August 15, 2012

First Person Personhood

Posted by DrK8 under Abortion Information
[74] Comments 

Women have the moral and legal rights to determine what is best for their own emotional and physical health, according to the World Health Organization. These rights are consistent with the human rights all human beings have, rights that include bodily autonomy, rights without which little else matters. Well-meaning doctors, legislators and judges in the United States have violated women’s human rights when they obstruct access to abortion, when they force women to undergo dangerous surgery and when they attempt to pass legislation that meddles with the doctor-patient relationship. Specifically, women’s rights are violated with any consideration of fetal personhood. Let’s recognize who is first in the personhood debate: the woman. Let’s begin with some facts about bodily autonomy.

Consider the woman who dies from severe head trauma in a motorcycle accident. Her driver’s license signifies that she is not an organ donor. Yet, harvesting her organs could give life to several people and it surely wouldn’t hurt her because she’s dead. But as the law reads, the organs remain solely under the purview of the deceased, her bodily integrity intact.

Or consider that people are not required to give blood. They could donate every 56 days, taking only an hour of their time, to save the lives of up to three people. And the personal risk is low. In fact, one hundred percent of the population is not required by law to give even a drop of blood. On a related note, people with very rare blood types are not required to give blood although not giving blood could literally kill someone who was dependent on that donation. Regardless, it is their blood to keep or donate.

Consider that people are not required to participate in an immunization program, even though immunizations are one of the best way to prevent the spread of disease and save the lives of many in our communities. Even though, immunizations have a very low risk to the individual, no human is required by law to be subjected to the invasive needles required for immunizations.

Or consider the teenage girl badly injured in a horse riding accident who now needs a kidney transplant. No one in her family—not her mother, aunt, father or cousin—is required to give this teen a kidney. Each family member has a choice because the law of land dictates that each person has control over his or her own body. A young teen’s eventual demise without someone’s kidney does not change this fact. And all the above are examples of bodily autonomy that humans in the United States should enjoy, unless one is pregnant. The gravid woman brings out the  preachers, pundits and legislators want

What anti-choice people want is not human rights for a fetus; they want supra-human rights, rights that are over and above the rights of the woman. Calling a fetus a person does not change that fact that the fetus does not have the right to a woman’s body. Calling a fetus a person negates the woman as a person.

Consider our existing laws and how they might change if fetal personhood laws went into effect. Would a woman be able to claim her fetus as a dependent on her taxes while pregnant? If she miscarries, would she have to return the tax deductions to the IRS? Would she be charged with homicide if she miscarried? Would a pregnant woman be allowed to drive in the HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lane? If a woman drank two glasses of wine then 12 days later learned she was pregnant, would she be retroactively charged with child endangerment? Will women with children who have abortions be convicted of murder and serve the rest of their lives in jail? How will the state care for these now-orphaned children? For the college coed who was brutally raped by a fraternity brother and forced to carry the pregnancy to term, will the rapist have visitation rights for 18 years? Should the court appoint a guardian for visitations because of the father’s sexually predatory nature? Who will pay for this guardian: the mother, the father or the taxpayers? Which parent—the mother or the rapist—gets to deduct the child on their income tax? Will the legal birthdate be calculated by date of birth or date of conception? How will doctors or lawyers know the exact time and date of conception? The concept of Personhood creates a legal, financial and moral nightmare not to mention a likely logistical Pandora’s box with expensive governmental surveillance of all those fecund women. As a political aside, while the Gallup poll found that roughly two-thirds of Republicans across most major gender, age, educational, and income lines describe themselves as “pro-life,” the reality is that the Republicans are pro-birth. After birth, you’re on your own, witness the funding cuts to Head Start, WIC, SNAP and other life-supporting programs. They have been pushing the ‘limited government’ rhetoric while expanding government intrusion in women’s reproductive lives. Any fetal personhood law would likely cost billions in surveillance of women’s wombs, monitoring of births, and criminal justice expenditures, thus expanding the government.

Take this personhood argument further.  If it becomes legal to force a person to allow another access to their body against their will for the purpose of saving lives, will we extend that law so all qualified human beings be on the National Marrow donor list or to give blood every two months? Does it mean that someone can requisition one of your kidneys (you only need one, right?) or a part of your lung? Can my childless 32 year old colleague requisition your 20-year-old daughter’s uterus for surrogate pregnancy? Should state-sponsored pregnancy be a job option for unwed and unemployed girls? Will we require sperm donations in healthy men with desired characteristics? Why not commandeer one of the grandchild’s corneas when the 76 year old grandfather still wants to drive his pickup truck but needs a cornea transplant? For all those women over 50, can we subject their bodies to transvaginal ultrasounds, blood tests and state-sponsored lectures about what they should expect as they age, what their eggs will look like or how their vaginas will change? These are dystopian questions, to be sure. But they are not too far from the path on which the current war on women is being waged.

