He was sentenced to 35 years in prison. Whatever his medical skills, only bad doctors abuse patients. Tom Tucker provided abortions in Mississippi and Alabama. In addition to being the subject of medical board complaints in both states, he was the subject of several death or injury malpractice cases.   New York convicted an abortion provider for murder in 1995 after he botched a second trimester abortion he wasn’t qualified to perform; the patient bled to death. With the exception of a few, the pro-choice community did not rally around these doctors and in fact expressed relief that they were no longer providing abortions.

What does it take to get pro-choice people to respond to negative events involving abortion providers? A little over 20 years ago I directed an abortion clinic.  When I assumed the position, I hired appropriate staff so that it could also provide comprehensive reproductive health services.  The doctor was responsible for regulatory compliance. There were some things that seemed amiss. For example, during one period I had to sign a monthly check to an RN who was never there but whose name was on all medical charts as the attending nurse.

The people who actually assisted with the abortions were not medically trained or licensed.  After a patient had a seizure I was able to convince the doctor to have a trained person present at all times.  After hiring a part-time RN, her signature was put on all charts regardless if she was there. In other words, medical records were routinely falsified. The doctor simply did not believe that abortions necessitated full-time, expensive, and trained medical staff required by law.

When the doctor decided to offer second trimester abortions, he also decided to offer sedation to patients.  After purchasing the drugs and some equipment, he did not seek additional training nor did he want to hire a nurse or technician trained in anesthesia. Second trimester abortions are more complicated and there were several occasions in which patients experienced problems in their hotel rooms. Support staff, not medically trained, answered the phone after hours. The patient calls were not always handled as professionally as they should have been. Word about patient experiences reached two other abortion providers who had the decency to call me personally. I began to question whether the clinic I took such pride in was delivering what I thought.

A nurse practitioner (RNP) I had hired primarily for the reproductive health services component of the clinic came to my office one day to let me know that she was resigning and why. The violations the doctor was regularly committing was the only reason, some not illegal but all potentially dangerous to patients. She cited the frequency in which she had been pulled away from her work to assist the doctor with crises that occurred during abortions, most related to sedation. Aside from the risk to patients, she also believed that her professional license was at risk. Regardless of his sound medical skills, with sedation in particular, training, legal compliance, and protocols are imperative. It is noteworthy that the involuntary manslaughter conviction Gosnell received was due to sedation complications.

After the RNP resigned, I started a conversation with the doctor about the violations. I also let him know that I had heard from other providers and that they were concerned. In addition to my job directing the clinic, I was also a public figure leading a pro-choice constitutional amendment initiative.  How could I be advocating safe and legal abortion if I was working at a clinic that was not entirely operating to maximize the “safe” aspect of abortion? The doctor informed me that since I was not medically trained, I did not know what I was talking about.

This doctor, now deceased, had been incredibly good to me. Nonetheless, my moral compass was stronger than my personal affections. It was a hyper political era for the abortion issue, with a highly involved media. A lawyer explained to me that by virtue of having knowledge of unsafe and illegal practices, I would be legally liable in the event there was ever a lawsuit. That was his legal speak. He then spoke in ethical terms and advised me that in life it is incumbent on all of us to do what is right when we know there is real or potential harm involved. The lawyer prepared a letter to the medical board, assuring me the complaint would be private. Nothing would be public unless there were violations that did not get corrected and disciplinary action was taken.  I then met with the doctor and informed him that I was resigning from the clinic due to the continuing violations. I also informed him of the letter to the medical board.

After resigning from the clinic, I was able to receive a salary for my work with the constitutional initiative and explained to the pro-choice organizations that I was leaving the clinic in order to devote all of my time to the political dimensions of the issue. Shortly afterward, the doctor had received notice that my claims were going to be investigated. Amazingly, the doctor responded to the matter by writing a scathing letter about me, suggesting that I was actually anti-abortion, and mailing it to hundreds of pro-choice people, including politicians. Since I was a public figure, he could say anything he wanted about me.  Since he was a private figure and the medical board complaint was private, I could not respond to his words without liability.

The letter made its way to the press. My resignation from the clinic, and then the amendment campaign, became front page news. Several judges, politicians, and, yes, abortion providers called me to let me know that they believed I did the right thing.

Who spoke out against me? The local chapters of Planned Parenthood and National Organization for Women! The NOW president even issued a press statement that the doctor was the best there was and that I was a “former disgruntled employee…”   Those organizations had long believed that someone from “their own” should have had the position leading the pro-choice cause. Ego and politics trumped concern for patient safety or even the plausibility that I had acted appropriately. The medical board was not able to verify or reach individuals who could verify my claims. No matter, I did my part and was at least confident that the doctor would change or at the very least avoid putting patients at risk.

