You know what I don't understand? I don't understand how Republican presidential candidate, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum, can be so steadfast in his assertion that abortion should be illegal in absolutely all cases and that physicians who provide the service should be prosecuted when his wife, Karen, is reported to have had an abortion.
Santorum Is against Abortion Unless HIs Wife Needs One
So let's see if I understand this. Santorum thinks women should bear the children of rapists and incestuous relatives while their medical doctors should be criminalized for providing abortion services. Santorum thinks that all abortions should be illegal even if the mother's health is at stake unless it is his wife's well being that is at stake.
The hypocrisy is astounding.
Or is it?
Folks, as a pro-choice American, I am not too sure this story passes the smell test. Let me elaborate. Did Karen Santorum's physician intentionally terminate her pregnancy, or did Karen Santorum suffer irreversible premature labor resulting in the loss of her fetus? If it is the latter, Mrs. Santorum had a spontaneous abortion, what laymen refer to as a "miscarriage", which is a totally different matter than an elective abortion, which is the medically induced termination of a pregnancy.
The End of Karen Santorum's Pregnancy
Are Pro-Choice Activists Lying About Santorum's Abortion?
You know, folks, it is extraordinarily difficult to sift through the falderal on the internet regarding this topic. Frankly, I don't know what the truth is; and equally bluntly, if Karen Santorum had an elective abortion, I doubt very seriously if Rick Santorum will ever admit to it.
What I do know is this. If Mrs. Santorum did, indeed, undergo medically necessary elective abortion in order to save her life, Candidate Santorum has no right whatsoever to deny the right to the same life saving procedure to any other American woman.
What I also know is that if fellow pro-choice Americans are twisting, distorting, and/or spinning the facts of this matter into half-truths to suit their agenda, they are behaving unconscionably; as unconscionably as those who harass, intimidate, and threaten women entering abortion clinics. If we want reproductive choice to remain the law of the land, we must present our case factually and without the heated, baseless pretentious moral outrage often put forth by the pro-birth crowd.
Take one thing away from this, ladies and gentlemen. Pregnancy, sex, reproduction, childbirth, choice, and abortion are highly sensitive, personal matters. Can we agree that they are no one's business or concern but the mother, the father, their physician, and their God? If so, then you understand why I am a pro-choice American.
Peace and love, my brothers and sisters.
Showing posts with label Reproductive Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reproductive Rights. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Monday, June 13, 2011
Criminal Charges For Physicians Who Perform Abortions For Rape And Incest Victims???
You know what I don't understand? I don't understand how Republican presidential candidate, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, can actually state that he believes medical doctors who perform abortions for victims of rape and incest should face criminal charges. (Thanks to my dear friend, Mira, for the tip.) Really? Has he no shame or sense of decency?
Rick Santorum Would Make Criminals of Doctors Who Perform Abortions on Rape or Incest Victims
You know, I am pro-choice. I have been pro-choice my whole adult life. I don't see that ever changing, but I have a great deal of respect for a certain faction of the pro-life crowd while having NO respect for the pro-birth folks, who lose interest in the child the moment it exits the birth canal. However, I find this absolutely unconscionable. A woman gets pregnant as a result of being raped, or a woman becomes pregnant due to an incestuous relationship, and Rick Santorum thinks the medical doctor who provided her with an abortion should face criminal charges. Now, Santorum has, in that huge compassionately conservative heart of his, found the kindness to not charge the woman who sought the abortion, which is more than I can say for some of the pro-birth crowd. No. He just wants the health care provider to face criminal prosecution. Repulsive.
Even though I have a fundamental disagreement with the pro-birth/pro-life folks regarding a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body, I, on a certain level, can see their point. However, how do they justify prosecuting (and prosecuting them with what crime, pray tell?) a physician for terminating a pregnancy resulting from two of the most heinous crimes that a woman can suffer? How do they justify telling a woman who was raped that if she chooses to terminate the resulting pregnancy that her doctor may go to jail for performing the procedure? How do they justify telling a woman who is pregnant because of an incestuous relationship that there aren't any physicians available to provide an abortion for her because they will face criminal charges if they do?
I just don't understand it, folks, and I don't see how anyone with any common sense or compassion can justify this stance.
Peace and love, my brothers and sisters.
Rick Santorum Would Make Criminals of Doctors Who Perform Abortions on Rape or Incest Victims
You know, I am pro-choice. I have been pro-choice my whole adult life. I don't see that ever changing, but I have a great deal of respect for a certain faction of the pro-life crowd while having NO respect for the pro-birth folks, who lose interest in the child the moment it exits the birth canal. However, I find this absolutely unconscionable. A woman gets pregnant as a result of being raped, or a woman becomes pregnant due to an incestuous relationship, and Rick Santorum thinks the medical doctor who provided her with an abortion should face criminal charges. Now, Santorum has, in that huge compassionately conservative heart of his, found the kindness to not charge the woman who sought the abortion, which is more than I can say for some of the pro-birth crowd. No. He just wants the health care provider to face criminal prosecution. Repulsive.
Even though I have a fundamental disagreement with the pro-birth/pro-life folks regarding a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body, I, on a certain level, can see their point. However, how do they justify prosecuting (and prosecuting them with what crime, pray tell?) a physician for terminating a pregnancy resulting from two of the most heinous crimes that a woman can suffer? How do they justify telling a woman who was raped that if she chooses to terminate the resulting pregnancy that her doctor may go to jail for performing the procedure? How do they justify telling a woman who is pregnant because of an incestuous relationship that there aren't any physicians available to provide an abortion for her because they will face criminal charges if they do?
I just don't understand it, folks, and I don't see how anyone with any common sense or compassion can justify this stance.