Let’s face reality. The argument about fetal personhood is a ridiculous indulgence in imperialism, patriarchal structures and control of the female body and her fertility. It’s time to recognize the woman in the body, the first person, as the only legitimate person in a personhood debate.

 

 

August 11, 2012

LifeNews: My New Friend!

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

Abortion

I gotta be honest with you – I enjoy reading pro-life newsletters more than pro-choice newsletters.  The main reason is that the pro-lifers love to focus on what’s (supposedly) going on right there at the abortion clinics, so I get a chance to read about what some of my old friends are up to these days.  In fact, I recently subscribed to LifeNews.com and so far it’s been very interesting reading!

For example, I just learned that President Obama is so intent on increasing the number of abortions in this country that, at a recent pro-choice conference, he told the attendees that he “will never back down in promoting abortion.”  I wonder if that means we will soon see him wearing t-shirts promoting www.abortion.com, the website that is a directory of abortion clinics?  Then, in the very same newsletter I learned that Obama recently met with – dare I say it – officials from Planned Parenthood!  It seems that they were two of many people on a receiving line as the President exited from Air Force One to embark on a campaign tour in Florida.  Just think about all the juicy stuff they talked about in those ten seconds that they (maybe) had his attention.  What a great opportunity for these two officials to discuss how the President of the United States could get more women into those abortion clinics!

Finally, another item from this hard news service reported that the President “makes special arrangements to meet the heads of the local abortion business so they can continue pumping profits from abortions into funding his re-election campaign.”  Yes, the President has no doubt met with PPFA officials but if anyone can cite me an example of the President meeting privately with an independent abortion provider, I’ll buy you a beer.  Meanwhile, of course, the pro-life movement is pouring millions into the Mitt Romney campaign.

So, I was getting real excited about my new source of hard-hitting objective abortion news when, on my third day, I was brought back to reality.  You see, one of the main reasons I subscribed to LifeNews.com was because it was FREE.   And I guess it still is free but, bingo, on the third day I received the inevitable fundraising letter.

The hook was that Obama had just celebrated his birthday but, as LifeNews noted, he was not concerned about those poor little unborn babies who would not be celebrating their own birthdays.  “A child’s birthday party is a joyous occasion with friends and family, but too many will never see their first because President Obama is committed to keeping abortion legal for another 40 years by stacking the Supreme Court with more pro-abortion activists in a second term. We can’t let that happen!”  So, they asked me to send a gazillion dollars which (they don’t tell us) will first pay for staff salaries, then the rent, then their travel expenses, then the high priced consultants whose job is to raise more money and, THEN with the few pennies we have left we will fight to force women to see their child on the ultrasound machine before they go ahead with the abortion.  Yeah, that’s how we will save the unborn!

No doubt people will dutifully send their money.  They will take everything they just read as gospel, they will not question any of it and they will write their check to pay for the overhead of their national organizations.

I can’t wait for my next edition of LifeNews!

 

August 8, 2012

Trust Women

Posted by DrK8 under Abortion, Abortion Information
[38] Comments 

Trust Women is a message that is elegant in its simplicity. Trust women to make the right choices for themselves. But it’s a message that means much more.

Trust Women means to respect and trust all women to know—better than strangers, church leaders or legislators—what they can and should do with their own bodies. In the United States, we the majority believe women have a constitutional right to bodily integrity, to be sexually active with whomever they choose and to choose when or if they parent.

Yet . . .