The vitriolic response from the most vocal in the pro-choice movement was personally hurtful but truly a shame for the cause of preserving the right to safe and legal abortion. It was a lesson about the confluence of politics and a cause as well as the power of ignorance in our own thinking at times as our convictions blind us. It was arguably “evidence” of the pro-choice community “protecting” a doctor; after the news hit, I received countless letters and calls from anti-abortion folks. Since I did generally have respectful and collegial relationships with most of them, there was not much exploitation of the situation.  I really appreciated that. In truth, there were very few in the pro-choice community who did not support my actions. Their voices were publicly silent because it was the appropriate response to a privately conducted medical board investigation.

Yes, some abortion providers are bad and some make mistakes.  The resistance to acknowledge it does no favors for the pro-choice cause. The failure to do so can imply that this area of medical practice will accept any standard provided abortion remains legal. That simply is not true and yet when the Gosnell case hit the news, pro-choice leaders were reluctant to respond. It was acceptable to take a wait and see attitude about the facts. It was not acceptable to avoid responding. It was bad public relations to miss the opportunity to proactively address exactly what the standards are concerning late term abortions, clinic personnel, and so on. Those issues eventually got addressed but as reactions and not as educational responses to a situation no pro-choice person would want to see for patients.

Gosnell’s pathetic legacy will continue to fuel mostly unproductive discourse. The anti-abortion forces will be sure to invoke his name as synonymous with all abortion providers. They will continue to do all they can to malign all abortion providers through lies or implication. Just as the anti-choice protesters have routinely displayed photos of full-term fetuses to imply that all abortions are late term, they will now display photos of Gosnell.  He does not represent any competent doctor. He certainly is not representative of the late Drs. George Tiller, Slepian, Gunn, and Britton – all of them responsible, dedicated doctors murdered by extremists who opposed them for providing abortions in their medical practices. Gosnell was and is a dishonorable and incompetent man at best. Let’s work harder to ensure that the good guys are supported and the bad guys are thwarted.

 

June 16, 2013

A “Baby” or a “Fetus” – Does It Matter?

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Information | Tags: |
[17] Comments 

Abortion.com FaceBook Page

Abortion.com FaceBook Page

The other day I was reading all of the cool stuff that goes on on the Facebook page, “Abortion.com.”   If you haven’t “liked” that page, take a minute to do so.  There are some really interesting posts, good information and great responses.  They now have over 50,000 “likes.”

At one point on that page, someone from another country asked how we here in the good ole US of A define “baby” and “fetus.”  They obviously were trying to get more information on the never ending debate over what the hell that thing is that women carry when they become pregnant.

So, I chimed in and said that, yes, there are legal definitions for the two words but that the definitions really do nothing to resolve the dispute over when it becomes a baby and when it can be terminated.   I guess most folks feel that if we continue to call it a “fetus,” then it’s easier to have an abortion – versus aborting a “baby.”

IntraUterine Pregnancy

IntraUterine Pregnancy

But when it really comes down to it, my honest reaction is:  “Who the hell cares what we call it?”

A woman discovers she is pregnant.   Depending on her circumstance, she may have a number of reactions.  If she and her partner were trying for years to become pregnant, then she is jumping for joy, calling all of her friends, putting it on her Facebook page.  She is going to have a “baby!”  In this case, at no point – and I mean NO point – will she ever refer to that tiny little organism in her body as a “fetus.”  It’s her baby and as it grows and grows, she embraces it more and more as her baby.  “Wanna feel the baby?” she will ask her neighbor.   What should we call the baby?   You know the drill.

Now, if the pregnancy was a surprise and a not so welcome surprise at that, the woman will still not refer to it as a “fetus.”  When talking to her partner and/or her loved ones, she will admit that she “cannot have this baby.”  If she makes an appointment to have an abortion, she will talk to the counselor about not being able to bring this baby into the world at this time.

Baby, baby, baby.

The women who are in these situations really don’t care about legal definitions.  And they clearly never use the word “fetus.”

So, the question from my Facebook friend was an interesting one and I know they meant well but, in the long run, it really does not make that much difference what term the woman uses and, in more cases than not, they will call it a “baby.”

Related articles
 

June 11, 2013

Kermit Gosnell: Abortion is Only One Issue

Posted by Kimmie Farrell under Abortion, Abortion Information | Tags: , , , , , , , , |
[18] Comments 
Kermitt Gosnell

Kermitt Gosnell

Kermit Gosnell. The name conjures up all forms of horror in the minds of so many. The arrest, trial, and conviction of Kermit Gosnell touches on a plethora of social, cultural, and public policy issues as few other high profile court cases do. The case has provoked a broad range of worthy discussions, several of which I will raise through a series of blog posts at Abortion.com and in a complete article at another source that will be accessible at a later time.  Hopefully the good to come from the evils of this man will be honest dialogue about some of these issues.

Media Coverage

To begin an honest dialogue, the controversy about the media coverage of the Gosnell case seems like a good starting point. Since the beginning of the trial and, now, after the conviction, the case is continually mentioned by conservative radio entertainers, anti-choice politicians, and anti-choice activists in every possible forum.  The mindset of many seems to be that media, in collusion with pro-choice advocates, has conspired to minimize any significance that the case brings to the abortion debate.  Their goal is arguably to saturate the public with incorrect messaging and try to use the Gosnell case to define the choice of abortion. Such a tactic is not likely to convert pro-choice people to an anti-abortion position. What it will do is keep the most radical anti-choice activists occupied with promoting misinformation.

