Abortion: The More Dangerous, The Better

execute
Does this mean we’ll have to make a special place on Death Row for members of the Moral Majority?

Just when you thought “pro-lifers” couldn’t get any more abhorrent — after the clinic bombings, the doctor shootings, the attempt at forcing a nine-year-old rape victim to give birth, and the general misogyny — they go and do something like this and totally redeem themselves.

And by “redeem” I mean that they show their true colors once again, and carve out a special place for themselves in Hell.

Because now they flat-out say that the so-called partial birth abortion ban is a good thing because it bans one of the safer later-term procedures — meaning that women who need later abortions will be more likely to face serious physical injuries that could kill them or make them sterile.

“The old procedure [standard D&E], which is still legal, involves using forceps to pull the baby apart in utero, which means there is greater legal liability and danger of internal bleeding from a perforated uterus. So we firmly believe there will be fewer later-term abortions as a result of this ruling.”

Well. To quote Marty Lederman:

Got that? The Court upheld the law because the remaining unregulated procedure might be just as safe. Yet according to Focus on the Family, the remaining procedure is markedly less safe for the mother, and that’s precisely why the law is a good thing — because it leaves in place only a procedure that carries a higher risk of danger of internal bleeding from a perforated uterus . . . which in turn leads to “greater legal liability” for the doctors, and, as a result, fewer abortions.

Score one for candor.

It should be pointed out that the procedure which is still legal is very safe — safer than most surgical procedures, and a hell of a lot safer than illegal abortion. So we shouldn’t get ourselves into a panic over the idea that this procedure is unsafe, because that simply isn’t true. What is true is that the banned procedure, wherein the fetus was removed in tact, was the safer procedure for some pregnant women, given their physical condition. It’s abhorrent that “pro-life” groups and the Supreme Court took that option away. This will make abortion more dangerous for some women. But we should keep in mind that “more dangerous” is a relative term, and there’s no reason to be under the impression that terminating a pregnancy is now a significantly risky endeavor.

That aside, it is incredibly telling that anti-choicers are excited about the prospects of women having their uteruses perforated just so doctors can be sued out of terminating pregnancies and the “pro-life” crowd can score some political points (hey, if shooting them didn’t work, perhaps suing them into oblivion will).

And that’s not all:

A Focus on the Family spokesman said that Dobson would not comment. But the organization’s vice president, Tom Minnery, said that Dobson rejoiced over the ruling “because we, and most pro-lifers, are sophisticated enough to know we’re not going to win a total victory all at once. We’re going to win piece by piece.”

The fact that they’re trying to dismantle abortion rights piece by piece isn’t exactly news, but they often try to play to the moderates by claiming that they’re only pushing “reasonable restrictions” on abortion, not trying to totally take away your basic rights. Well, here’s the admission that that’s a huge lie. They are trying to totally dismantle abortion rights. And they aren’t going to stop there. To all the ladies who think that you’d never have an abortion but still kinda like your birth control: You’re next on the list. Because this isn’t about saving babies or any of that — it’s about gaining power and controlling women.

And since we were talking about “convenience” yesterday — how selfish sluts kill their babies because it’s the convenient thing to do and whatnot — I’ll include the full I-want-to-see-women-injured quote from a Focus on the Family rep:

Doctors adopted the late-term procedure “out of convenience,” Minnery added. “The old procedure, which is still legal, involves using forceps to pull the baby apart in utero, which means there is greater legal liability and danger of internal bleeding from a perforated uterus. So we firmly believe there will be fewer later-term abortions as a result of this ruling.”

Selfish asshole doctors, choosing a “convenient” procedure — clearly, they should take some responsibility, man up, and pick the procedure that is most likely to do harm to their patients. Because that’s the pro-life way.

Kinda puts the whole “women have abortions for convenience” argument into perspective.

Welcome to the culture of life.

via Scott, who has more. Thanks also to NewsCat for sending this on, and who also has more to say.


Similar Posts (automatically generated):

19 comments for “Abortion: The More Dangerous, The Better

  1. June 4, 2007 at 8:43 pm

    I love that last question mark on the sign, it’s like some sort of fundamentalist terrorist cliffhanger.

  2. June 4, 2007 at 8:53 pm

    Charming.

    As for the auto-cannibalization beginning to happen viz Dobson not being -enough- of a foaming zealot: couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

    “because it is bitter, and because it is my heart.”