  • Support for vitally important birth control is all too often out of reach for young, sexually active females because they lack health insurance and/or finances, because they lack of adequate and age-appropriate sexual education or because they are involved in abusive domestic situation.
  • One out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime. Rather than warnings about potential risks, as a nation we should work on changing our culture so that we truly value and respect young girls and women. And invisible to society, our incarcerated women are subjected to conditions of improper touching by persons of authority, sanctioned sexual harassment, unnecessary strip searches, sex for special privileges or money and rape. In fact, the 2010 Department of Justice report stated, “Nearly 82% of the female victims
in prison said they were pressured by staff to engage in sexual activity.” Even our own military branches have allowed a culture of rape to exist with instructors raping recruits and active duty personnel.
  • When a woman is unexpectedly pregnant and wants to end the pregnancy, her right to an abortion is can be denied because she is incarcerated, delayed because of funding or a complex of social reasons or ignored because of legal complications.
  • When a woman knows that her grossly malformed fetus at 25 weeks has no chance at life after birth, it doesn’t mean the she will find trust and respect for her decision to abort nor readily find a doctor who is willing and capable of providing services nor readily being able to afford such an abortion.
  • When a woman wants an abortion, there are legislatures, playing doctor, who want to force a transvaginal ultrasound into a woman’s vagina. There is no known law that has been put forth from any legislator that would propose inserting medical probes of any kind into a male for any reason.
  • Fetal rights have trumped women’s rights in growing numbers. In fact, fetal rights advocates have convinced police, prosecutors, and judges to treat maternal addiction as a form of abuse or neglect without regard for parenting ability. Fetal rights trumped a woman’s rights in the case of Angela Carder, a young woman who was critically ill and 25 weeks pregnant. Lynn Paltrow, Executive Director, National Advocates for Pregnant Women, writes, “More than anything, she wanted to live. A court, however, ordered cesarean surgery based on claims of fetal rights. The surgery was performed over her objections as well as those of her physicians and family. Angela Carder died two days later – the cesarean surgery listed as a contributing factor. The fetus was born alive but died within two hours.” Even without a personhood measure on the books, Angela Carder died with the help of judges and doctors working quietly behind the closed doors. Her wishes were denied, her bodily integrity and her life stolen by the state.
  • When a woman and her husband refuse to undergo a caesarian section, she could be a victim of coercive medicine and criminal prosecution. For example, Melissa Rowland, pregnant with twins, refused a c-section. One of the twins was stillborn so Rowland was charged with first-degree murder. After spending three months in jail, she accepted a deal in which the murder charge was dismissed in return for her guilty plea to two counts of child endangerment (unrelated to her c-section refusal). She’s now free, and serving 18 months of probation.
  • Women prisoners have been subjected to degrading, gratuitous and unconstitutional cavity searches, called the labia lift, after family visits, attorney meetings and at shift changes. A violation of the fourth and eighth amendment, this practice has been stopped, thanks to the American Civil Liberties Union.
  • And for women who fail to conform to the heteronormativity of our culture because they are lesbians or transgender, the danger of physical and emotional assault is ever present. For example, a 33-year old lesbian was tied up so that her homophobic male attackers could carve homophobic slurs into her abdomen and arms while law officials questioned whether the attack was faked or not.
  • For low-income women who know what is best for them and for their families, access to the full spectrum of reproductive health services is often met by local family planning services. In fact, more than six in 10 women who obtained care at a family planning center considered the center their usual source of medical care. According to the Guttmacher Institute, ‘publicly funded family planning services help women to avoid pregnancies they do not want and to plan pregnancies they do. In 2006, these services helped women avoid 1.94 million unintended pregnancies, which would likely have resulted in about 860,000 unintended births and 810,000 abortions.” Despite the very real needs of low-income women, the Republicans, who are overwhelmingly prolife, want to cut funding for Title X and Planned Parenthood (essentially cutting funding to help low-income mothers and their children).

Christine Cupaiuolo, blogger for Our Bodies, Ourselves, writes, “Trust Women isn’t just a mantra of tolerance or respect. It’s a phrase that changes the playing field, in every way imaginable. It’s the right phrase to advocate for women making their own reproductive health choices, and it’s a much broader statement about our future.”

Broadly speaking, it means women are fully human and should be afforded every human right men are afforded including all rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, reproductive decision, sexual orientation or other status.

 

August 5, 2012

Internet Abortions?

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Information, Abortion Pill, Misoprostol, RU486 | Tags: , , , |
[65] Comments 

And now it seems that you can get an abortion over the Internet.

Abortion Pill

Abortion Pill

Years ago, I was in the middle of the effort to get “the abortion pill,” otherwise known as RU-486, approved for usage in the United States.  On several occasions, I was at the table with the investors who had put up a lot of money to get the product approved by the FDA, the pro-choice groups that desperately lobbied for it and the company that would ultimately distribute it.  The company was especially conscious about security, to the point where they had an office in Manhattan but no signs anywhere announcing its presence.  Ultimately, after years of struggle, we prevailed.

From the beginning, advocates of the pill championed it as another option for women who did not necessarily want to have surgery. They also, however, got a bit hyperbolic about its impact when they predicted that the pill would “revolutionize” women’s reproductive health.  Their thought was that additional physicians would come out of the woodwork and start prescribing this pill and that it would allow women to have abortions in the privacy of their own home.  The abortion providers, on the other hand, voiced concern that the product was being built up too much and warned that a doctor who had never been involved in the delivery of abortion services before would not suddenly start prescribing the abortion pill.  Today, the pill is being used by about 20% of women having abortions and we have not seen those doctors coming out of the woodwork, although some current abortion providers – particularly Planned Parenthood – have set up small offices where they only disperse the pill.

Abortion Pill

Abortion Pill

The bottom line is that the pill is a good option, but it is not for everyone.

And now, the pill is available on the Internet.  Yep, the other day I ran across a website named http://www.abortionpillonline.com  and, honestly, my first reaction was rather negative.  First of all, the website itself looks very cheesy, very amateurish.  Unlike the website of your average abortion provider, there was no hard information, like where they were located, what doctors were involved, etc.  I didn’t

Abortion Pill

Abortion Pill

see any phone numbers.   Heck, I didn’t even know what country this business was in until I emailed them and they told me that the product was made in India and distributed from India.