The criminal case against Kermit Gosnell initially did seem to be a case about abortion or at the very least about bad abortion providers and clinics. For sure, a number of abortion-related political, moral, legal, and public policy issues were made relevant as a result of the case.  However, the case was not about abortion; the role of abortion in the case was limited to being a part of the evidence against Gosnell, a criminal. The indictment against Gosnell states, “…we realize this case will be used by those on both sides of the abortion debate…the case is not about that controversy; it is about disregard of the law and disdain for the lives and health of mothers and infants.”  The indictment was graphic; Gosnell was evil. (See http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/pdfs/grandjurywomensmedical.pdf ) The prosecution actually did an excellent job throughout the trial in keeping the case focused on the legal merits and not the political debate about abortion.

As a licensed doctor who violated laws and professional standards of abortion care, as well as other areas of medical practice (including unlawful prescribing of pain medication), Gosnell has been tried, convicted, and sentenced to life in prison for murdering three babies. (There were other charges and mixed verdicts; the sentence was the result of a negotiation between the defense and the prosecution to avoid the death penalty.) He was not performing late term abortions in the cases for which he was charged. He was killing viable third trimester fetuses – babies – under the guise of providing elective second trimester abortions.  When a health-related later term abortion is performed, and results in a live birth, a competent professional doctor would follow protocol to provide or seek immediate medical attention for the baby. Gosnell did neither. Instead, he not only failed to check for signs of life, but he also ensured death and involved others in his crimes. He jeopardized the health and lives of his patients. He maximized his profits by hiring nonmedical staff. The clinic was also filthy and in violation of numerous laws and professional standards. In all probability, Gosnell would have been convicted of crimes regardless if he provided abortions.

It was not surprising that the Gosnell case continued to be perceived to be about abortion even after the trial. Virtually all news reports gave more attention to the reactions of the two sides of the abortion debate instead of the actual crimes he committed. When I recently asked news-informed people what they knew about the case, all could reference abortion. None could provide information concerning specific details about the charges against Gosnell. There continue to be claims that the media ignored the case; most basing their belief on their opinion that the majority of media professionals are pro-choice liberals. In reality, the media reported on the case similarly to other criminal cases. The charges filed against Gosnell in January, 2011 were reported by the media. After the initial charges were filed, there was nothing new to report until the trial began – in part because a gag order was imposed on the defense and the prosecution in April. It is as simple as that.

Consider recent high profile criminal cases that have made the news.  After the initial cycle of “breaking news” headlines, there may have been a few special interest storylines but little else until a court proceeding took place. The mass killing at the theater in Aurora, Colorado comes to mind. For several weeks after the event, families willing to speak with the press enabled numerous human interest issues. The only news since has concerned court decisions, such as last week’s ruling that the accused will be allowed to plead insanity. The recovery of three women in Ohio who had been held captive for ten years was major news until there was nothing new to report. This week, it was reported that the accused was no longer on suicide watch – nothing else. In the Gosnell case, there were also medical privacy issues that posed significant challenges to reporters who might have been interested in presenting human interest storylines similar to other high profile criminal cases.

It seems that people opposed to abortion believe that if abortion is part of the evidence in a criminal case, or if the criminal is an abortion provider, the media should be obligated to continuously report something about the case. Ironically, even conservative media sources did not report on the case until the trial. And, even then, they hypocritically pointed to the lack of coverage as if they had no ownership of the so-called “failure” to cover the story. If there had been something new to report between the time of the initial charges and indictment to the time of the trial, the more conservative media sources at the very least would have reported.

Many of us, including pro-choice folks, wonder why the murder trials of Casey Anthony and Jody Arias as well as the upcoming murder trial of George Zimmerman warrant constant coverage but the Gosnell trial did not. One answer is that cameras are not allowed in Pennsylvania courtrooms. Other explanations include the sheer difficulty in presenting technical medical testimony through the filter of reporters or editors and protecting the privacy of medical records submitted as evidence.  Those two points alone had the potential to create enormous error which would be a disservice to all.

An objective look at the history of the coverage of the Gosnell case will confirm that there was no conspiracy to hide or minimize the atrocity of the crimes committed by Kermit Gosnell.  The passion and convictions many of us have about the abortion debate and other issues is often used by media to determine the coverage. But that coverage has to be responsible and factual.

Part 2 of this series will address issues of competency and professionalism among doctors who provide abortions.  In the meantime, no matter your position on abortion, at least consider that the Gosnell case was about crimes and not abortion. If you do a comprehensive online search, you will find that the case of Kermit Gosnell was thoroughly covered by the media.