  3. June 4, 2007 at 9:03 pm

    What’s this?! The rabid anti-choice, misogynist, Christian Talibanists are competing against each other, to see who is more radically anti-choice/contraception, misogynist, and religiously psychotic?! Fuck the Marquis de Sade!…the pro-perforated-uterus folks win!

  4. June 4, 2007 at 9:41 pm

    I already knew “pro-life” equated to “pro-misery”. Now it seems to be “pro-hideous suffering and injury” as well.

  5. Mary
    June 4, 2007 at 9:46 pm

    Why don’t we just euthanize everyone who doesn’t agree with us? That would make the world so much simpler because then the entire human species would be gone.

    I’m really getting sick of being open to others’ ideas and beliefs, listening to their side and point of view and then them sticking their fingers in their ears and singing “LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU!” when I try to explain my own point of view. This happens everywhere from abortion rights to religion. It’s OK for the fundies to spew hate on the street corner and at PP, but God thinks it’s wrong for me to make my own stand.

    Excuse me while I get barefoot and pregnant and let my husband drag me by my hair back into the kitchen where I clearly belong.

  6. Le Fille Torpille
    June 4, 2007 at 10:04 pm

    I love the “Accessories?” part of the sign. It’s so baffling.

    “We’re fighting for unborn souls, fighting against the eeeevil forces of Planned Parenthood and Claire’s in the Birkwood Mall!”

    whut.

  7. micheyd
    June 4, 2007 at 10:10 pm

    Oh man, that sign reminds me of the one my friend saw at a reproductive rights conference: “kill all murdering abortionists”

    If it wasn’t so scary, it would be funny.

  8. June 5, 2007 at 12:33 am

    speaks honestly, they really want women to choose between giving birth and risking death

    Actually, in this case, they want women to choose between risking death and risking death.

    Because they deserve it, apparently, for not successfully having a healthy pregnancy. Or something.

  9. Sarah
    June 5, 2007 at 3:50 am

    It’s interesting how they see the main risk of an abortion gone wrong as to the doctor who might get sued. Not to the woman who might be injured or even killed. Almost as though she is irrelevant and not really a real person in all this. Not surprising at all though…

  10. June 5, 2007 at 6:28 am

    “Mainstream” liberals have, for too long, embraced an ideology of “everyone is entitled to their opinion, and every opinion has its own validity.”

    Clearly, this is not so.

    When the other side embraces to opposite ideology, which is that “If you don’t agree with us, you’re wrong, and you shouldn’t be allowed to say that,” and you continue to proclaim that to be a valid opinion that you respect someone for having, you lose. Combining that with the opposite ideology saying “We want to kill you — we want you to die a horrible death for a belief that is peculiar to us — and if you don’t agree with us you’re wrong, and you shouldn’t be allowed to disagree” and you pretty much have how we arrived here today.

  11. Saros
    June 5, 2007 at 6:34 am

    These people make me ill.

    which means there is greater legal liability and danger of internal bleeding from a perforated uterus. So we firmly believe there will be fewer later-term abortions as a result of this ruling.

    *shudder*

  12. Chicklet
    June 5, 2007 at 8:05 am

    Irony of ironies, that’s Paul Hill in that picture – a now-executed murderer.

  13. Rhiannon
    June 5, 2007 at 11:02 am

    hmph. Figures they’d try to get rid of our jewelry and handbags too. Those Accessories-haters.

  14. cme
    June 5, 2007 at 12:18 pm

    Sarah said:

    It’s interesting how they see the main risk of an abortion gone wrong as to the doctor who might get sued. Not to the woman who might be injured or even killed. Almost as though she is irrelevant and not really a real person in all this.

    I perceived that as “you can’t convince/trust women not seek abortions, so you have to discourage the people who provide them”. I think these are two sides of the same attitude.

  15. June 5, 2007 at 2:21 pm

    That belongs with the Bill O’Reilly video in the “Shit, we know they think it, but damned if we’re not surprised to hear them actually say it out loud” file!

  16. June 5, 2007 at 6:23 pm

    And of course, these late term procedures are usually performed for a wanted pregnancy in which something has gone horribly awry. That’s the case in which preserving a woman’s fertility, that is, not perforating her uterus, is usually very important to her.

  17. Sam
    June 5, 2007 at 8:53 pm

    And of course, these late term procedures are usually performed for a wanted pregnancy in which something has gone horribly awry. That’s the case in which preserving a woman’s fertility, that is, not perforating her uterus, is usually very important to her.

    I’m gonna even go one step further and say that “not having a perforated uterus” is probably very important to (dare i say) every woman, not just the ones who had wanted pregnancies.

Comments are closed.