Now, I don’t know all the legalities here and I certainly am not accusing this group of being less than reputable.  But this just sounds too easy for me.  When it comes to any kind of medical care, everyone needs to be careful.  Let’s face it, no matter what the medical specialty, there’s always someone out there who is eager to cut corners and make the quick buck.  In the case of the abortion pill (which is actually two pills), there’s a lot more to it that just swallowing a pill.  For example, this website just distributes the pill, it does not offer any counseling which, for some women, is very important.  And it’s hard to predict how a woman will react once she starts the regimen, physically or emotionally.  What if there’s an issue in the middle of the night?  Who will she call?  There are so many potential issues that might require the advice of a real, accessible doctor or at least a nurse.

I’m glad that women have more access to abortion services via the pill.  Going to the Internet and just ordering a bunch of pills and swallowing them belies the seriousness of the abortion process.  It makes me nervous.

Related articles
 

August 2, 2012

A Closer Look at Anti Abortion Activists

Posted by DrK8 under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Information, Abortion lies, Cancer, Christian Terrorism
[31] Comments 

Anti abortion activists are against abortion. Period. But there’s more to their rhetoric than merely proclaiming that abortion is morally wrong. Yes, there is more than simply being against a legal, safe medical procedure. In fact, it is through an examination of symbolic acts and artifacts that the activists use (literature, images, performances and verbal messages), that we can more fully flesh out the personae known as anti abortion activists.

Oppositional – Their lives are bound by ancient superstitions that stand as an impediment to science and progress. Relying on faith, they view the world in oppositional and controlled ways. For example, consider the archetypal metaphor of day and night. Antis are to day what pro choicers are to night. They are the ones who wear white, while others wear black. Their worldview accommodates no shades of grey. Nuances do not factor into their tightly bound world.  So, for example, to clinic clients, they say things like:

They want your baby to die. We want your baby to live.

With them, you’ll have a lifetime of regrets with a dead baby. With us, you will no regrets, a lifetime of happiness and a beautiful baby.

Your daughter deserves better than abortion. She’s going to mourn for this child for the rest of her life.

Make the right choice and not destroy life.

And to volunteer and clinic staff, the antis are fond of oppositional comments such as:

Get a job where you don’t have to kill for a living.

Why don’t you cross over to our side?

When you laugh at me, you’re laughing at God.

To make their point more visually punctuated and to signify their sacredness, they wear and carrying crosses and crucifixes, decorate the adjacent lawn with ornaments such as white crosses and white coffins, and chant prayers and spells to exorcise the evil spirits.

Another aspect of this oppositional thinking is their proclivity toward discriminating between the sacred and the profane. For example, offers of money to help women carry their pregnancy to term is sacred while offers of money to help women defray the cost of an abortion is profane. While doctors who earn money performing general surgery are sacred, doctors who earn money performing abortions are profane. While dental clinics are sacred, abortion clinics are profane. The say things like:

Their bread and butter comes from killing babies.

They’re banking on your daughter to forget to take her birth control pills so she gets pregnant and has to have an abortion.

This doctor doesn’t care about you. All he wants is your money.

In an attempt at amending what they view at evil, antis sprinkle holy water on the ground outside the abortion clinic, chant prayers and spike the lawn with white crosses and images of a white Jesus (who was, without a doubt, not white).

Authoritarian – From the strict doctrines binding them in their faith, antis are like the dragons that guard the door to progressive thinking. For them, their faith is absolutely true and completely adequate to explain everything. In their worldview, absolute conformity to the doctrine is mandatory. They learn from authoritarian teachers and preachers. Hence, they learn to be authoritarian toward others. In fiery, white-hot lightening, they lash out toward volunteer escorts:

You need to examine your motives for being so happy here at an abortion center.

You should be ashamed of yourself. You know in your heart that abortion is wrong.

Keep in mind that the antis do not know the women and their companions who enter the clinics. Nevertheless, they’ve singed total strangers, with comments like:

You don’t want your daughter to be hurting for the rest of your life

Don’t kill your baby today. Your baby deserves a birthday

Abortion is not the answer to the problem you’re facing today.

You’ve had your fun sleeping with her. Now be man and take care of her.

If your daughter conceived in rape, it’s the way God wanted it to be.

Ask God to forgive you.

In an effort to make their point, they often resort to finger-pointing, to shoving their signs in people’s faces telling them they “need to see this” and posting signs with straight forward pronouncement “Babies killed here” or “Be Gone Satan” or “Abortion is the Holocaust.”

Fear Mongering – Imagine living amongst humans where their nature has been programmed by magical thinking and heapum powerful juju. Using words created by humans and printed in man-made books, they declare their programming to be the Hocus Pocus of the Great Sky God. Lacking wisdom, they demand you too turn your life over to their GSG. They warn that if you don’t do as they say, because they know what is best, you will live in eternal flames. At abortion clinics, they spread their fear mongering words, often marinated in magical thinking, with comments like:

Abortion is associated with a 400% increase in breast cancer.