Related articles
 

June 6, 2013

Abortion and my Story

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion, Abortion Clinic, Abortion Documentary, David Gunn | Tags: , |
[31] Comments 

I Won’t Back Down

David Gunn, Jr.

David Gunn, Jr.

Please grant me the indulgence of a slight digression before getting to the meat of my post.  I have never been one for personal theme songs, couples taking ownership of a particular song from a particular place and calling it “our song”, and  I never believed in the “soundtrack of your life” bullshit slogan we get sold by Apple or some other company asking we consume their individuized music player cutting us off from the music’s true power which is to be consumed—not in the sense of bought in some meaningless disposable manner—but to be collectively consumed as one consumes food, nourishing your being and providing limitless sources of inspiration rivaling the written and spoken word in its power to move people to “seek, to find, and not to yield” (thanks, Tennyson).

In fact, music is one of my first artistic loves though I am not a musician.  It rivals reading and the written word in my mind, and fuels a long standing self-debate which should not matter in any capital T truth sense, but I find the question haunting—for me at least—and I have found how one answers the question reveals something of the soul for lack of a better word since I do not believe in an eternal soul.  The debate topic, my friends, is which of the following is the purest art:  music, painting—or some other graphic design, or the word?  Pure is probably a poor choice of words as it is a relative term and has no meaning we do not assign it so in simplest terms, I struggle to determine which one is better and find others’ answers to the conundrum particularly interesting and revealing.

Joyce

Joyce

Joyce argued the written word is the most powerful, and therefore, the purest art.  If you ask any self- respecting Christian, told since time immemorial that God is the word and the word is God, I believe they would agree with Joyce; however, Tolkien imagined the world’s creation through the singing of angelic type beings which is kind of ironic when you think about it since Tolkien envisioned the choral creation in writing!

Over the years I’ve vacillated on the topic but more and more find myself falling on the musical side of the debate as its motivational power transcends language.  Though great works find global appeal via translations, any bilingual reader knows any particular work’s power diminishes when not digested in the original language.  Music, though, requires no translation or modernization:  there is no New English Version of Beethoven’s Erocia for example, and if you play “Imagine” or any number of excellent modern songs most folks respond much more positively than, say, if you read a passage from Macbeth to an alien.  One of the proofs for my side of the argument is Close Encounters of the Third Kind.  When, in the movie, we finally established first contact, we “spoke” through music, not the written or spoken word.

Abortion

Abortion

I apologize, again, for the theoretical introduction and want to get down to what in the world all of the above has to do with abortion and my story.

1)     Gonna stand my ground, won’t be turned around:

I Won't Back Down

I Won’t Back Down

Though I do not believe in a personal theme song, my dad became irrevocably associated with Tom Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down.”  I remember the first time I heard the song in 1989 and I owned a copy of “Full Moon Fever”.  I argue it is one of the greatest rock albums of the 80s for a number of reasons, but I have digressed enough and am not writing rock criticism.  Dad loved “I Won’t Back Down” and sang it to himself frequently.  Petty’s ode to personal strength and fortitude hit in the summer of 1989 which, oddly enough, is when Christian Terrorism was in its embryonic phase from the standpoint of most of their terror attacks, at this point anyway, were limited to physical damage to clinics and intimidation while also employing massive acts of civil disobedience.

Screen Shot 2013-06-05 at 1.09.29 PMBy late 1992-93, antis targeted dad with wanted posters, stalked him, staged protests at his workplace, and otherwise eviscerated any shred of privacy he enjoyed—which wasn’t much given we lived in a very small Alabama town at the time where gossip ran through town like the river from which it took its name.  In a show of personal strength and defiance, during an anti-abortion protest on Roe v. Wade day outside of one of the clinics on his circuit, dad stood in front of the antis, sang “Happy Birthday to You” to the Roe decision, and then played Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down” to the antis as a means of showing his personal commitment to provide quality health care to women even in the face of intimidation and terror.  Of course, local media picked up on the event, and a local paper ran an article with a photo of dad antagonizing those who terrorized him, and his co-workers, for years.

2)     You can stand me up to the gates of hell, but I won’t back down:

Christian Terrorism

Christian Terrorism

Twenty days later, dad lay bleeding out on the ground outside a clinic in Pensacola, FL becoming the Abortion War’s first casualty.   Soon thereafter Petty’s anthem became a rallying cry for the pro-choice movement.  Folks played the song at vigils, protests, and speaking engagements.  What was a song I immensely enjoyed, became both a personal motivator and a painful reminder of death.  I quickly became a poor substitute for my father’s courage and attempted to act as his surrogate.  Though I was no doctor and could not actually fill his void, I tried, in my own small way, to keep the providers’ travails in front of a public who did not necessarily want to understand, for any number of reasons, what doctors and clinic staff experienced on a daily basis.