Peace and love, my brothers and sisters.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
The Pro-Birth Faction Hits A New Low
You know what I don't understand? I don't understand why a Kansas lawmaker has suggested that women should "plan ahead" to buy insurance in case they are raped since he carries a spare tire in his car. (Thanks to my old friend, Mira, for the tip.) What is that, dear reader? You don't understand it either. Read on for the whole despicable story.
http://www.mcphersonsentinel.com/newsnow/x1058165813/Kansas-backs-bill-restricting-abortion-coverage
First, a Doug Disclaimer.................. I am a pro-choice American. I avoid the subject of reproductive rights on this blog and in my day to day activities due to having been harassed, insulted, and threatened on a regular basis by the pro-birth faction. The pro-birth faction are those who immediately lose interest in the child the moment it exits the birth canal as opposed to folks who really are pro-life and want to ensure that all children receive quality care, a decent education, and an opportunity to succeed in life.
That being established, the remarks by Rep Pete. DeGraaf, a Mulvanve Republican, cannot be ignored. The lowlights, per the attached article, are as follows:
Rep. Barbara Bollier, a Mission Hills Republican who supports abortion rights, questioned whether women would buy abortion-only policies long before they have crisis or unwanted pregnancies or are rape victims.
During the House's debate, Rep. Pete DeGraaf, a Mulvane Republican who supports the bill, told her: "We do need to plan ahead, don't we, in life?"
Bollier asked him, "And so women need to plan ahead for issues that they have no control over with a pregnancy?"
DeGraaf drew groans of protest from some House members when he responded, "I have spare tire on my car."
"I also have life insurance," he added. "I have a lot of things that I plan ahead for."
Let's make sure we all understand this. This gentleman (and I use the term very loosely) is comparing life insurance, which we are all guaranteed to use, with an abortion rider that he feels women should purchase to "plan ahead" in case they become impregnated via rape. Let me say that again. A Republican said that a woman should "plan ahead" and purchase insurance in case she is raped. One more time. She should have a plan in place in case she is raped. As if their constant chiseling away at a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body isn't objectionable enough, as if their wanting to make a woman's uterus state property weren't unconscionable enough, now they want woman to "plan ahead" in case they are raped. It is just like life insurance or a spare tire in their eyes.
Seriously????
It's a great year for women so far. First we have the person in Canada who suggests that women can avoid being raped by not "dressing like sluts". Now they have insurance in case they get raped. Well, why not? One in five women will be sexually assaulted, after all. I guess it is their fault for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I would like to think that this is only happening in the backwoods of Kansas, but right here in my home state of Indiana, our state government just approved slashing federal funding for Planned Parenthood; all the while ignoring the rock solid fact that Planned Parenthood does not use federal funds to provide abortions. The result? Poor women are denied birth control and reproductive health care. Fantastic.
Who says there is no war on reproductive rights? Who says women aren’t being treated as second class citizens? It is happening right in our own backyards, folks; and where this continual encroachment onto individual’s rights will end is anyone's guess. Personally, I find it utterly chilling.
Peace and love, my brothers and sisters.
http://www.mcphersonsentinel.com/newsnow/x1058165813/Kansas-backs-bill-restricting-abortion-coverage
First, a Doug Disclaimer.................. I am a pro-choice American. I avoid the subject of reproductive rights on this blog and in my day to day activities due to having been harassed, insulted, and threatened on a regular basis by the pro-birth faction. The pro-birth faction are those who immediately lose interest in the child the moment it exits the birth canal as opposed to folks who really are pro-life and want to ensure that all children receive quality care, a decent education, and an opportunity to succeed in life.
That being established, the remarks by Rep Pete. DeGraaf, a Mulvanve Republican, cannot be ignored. The lowlights, per the attached article, are as follows:
Rep. Barbara Bollier, a Mission Hills Republican who supports abortion rights, questioned whether women would buy abortion-only policies long before they have crisis or unwanted pregnancies or are rape victims.
During the House's debate, Rep. Pete DeGraaf, a Mulvane Republican who supports the bill, told her: "We do need to plan ahead, don't we, in life?"
Bollier asked him, "And so women need to plan ahead for issues that they have no control over with a pregnancy?"
DeGraaf drew groans of protest from some House members when he responded, "I have spare tire on my car."
"I also have life insurance," he added. "I have a lot of things that I plan ahead for."
Let's make sure we all understand this. This gentleman (and I use the term very loosely) is comparing life insurance, which we are all guaranteed to use, with an abortion rider that he feels women should purchase to "plan ahead" in case they become impregnated via rape. Let me say that again. A Republican said that a woman should "plan ahead" and purchase insurance in case she is raped. One more time. She should have a plan in place in case she is raped. As if their constant chiseling away at a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body isn't objectionable enough, as if their wanting to make a woman's uterus state property weren't unconscionable enough, now they want woman to "plan ahead" in case they are raped. It is just like life insurance or a spare tire in their eyes.
Seriously????
It's a great year for women so far. First we have the person in Canada who suggests that women can avoid being raped by not "dressing like sluts". Now they have insurance in case they get raped. Well, why not? One in five women will be sexually assaulted, after all. I guess it is their fault for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I would like to think that this is only happening in the backwoods of Kansas, but right here in my home state of Indiana, our state government just approved slashing federal funding for Planned Parenthood; all the while ignoring the rock solid fact that Planned Parenthood does not use federal funds to provide abortions. The result? Poor women are denied birth control and reproductive health care. Fantastic.
Who says there is no war on reproductive rights? Who says women aren’t being treated as second class citizens? It is happening right in our own backyards, folks; and where this continual encroachment onto individual’s rights will end is anyone's guess. Personally, I find it utterly chilling.
Peace and love, my brothers and sisters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)