They love to talk about dead babies, stopping a beating heart.

The child you kill will haunt you at night.

Your baby has a heartbeat and brain waves and feels excruciating pain when the doctor tears his little body apart.

They’re going to turn your baby into baby road-kill.

They’re going to tear your uterus apart.

My girlfriend died in this clinic two weeks ago.

You’re going to cry for the rest of your life.

They’re going to suck your baby’s brains out.

The blood of that child is on your hands.

Mommy, please don’t let them tear my arms and legs off.

And if the words don’t scare the living hell out someone, these folks resort to gruesome images of a bloody full term fetus in pieces, Auschwitz signs with each letter of the word dripping with blood or spill red paint wherever they can.

Pro Fetus Anti Woman – Anti abortion activists call themselves prolife but that’s a misnomer. They’re really pro fetus. Taking the pro fetus position symbolically annihilates the woman carry the fetus, which is a pretty damn difficult place to be, if you ask me. In their magical thinking, the fetus is at the top of their value hierarchy while the aged humans are near the bottom. It’s no wonder that the average age of an anti abortion activist qualifies for senior citizen discounts. This older generation was socialized to believe that women were subservient to men, that people were heterosexual, that marriage meant children, that motherhood defined a woman and that young children were more valuable than old people. You can hear how this misogyny plays out when activists make comments like:

Let your baby live.

Your baby loves you and is innocent.

Your baby has the right to life.

Your baby has the right to have a birthday.

Anti woman comments are evident when the anti abortion activists say comments like:

Women use abortion as the easy way out.

Abortion is a selfish choice.

What gives you the right to kill your child?

Think about your baby’s soft, soft heart and your hard, hard heart.

You’re the mother of a dead baby now.

Even a cursory inventory of images used in the antiabortion industry reveals an obsession with the fetus and with babies. From microscopic fetal images to full color photography of children smiling, the antis are fixated. In their artifacts, the fetus figures prominently in rosaries sporting fetal dolls floating in the beads, in poster-sized baby announcements, in empty manger scenes (as if all babies are Jesus?), in baby dolls they carry in infant carriers and in the live babies they borrow from friends as props. While the fetus is foremost in their visual world, women are relegated to the occasional incubator status in the objectified form of a swollen, pregnant belly.

In Sum – A closer look at the personae of anti abortion activists provides a glimpse into their beliefs. They often claim that prochoicers have a hardened heart but the reality is that they are projecting their own ossified head and heart. Unable to moderate, unwilling to recant, and unable to see their own aggressivity, they hold fervently to the belief that what they do outside abortion clinics, on the Internet and at rallies is the right thing to do and is the right way to do things. And despite millions of people who share their faith, it is in name only. The anti abortion activists have their own special interpretations of how their faith is to be performed. And it’s quite the unbelievable performance!

 

July 29, 2012

Have an Abortion Then Commit Suicide?

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Information | Tags: , |
[33] Comments 
Anti Abortion People Abuse Children

Anti Abortion People Abuse Children

By the time a woman walks into an abortion clinic, she’s got a lot of stuff on her mind.  In the first place, she really doesn’t want to be there.  Furthermore, she’s probably been thinking about the issue for weeks, she’s been conflicted and her partner might not even be supportive of her decision.

But, at some point she picks up the telephone and calls the clinic to make the appointment.  When she gets to the abortion facility, she may be subjected to all of those “sidewalk counselors” who are oozing love and compassion (for the fetus) and who know oh-so-much more about abortion than she or the folks in the clinic do.  And, to top it off, they are even willing to help actually raise the child!  By the time she finally sits down to fill out her paperwork, her blood pressure is no doubt higher than normal and she has one thought:  let’s get this over with so I can move on with my life.  Well, maybe that’s a little too casual but the bottom line is they want to have the abortion and go home.

At some point, she will have to read a bunch of paperwork and then be counseled about the procedure.  It’s generally the same drill we’ve all been through where you just sit there, initial papers that you don’t read and kinda listen to the doctor as he tells you what could go wrong with the surgery, including the fact that you could DIE.  Sure, doc, thanks a lot.  Now where do I sign?

And now abortion patients in South Dakota will have to wait just a tad bit longer because a court has upheld a law passed in that state that requires abortion doctors to inform women that if they have an abortion they will have an increased risk of suicide.  The interesting thing about the decision is that the court said the state didn’t have to prove that this warning was true.  Instead, they said that those opposing the law had to prove it was untrue!  So, someone is gonna have to find those millions of women who have had abortions over the years and ask them if they ever contemplated suicide.  Then, in the unlikely event that the pro-choicers could prove the allegations were untrue, they would have to go back and convince the state legislature that they got it all wrong in the first place.  Sure, like that’s going to happen.

My reaction to all of this hogwash is – whatever.