Christian Terrorism

Christian Terrorism

For six to seven years, I traveled to various cities—wherever I was asked to go—to tell dad’s, and by proxy other providers’, story.  My intent was to galvanize support for the providers and to tell those who thought “it can’t happen here,” that it can and will if you do not get involved, act, and act now.  Over the course of the 90s, Christian terrorists murdered more doctors, and violence spread northward disproving the widespread belief doctor murder was a Southern thing.  During the 90s, the choice movement grew and was highly visible.  We saw court and legislative victories in the form of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance Act in mid-1994 as well as a positive ruling by the Supreme Court in the NOW v. Scheidler case which was subsequently overturned during the farce we now know as the Bush years.  We met each act of violence with a large public outcry and response.  Roughly 800,000 people attended the March for Women’s Lives on April 25, 1994 in Washington DC including myself as a speaker.

As the 90s ended and the Bush era began, abortion, though still a target of Christian Fascists, ceded ground to the now eternal War on Terror taking a backseat to Bush’s neverending wars, civil rights abuses, and war crimes.  Though the struggle—and Christian Terror–continued, it went largely ignored by a press preoccupied with terrorists abroad while those of the homegrown ilk were allowed to regroup and gain courage from the first admittedly Evangelical President.

3)     Well I know what’s right, I got just one life; In a world that keeps on pushin’ me around but I’ll stand my ground and I won’t back down:

Following a highly abridged overview of the past 20 years in an attempt to keep your attention and this post a respectably attention holding length, I ask you to look around you to see where we are as of mid-2013.  Many Republican controlled states—mine included—passed and/or are preparing to pass regulations designed to severely cripple a clinic’s ability to remain open while at the same time making it personally intrusive and harder than ever for women to seek the medical care they feel they need.  Whether being forced to undergo a rape-like act via vaginal probe, an onerous waiting period, propaganda influenced “counseling”, or being forced to watch an ultrasound, Christian Fascists have succeeded in making a legal medical procedure virtually unobtainable in many Red states via intrusive and overly restrictive regulations. It’s funny how the party of regulatory constraint never met a regulation it did not like when abortion—or birth control or sex education for that matter–is concerned, and how the “libertarian” Tea Party Racist/Terrorists love liberty as long as it doesn’t apply to women, minorities, or the poor.

Screen Shot 2013-06-05 at 1.14.59 PMHell, in my state alone, where there used to be multiple clinics in three of the major cities—or at least six to nine clinics statewide–according to abortion. com, there are only two clinics for the entire state.  These last bastions of reproductive freedom risk closure due to new regulations making their way through my state’s state legislature.  In Mississippi, were there were clinics in Jackson and Gulfport at the very least, there is now one in Jackson.  Likewise, Tennessee is served by only two clinics:  one in Nashville and one in Bristol (eight hours apart at least for the southern geographically challenged).  Also, there is only one operational clinic for the women of Arkansas.

Think of the implications of the above for a few moments.  Imagine yourself a minimum wage earner in rural Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, or Tennessee who elects to undergo an abortion; in order to get the medical care you desire, you must travel at the very least 60 miles to the nearest clinic and more than likely longer.  If you are unfortunate enough to live on the Gulf Coast of Alabama or Mississippi, your travel time to the nearest clinic exponentiates drastically and may be sufficient, on its own, to force you into motherhood.  Aside from the travel obstacle, you also have significant economic challenges if you elect to travel the underground abortion railroad as you must lose at least a full day’s wage, waste at least another few days’ wages and fuel, and then endure the cost of a hotel plus the cost of the procedure itself; therefore, your medical procedure—since it isn’t covered by insurance, Medicaid, or military insurance—can cost you a month’s salary.  Given the above, it is blatantly clear for many women in the United States, though abortion is technically legal, it is not available as a viable health care option.  These obstacles do not account for the ever reducing number of providers who do not view abortion services as a career option due to the threat of violence.  Again, though abortion is legal in the USA, the Christian Fascists through terrorism, regulatory intimidation, and simple misogyny have effectively banned the procedure for many women across the county.

4)     Hey, baby, there ain’t no easy way out; hey I will stand my ground and I won’t back down:

The above encapsulates a small number of the travails women seeking abortion in 2013 face.  There are many reasons for these developments.  One, choice groups cede the local fights in Red States and instead focus on a national agenda. Two, politicians and the media cannot say the word abortion much less report on it in a way that reflects the actual disposition of the nation on the topic.  If one simply watched corporate news, you would think most people are against abortion while the converse is obviously and undeniably true in poll after poll.  Three, and this is most important in my opinion, we lack grass roots direct action to counter the actions of the Christian Terrorists.  We do this for a number of reasons primarily out of a combination of fear and shame.  Fear of how a strong stance on abortion will impact our friendships, family relations, and children as well as a shame or guilt some may feel due to their own religious beliefs.  We must, though, have the courage to educate the public as to the true reality.  Namely, we significantly outnumber those against abortion, and we must have the confidence and perseverance to unabashedly engage the public, teach the scientific truth, and demonstrate our determination to win this war on women.  Not because it is, in simplest terms, the right action but because it is just.

In furtherance of these goals, we must reorganize and have the courage to “stand our ground” and “not back down” as our children’s rights depend upon what we do now, not what we might do in the future.  I have a personal stake in this not only due to dad’s death and my own personal involvement in the past, but I owe it to my daughter to ensure she enjoys self-determination and true liberation.  If the Christian Right has it their way, by the time my daughter hits puberty, after suffering through abstinence only sex education, should she be “legitimately raped” to quote Mr. Akin, she would be forced to bear the rapist’s child.  How utterly intolerable, ludicrous, and goddamned unacceptable is that statement?  How important, then, is it we re-energize, re-engage, and rejuvenate our conviction to win this fight and win it now—and we absolutely can and will win if we take proper action at this crucial moment!

To this end, I want to announce a project I’m supporting and ask that you support as well.  Two groups of activists embarking from San Francisco and New York City are planning a freedom ride style journey across the United States set to kick off with joint rallies at each city of origin tentatively set for July 23.  The riders will tour and engage the public in areas of the country impacted most by the draconian anti- abortion regulations currently making their way through state houses across the country.  Both groups will converge on Bismark, North Dakota by 8/1 to protest the effective date of North Dakota’s fetal heartbeat legislation which goes into full effect 1 August 2013.

I believe actions such as these are not only needed but required if we as a movement are going to regain the needed momentum to re-establish our strong and solid footing in our struggle against the well- funded and connected Christian Fascists.  If you have any sense of history, you know that only through mass direct action do the voiceless gain voice, the powerless gain power, and the professed ideals of our nation actualize in reality.  Building a national movement is paramount and failing to do so is tantamount to surrender; however, I know we will not surrender to threat, intimidation, and violence because we have righteous conviction to engage the armies of the night and prevail.  To this end, I urge you to review this statement published by the Riders’ organizing committee and lend your signature/support to the growing movement by following the attached link:

http://www.stoppatriarchy.org/abortionondemandstatement.html

Lastly, I appeal to everyone to reflect objectively on the statement, sign it, and lend what support you can.  Give money to fund the riders, join the caravan when they come through your town, and even if you simply donate your signature to the statement:  that alone is taking action.  There are those of us in the movement who have been engaged for a long time—many of you much longer than myself.  You know abortion is not a foul and dirty word.  You know attaching shame to the procedure only aids the antis by keeping it in the closet and attaching a scarlet letter type stigma to what should be a private matter between patient and doctor.  You understand the effectiveness and utility of direct action because you organized and led it in the past.  You also understand sacrifice because some of you do it daily by choosing to walk into a clinic under threat of death after witnessing many of your colleagues suffer death for continuing to make abortion services a safe option for women across the country.  I know all of the above from direct experience after suffering through what the Christian terrorists did to my family.  We cannot allow it to happen to another.  We must draw a line and we must not back down.

Walt Whitman

Walt Whitman

I started this post with a lighthearted philosophical debate and have framed my essay using song.  To be fair to both sides, let me offer the following words of Walt Whitman as a benediction of sorts:

O ME! O life!… of the questions of these recurring;

Of the endless trains of the faithless—of cities fill’d with the foolish;

Of myself forever reproaching myself, (for who more foolish than I, and who more faithless?)

Of eyes that vainly crave the light—of the objects mean—of the struggle ever renew’d;

Of the poor results of all—of the plodding and sordid crowds I see around me;

         

Of the empty and useless years of the rest—with the rest me intertwined;

The question, O me! so sad, recurring—What good amid these, O me, O life?

Answer.

That you are here—that life exists, and identity;

That the powerful play goes on, and you will contribute a verse.

Now is the time to ask ourselves about our verse and to determine what impact it has to the powerful play.  My dad’s was “I Won’t Back Down.”  Is it not time that we make it ours as well?
Related articles
 

May 29, 2013

The Sting

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Centers, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information | Tags: |
[10] Comments 

Live Action

Live Action

The “Live Action” activist wakes up thinking about how she is going to get that abortionist that day.  She can hardly contain herself as she mulls over how she is going to give back to society by trapping an unsuspecting doctor into saying something that, with good editing, will indict him and that entire industry he works for.

By now you no doubt have heard about these anti-abortion kids who are running around the country making phony appointments at abortion clinics and going in all wired up for sound and video.  They are engaging in a sting operation and they are oh-so-proud of what they are doing.  .

For example, this student-led group recently released footage taken surreptitiously inside Kentucky’s only abortion provider, EMW Women’s Surgical Center, where, according to the press release, the staff “ignored the sexual abuse of a child and gave misleading abortion counseling.” The footage was taken by Live Action President Lila Rose and actor Jackie Stollar who posed undercover as minors with Rose telling the staff that she was 14-years-old and impregnated by her 31-year-old “boyfriend.”

Abortion

Abortion

Then there is another brilliant piece of cinema of a conversation with Doctor Lee Carhart where he describes how the baby will die in the womb like “meat in a crock pot.”    Ouch.