Abortion

Abortion

Anyone who is about to have surgery, including abortion, knows there are risks, physical or otherwise.  And, the opinions of the anti-abortion folks notwithstanding, the women having abortions have brains and can sort all of these things out on their own.  Meanwhile, I cannot imagine when a woman hears that she might be more inclined to commit suicide if she has an abortion is gonna jump up from her chair and scream “Hey, wait a minute, I don’t want to kill myself years from now!  I would much rather give birth to this child and, even though I cannot take care of it for the next 20 years, I’ve got all of those people outside the clinic who have offered to help me!”

The stuff that the anti-abortion movement focuses on really is amusing.

Keep spinning your wheels folks.

Related articles
 

July 25, 2012

Symbolically Annihilated

Posted by DrK8 under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Lies | Tags: , , , |
[84] Comments 

A common sentiment from antiabortion activists is the juxtaposition of what they want versus what the clinic staff and volunteers want. For example, Gerry McWilliams, an incorrigible protester at Allentown Womens Center, is fond of saying to women as they cross the parking lot with clinic escorts (who wear green AWC vests), “We want your baby to live. Those people in the green vests want your baby to die.” It’s a perfect example of a logical fallacy in public debates on politics, ethics, and religion. As a straw man, this protester attacks a position not held by the other side (in fact, staff and escorts respect what women want), then acts as though the other side’s (the escorts in the vests) position has been refuted. This straw man is easy to defeat and is a sign of a weak, desperate man who knows he is losing. It’s also an indication that the woman is symbolically dismissed.

The notorious Flip Benham, Director of Operation Save America, writes about abortion in an ironic twist “there are no cheap political solutions to the holocaust presently ravaging our nation” (operationsaveamerica web site). Yet, outside the Hebron, NC clinic, he uses cheap political solutions that are grotesque, bordering on pornographic. Standing on a raised platform, he uses a bullhorn to broadcast to women entering the clinic “the devil inside that door will drink the blood of your child.” Again, the appeal is for the sensational and the want of the fetus. It’s not about what the woman wants. She is symbolically dismissed as unimportant.

When prolife pundit Abby Johnson tells her story on college campuses about why she resigned her position at Planned Parenthood, she appeals to emotions. Claiming to have witnessed an ultrasound-guided abortion that horrified her, she claims she was compelled to cross over to the prolife side. Of course, she obscures the fact that she was about to get fired. She also fails to mention the money she earns for her new-found celebrity status. But that’s another story. In telling her story over and over, she attempts to create a logically coherent narrative to convince her audiences that abortion is wrong. But, like others who just don’t get it, she ignores the very reality that abortion is right for one out of every three women of reproductive age. She, too, ignores these women.

Another common prolife sentiment, especially among the women, is talk about life being precious. A tender-hearted Lutheran minister in Allentown, PA, suggested these women just loved babies. They prattle on with what is essentially their own desires, “Love your baby” or “Life is precious. Don’t kill your baby” or “Give your baby up for adoption. It’s the selfless thing to do.” But their suggestion of adoption as a selfless option fails to consider the documented disadvantages of adoption. It fails to recognize that life’s preciousness can and should mean the concerns of the woman who is considering her options with an unplanned, unwanted pregnancy. But for these prolife women, symbolically dismissing the pregnant women, while favoring “the babies” is simply what they do best.

At clinics across the nation, antiabortion activists stand on sidewalks and streets with signs that 1) not only make it easy for women to locate the clinics (because they are warned about the trolls) but 2) illustrate their own obsessions and utter disregard for the very women they hope to attract. They use grotesque fetal images that exploit fetal death, that strip any human dignity from the fetus, and that turn death into leering pornography. These faux moralists cheapen their brand when they stigmatize women through grotesque imagery and powerful language of condemnation. Their monster talk is convenient. It frees them from thinking about the sacredness of women. And with predictable frequency, the protesters create a circus of the bizarre for women and their companions, with performances of religiosity, banal rituals of fear mongering, and social repudiation directed at women and their companions. And while they claim to direct their efforts toward women, in reality, they are simply performing acts of self-righteousness while ignoring what women want. In other words, they symbolically dismiss women in favor of what they want.

It was Gaye Tuchman (1978) who coined the phrase ‘symbolic annihilation’ when she was describing how women were underrepresented or misrepresented in media and society. She divided symbolic annihilation into three aspects: omission, trivialization and condemnation. It is within these aspects that symbolic annihilation is evident in the prolife industry. They omit women’s agency. They trivialize women’s reasons for wanting an abortion. And they certainly condemn women who consider abortion and who choose abortion.

Symbolic annihilation of women through omission, trivialization and condemnation: it’s the hallmark of the antiabortion zealots who care less about the rights of girls and women.

 

July 22, 2012

Unlimited Abortions in Your Nation’s Capital!!!

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion Medical, Abortion Pill, Late Term Abortion, Late Term Abortions | Tags: , , |
[102] Comments 
Pro Life Violence

Pro Life Violence

I rarely read LIFENEWS, the on-line “newspaper” of the Right To Life movement, or at least the main one.  But I was recently trolling around the internet the other night when I came across this site and an article caught my eye.  The headline read:   “House Panel OKs Bill to Stop Unlimited Abortions in Nation’s Capital” and the first sentence informed us that this bill would stop the “policy of unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy for any reason in the nation’s capital.”

Abortion Washington DC

Abortion Washington DC

In the past, I’ve talked about how advocates on both sides of the abortion issue get so locked into their positions that they dare not consider that their opponents might have a point and they certainly do not question the stuff that comes down from their oh-so-sacred national organizations.  So, if Planned Parenthood announced tomorrow that they’ve learned that President Obama will soon convert to the pro-life position, their followers would take the announcement as gospel and start sending money to “help us convince the President is on the wrong track.”

Violence against Abortion Providers

Violence against Abortion Providers

So, this little nugget from LIFENEWS got my attention pretty quickly.

As my readers know, I’ve worked with abortion clinics for the last 20 years.  As such, I got to know just about every clinic, every owner and every doctor.  One thing that I paid particular attention to was how far a doctor would go in terms of weeks when terminating a pregnancy. That was important information because I would constantly get calls from women looking for an abortion and the first thing you needed to know was how many weeks pregnant they were because, if their pregnancy was rather advanced, the number of doctors who performed later abortions were few and far between.  So, I basically knew how far each clinic went.

So, when I read that there was a “policy of unlimited abortions” in the District of Columbia, I was caught short.  Unlimited?   As in, they perform abortions in our capital up to the point of birth?  Now, if there were clinics in D.C. that performed abortions up to the moment of birth, I would just say it.  Everyone knows I am unapologetic about what the clinics do and how far they go.  So, I gotta tell you that LIFENEWS and their advocates on Capitol Hill are full of it.

Violence against Abortion Providers

Violence against Abortion Providers

Years ago, there was a doctor who did third trimester abortions in D.C., but he has since cut back dramatically and is only offering the abortion pill.   Then, there is Doctor Lee Carhart, who recently relocated to Maryland where he is legally permitted to perform third trimester abortions.  Then, outside of the D.C. area, there’s a doc in Florida who performs third trimester abortions, Doctor Warren Hern in Colorado, a doctor in California then I understand there are two who do later abortions in New Mexico.  Meanwhile, I called the clinics in D.C. and found one that went to 22 weeks.

But, who cares about the facts?   Political advocates have to make their points regularly to keep the troops stirred up and, yes, to raise money.  And the troops will follow, like lemmings to the sea.

Related articles
 

July 18, 2012

Before Roe v Wade

Posted by DrK8 under Abortion, Abortion Information, Abortion Stigma, ProLife
[114] Comments 

In 1969, one of my housemates, Michelle, and I offered to drive a colleague from Fort Collins CO to Denver. All three of us worked at Luby’s Cafeteria. Michelle and I worked part time because we also attended Colorado State University while our friend, Linda, worked full time. Linda was a 30-something divorcee with two children living in a trailer park with her Baptist parents. She had started dating again and found herself with an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. So she arranged for an abortion and needed a ride and an alibi. The story she told her parents (who would be watching her children) was that she was stepping out for the evening with friends and would crash at our house (we were five women who shared a really large rental home). That was her cover story. The real story was quite different. She could not tell them she was pregnant. Unmarried women, according to her parents, did not have sex, did not get pregnant and, sure as hell, did not have an abortion. Linda was convinced that if they knew she was pregnant, they would throw her out on the street.

So, with the best of intentions, Michelle and I made the one-hour trip to Denver with our friend. She was understandably nervous about the arrangement she made over the phone with a strange man, the abortionist. The plan was to meet him at a motel on West Colfax Avenue, cash in hand, where he would perform her abortion. It’s kind of amazing to think about legislators and antis talking about waiting periods and ambulatory surgical requirements now. Our friend had an abortion on a motel bed without any assurance that the man was a doctor, without any assurance that the man had hospital privileges, without any anesthesia, without any assurances of sterility, without any guarantees that she would live and without any state required speeches about pregnancy options.

I do not recall much of the trip. Knowing the three of us, we likely chatted like magpies. I also loved to drive. So, zipping down the highway was just a way of life for me. It wasn’t until we arrived at the crummy looking motel, that I began to feel afraid for Linda as she got out of the car. She seemed scared. Michelle and I watched her enter the designated motel room and the door close behind her. Our instructions were to pick her up in two hours, as best I can recall.

Keep in mind those were not the days of cell phones. We couldn’t text or call her. And we knew not to knock on the motel door. Instead, Michelle and I went to the local favorite, a coffee shop called the White Spot.

They were all over the metropolitan Denver area and had one of the best waffles around. Whether for greasy comfort food, post party munchies or waiting for a friend, the cheap eats at the White Spot were just the ticket.

From the recesses of my memory, I recall feeling anxious while Michelle, a veteran of abortion, seemed more comfortable. I was 20 years old and naïve. I didn’t know anything about abortions except hushed conversations about girls desperately scrapping together funds to go to Mexico or Sweden. I didn’t know even that much about sex or pregnancy. Thinking about this naiveté (or ignorance) now, as I write this post, reminds me of our 2006 documentary fieldwork with junior high students in Allentown. The kids were making digital stories about issues that impacted their community like speeding, litter, graffiti and recreational parks for kids. In what was likely the hottest day on record, our digital documentary campers were doing fieldwork in downtown Allentown when one of the antiabortion ‘truth trucks’ rolled down Hamilton Boulevard. One of the young girls, a nine year old, saw the truck and said, “That’s why I won’t use birth control.” I was astounded at her misperceptions (but said nothing to correct her because it wasn’t my place). But considering my ignorance back in 1969 and her misperceptions in 2006, there seemed to be little difference in terms of naiveté. But I digress.

After polishing our waffles, swilling gallons of coffee, and polluting our lungs with cigarette after cigarette, we eventually returned to the West Colfax motel. Linda was cramping but seemed otherwise OK. I felt a bit of relief because she was with us.

But by the time we got Linda settled in our house, things took a turn for the worse. She began bleeding really heavily. I drove to the drug store for sanitary pads. But the bleeding worsened still. She soaked through an entire box of super soaker pads in no time. Fortunately, we had enough sense to take her to the emergency room. She survived, thanks to an emergency hysterectomy, a short visit to ICU and several transfusions.

This is before Roe v Wade. Others weren’t so lucky.

 

July 15, 2012

Obama Should Take the Offensive on Abortion

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Information, Abortion Pill | Tags: , |
[30] Comments 
Abortion

Abortion

This year’s presidential election is going to very interesting, very dirty and very close.  So it’s tempting to start to dissect the individual campaign strategies because every minute decision could win or lose the race.

On the abortion issue, the lines are very clear.  Obama is pro-choice, pro-family planning, pro- Planned Parenthood, pro-stem cell research.  As we all know, Mitt Romney was pro-choice when he was Governor of Massachusetts but then he suddenly had a “conversion” about the time he started thinking about getting the Republican nomination for President from those right wingers who control their nominating process.  Now he is pro-life, anti-Planned Parenthood, blah, blah.  And although each candidate is always fuzzy on the issue of Supreme Court nominations, we know darn well that they will nominate justices that comport with their views on reproductive health.  This is a very important issue as the next President is bound to get a few nominations and that could determine the future of Roe v Wade.

Abortion

Abortion

It should come as no surprise that both of the candidates, as they criss-cross the country collecting the few votes that could make the difference, never talk about abortion.  Now, sure, I cannot say for a fact that they have NEVER mentioned it in a speech, but I have over the summer taken a lot of time watching their speeches on YouTube and as far as I can see they are not mentioning the issue.  This is very interesting to me in light of all of the talk a few months ago about the Republican Party’s so-called “War on Women.”  I’m not sure what happened to those folks who are concerned about that war, but they have been rather conspicuous by their absence.  On the other hand, if they were smart they would hold their fodder and wait until Labor Day when the race is engaged in earnest.

Abortion Advocate then convenient flip flop

Abortion Advocate then convenient flip flop

I was surprised, therefore, the other morning as I was flipping a pancake when I heard some foreboding music on the television and saw the grainy image of Mitt Romney with a voiceover telling us that he would “outlaw all abortions, including in cases of rape and incest.”   There was more foreboding music, like a soundtrack from some low budget vampire movie, and then I saw several pictures of women who were looking straight into the camera as if to say “stay out of my uterus, Mitt!”   The commercial then finishes off with a fuzzy recording of Mitt saying “and we’ll get rid of Planned Parenthood.”    Fade to black.

Now this commercial ran in Virginia, a toss-up state.  And I would not be surprised if the commercial ran just here in Northern Virginia which is much more progressive than the rest of the state.  Remember that it was the Virginia legislature that considered requiring vaginal ultrasounds before a woman could have an abortion.  So, Obama is probably being very strategic but just once I’d love to see a presidential candidate go all the way.

Abortion

Abortion

Putting all of those polls aside, polls that can be easily manipulated based on how you frame the question, I still believe that the vast majority of voters in this country are generally pro-choice and, more importantly, they just don’t think it’s an issue for politicians to be involved with.  And I think that Obama could tap into that sentiment by being a strong, unequivocal voice for “choice.”  I mean, just come out and talk about the darn issue and tell the American that “I trust women.”   In my many years in national politics, the biggest rounds of applause I heard were often when the candidate did not pull any punches, went right to the heart of the matter and told people that, while they might not like what he says, he is gonna tell them how he feels.  I firmly believe that’s what we Americans want in a candidate – a candidate with guts.  This is a great issue to demonstrate those guts.

Related articles
 

« Previous Page — Next Page »