These kids really are making their mark, aren’t they?   I mean, why should they be wasting their time organizing the soup kitchen in the Bowery when they can actually meet the “abortionist,” trick him and then become famous on numerous anti-abortion blogs?  Why should they volunteer to be a mentor for a child who is struggling in math when they can get their jollies sitting inside the abortion clinic waiting room?  Wow, their parents must be so proud!

Now, I’ll admit that Doctor Carhart needs to figure out a better way of describing the abortion process and no one who works in a clinic should be ignoring sexual abuse.  But I’ve seen some of the unedited videos of doctors and counselors and, of course, in that form they show the entire story.  And what they show is that the doctors and staff are competently and compassionately performing their job and helping women in need.  They are counseling them on all birth control measures and talking about the options – including adoption – that are available to the woman.  But you know that stuff is going to wind up on the editing floor.  I mean, after all, we would not want to show clinic staff in any kind of good light, would we?

I know hundreds and hundreds of doctors and clinic staff.  They love their job, they love to interact as much as possible with that woman who does not want to be there.  The conversations can be fascinating and at times very reassuring to the woman.   But in the future, every staff person is now going to assume that she is talking to a camera and so they will resort to being the ultimate bureaucrat, just telling the woman what she is required to know, not engaging in any conversation lest it be taken totally out of context.

All because of a bunch of sick brainwashed kids.

Related articles
 

May 23, 2013

The Power of Visuals: Three Lessons and a Proposal

Posted by DrK8 under Abortion Information, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion MisInformation, Abortion Rights, Abortion Violence, Anti Choice - Anti Life Violence, Politics, Pro Life Deception, Pro Life Lies, War on Birth Control | Tags: , , , , |
[15] Comments 

It’s hard to deny that we are becoming a visually mediated society. The power of visuals to (mis)inform, persuade and threaten is evident particularly when iconic photographs are considered for their power to expose the truths of local and global catastrophes, wars and social unrest. Nick Ut’s Accidental Napalm, and Kevin Carter’s Struggling Girl are images that produce certain truths but they also produce a moral conundrum. Showing these images are representations of reality but they also alienate the public. In fact, the circulation of Accidental Napalm has been considered a pivotal turning point against the horrors of Vietnam War while Struggling Girl forced the world to see the plight of the starving. More recently, Richard Drew’s September 11, 2001 Falling Man was subjected to criticism for being too offensive to publish and for revealing the immorality of the photographer and the news sources entrusted to uphold societal values. Falling Man is troubling because, while it reveals a truth about the World Trade Center attacks, it also exploits the human dignity and privacy of a man and moves us to question the propriety of such a display.  The representation of images have ethical implications in that they are a kind of truth that can be shown but can never tell the whole story. It is with this notion of  (mis)representations that I want to address three lessons about the power of visuals and recommend using visuals in a more provocative, yet enlightening campaign—as a proposal for the 21st century.

Lesson One

The first lesson addresses this tension between propriety and morality for photographers and for activists who choose to capture and use spectacular images of human beings. For example, for antiabortionists, any propriety about displaying mutilated human fetal images is easily set aside out of concern for a larger moral purpose. In fact, in the antiabortion movement, there are those who use grotesque fetal images that, while inducing both empathy and disgust, raise ethical questions about the public display of these dead bodies. Antiabortion activists promote and distribute these visual materials based on a premise that once Americans see images of abortion, they will reject abortion. And while legal debates over the right to display such images erupt on state-run university campuses, outside the walls of progressive churches and, of course, outside the perimeters of abortion clinics, the majority views these prurient displays as morally repugnant and potentially harmful to young children.

Lesson Two

GOP StupidA second lesson is drawn from campaign materials of the antiabortion activists’ use of mutilated fetuses and from the 2012 presidential election.  Both campaigns ignore an essential element—women. While Republicans fell on their collective swords with their anti abortion and rape rhetoric, the so-called prolife crowd (majority Republican) continued with their fetal fetish worship. In hindsight, the lesson is clear. Don’t ignore women and their rights.

Lesson Three

The third lesson addresses the failure of media to address some of the most fundamental and important issues that half the world’s population—women—face. Corporate media, held hostage by capitalistic greed, flourishes on a diet of sensationalism and entertainment. For example, recent news reports focused on Angelina Jolie’s mastectomies but ignored the science about environmental toxins (caused by unbridled, irresponsible industries) that are known causes of cancer. The news of her surgical decision also ignored the enormous costs of media’s relentless messages to young girls and women that their breasts are accessories for voyeuristic entertainment and men’s physical and sexual pleasure. Jolie’s story also ignores a very powerful human right—to be empowered to make a tough choice about her own body.

In another media ruckus over the accessibility of Plan B emergency contraception—political brouhaha about other-the-counter access, age limits and state-issued identification as proof of age—the stories failed to point out the cozy relationship that politics and pharmaceuticals play, failed to address the importance of emergency contraception to those who need it most, and failed to address the personal, social and economic consequences when emergency contraception isn’t available. As with Angelina Jolie’s story about making the choice to prevent cancer, the story about unfettered access to Plan B means women have the choice to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.  But corporate media seldom acknowledges a woman’s agency unless she’s a celebrity.

A Proposal

In the spirit of Jonathan Swift, I propose a 21st century campaign that speaks directly to real women’s lives—the on-the-ground reality of women as they attempt to hold up half the sky.  To begin, I suggest that legislators draft laws that require obstetricians, crisis pregnancy centers and abortion clinics recite narratives with accompanying displays of women killed by unsafe and illegal abortions, with displays of bodies that succumbed to pregnancy-related deaths, and with bodies who, devastated by post partum depression, committed suicide. While it may sound too far-fetched, consider that there are currently laws that dictate what doctors in abortion clinics tell their clients. In particular, there are numerous states that require that physicians provide specific information about fetal development, pregnancy options, abortion complications, and about voluntary, non-coercive decision making about abortion. Euphemistically called A Woman’s Right to Know, the law is the ironic work of conservative legislators—the very same conservative who cry “I don’t want big government coming in and telling me what to do with my healthcare” but actually want big government to tell doctors what they can do to women. So, the precedence is in place for legislators to continue practicing reproductive medicine without any education or without a professional license. Despite the long-standing tradition of fully accredited abortion clinics providing comprehensive counseling about pregnancy options, state legislators use their bully pulpit to impose their morality on others with these laws. What these right-to-know tactics ignore are the realities of illegal abortions and complications of pregnancy. So, it’s appropriate to suggest that legislators enact laws to more fully inform women with a new campaign.

A proposal such a mine would comb the world for images of the approximately 219 women who die worldwide each day from an unsafe abortion. With that many images of dead women, there would be plenty of material to use in pamphlets and in educational materials. Such a visual bounty would provide a deliciously, deadly assortment to post on blogs and to add to the Op Ed sections of local newspapers. As with the antiabortion activists who wear their fetal focused messages around their neck, counter protesters could sport an image of a woman in a blood-soaked bed with RoeEndWomenDyingthe words “Keep Abortion Safe” written in large letters. The thought of such a poster borders on pornographic, unethical and downright obscene. And while such a poster aligns with antiabortion impropriety, at least it’s honest in demonstrating the truth about women who want and need but cannot access safe and legal abortions. Perhaps we could further underscore the situation by showing all the children left motherless because safe abortion is not available.

At the very least, the displays should show the very real complications of illegal  abortions with up-close-and-personal representations of pelvic abscess, septicemia, lacerated cervix, perforated bowel, exsanguination, and gangrene. And should anyone charge that these images are obscene, recall that obscenity laws cover material that deals with sex in a manner appealing to prurient interest, i.e., material having a tendency to excite lustful thoughts.  A dead woman’s gangrenous bowel or an exsanguinated body certainly cannot be considered titillating. In an effort to ensure a woman’s right to know, as so many conservatives are determined to legislate, a campaign such as this would more fully inform women of all the potential harms.

Let’s face it. The antiabortion activists use fetal images, as they claim, to expose the injustice of abortion. In reality, their images are a misogynistic attempt to shame women and to alter the realities of safe abortion for religious and political dogma. On the other hand, a display of women’s mutilated and dead bodies would expose the discriminatory, immoral violations of their human rights including the dishonorable reality, specific to the United States, that

  • this nation is 19out of 134 countries in terms of gender equality
  • this nation is 50th in world for maternal health
  • 68,000 women nearly die in childbirth annually
  • 1.7 million women suffer a complication that has an adverse effect on their health
  • the annual maternal morbidity is currently between 500-600 deaths

Equally important to my proposed campaign would be evidence of the endless attack on women’s reproductive rights through targeted regulations against abortion providers, through defunding of family planning services, through state-directed funneling of monies to (mostly religiously-affiliated) crisis pregnancy centers, through imprisonment and subsequent poor treatment of pregnant women (often resulting in miscarriage, preterm delivery and poor birth outcomes including neonatal death), through the rise of sexual assaults in the military and through the silent war being waged against poor women through cuts in Medicaid for abortions, cuts in state support (food stamps and welfare ) after one year and cuts in Head Start programs. Finally, a Google map of the United States using hyperlinks could locate the draconian politicians’ current laws as well as proposed legislation to further obstruct or outlaw access to abortion and contraception. Further details of such a map should include their political party affiliation, their religious affiliations and their financial supporters (such as PACs).

Religion_PoliticsMy modest proposal would visually depict the inexcusable health and human rights violations that occur due to the corrosive effects from religion, corporate greed, politics, military and government obstructionism for women of reproductive age, particularly for the poor in urban and rural areas, for minority women, and for those with limited or no access to health care. My campaign would be a much-needed corrective for media’s drive for entertainment and sensationalism, programming that’s foisted on the public as relevant and objective.  Moreover, my proposal would illustrate the true nature of the conservative, right wing as misogynistic, anti-science, anti-medicine and anti-woman.

It’s a modest proposal that I’d like to think Jonathan Swift would admire.

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »