Frames, Exceptions and Anti-Choice Aims Exposed


It was the exchange that reproductive and sexual health advocates had been waiting for.

Finally, a discussion about women’s health. This isn’t "special interest" we’re talking about. It’s a bit tiring to hear over and over again that my life and my body are so controversial that presidential candidates need to fight over them every time the discussion is broached. 

So, I held tight and waited when abortion was introduced into the debate last night. I waited for the same old argument. The tired lines about pro-choice vs. pro-life. I waited for the requisite line about how important it is to have a "culture of life" in this country and how both candidates stand up for the lives of the unborn. 

I didn’t hear that. I didn’t hear it because the argument has changed. And it’s thrilling. Instead of the meaningless "life" rhetoric and the tired anti-choice frames that lift the discussion away from women’s health and lives and away from women’s and families’ medical decision making power, we heard the phrases and frames that reproductive and sexual health advocates have been promoting for years. 

Regardless of whether or not you felt that Senator McCain was unbearably out of touch on the issue, he used the word "decision" when referring to women faced with an unintended pregnancy and did not fall back on the word "choice" – a frame that, for many reproductive health advocates and providers, has never captured the situation well. Women have the right to make private decisions about their health and lives – it’s more than choice.

McCain: And it’s got to be courage and compassion that we show to a young woman who’s facing this terribly difficult decision.

Do you notice what else he did in that sentence? He focused squarely on the woman. Subtle, maybe. But words matter. McCain himself brought that up a few times last night when attempting to criticize Senator Obama for his "eloquence."

Words do matter. And Senator Obama’s words were even more astounding:

Obama: “We should try to prevent unintended pregnancies by providing appropriate education to our youth, communicating that sexuality is sacred and that they should not be engaged in cavalier activity, and providing options for adoption, and helping single mothers if they want to choose to keep the baby.”

Senator Obama’s choice of frames — "prevent unintended pregnancies," "appropriate education," "communication," "providing options," and "helping single mothers" — were made all the more powerful because this is exactly where the majority of Americans wishes the focus to be. There is no public benefit to an endless back and forth about the morality of women’s reproductive health decisions — when millions of women are faced with unintended pregnancies, lack of access to proper family planning, when our young people are desperate for clear guidance and education about their sexual health and sexual decision making and when we face public health epidemics like HIV and aren’t addressing the root causes of any of these critical issues. 

Senator McCain’s obvious frustration over women’s constitutional right to access abortion if their lives are endangered through the pregnancy may have been the most telling of all. 

McCain belittled the allowance in Roe v. Wade for a late term abortion during a health crisis for women by saying:

MCCAIN: Just again, the example of the eloquence of Senator Obama. He’s health for the mother. You know, that’s been stretched by the pro-abortion movement in America to mean almost anything.

That’s the extreme pro-abortion position, quote, “health.”

Senator McCain’s opposition to Roe v. Wade is no secret. He and his running mate support overturning Roe v. Wade, as they both oppose legal abortion in the United States. But since Roe v. Wade has provided millions of women in this country the opportunity to exercise some control over their reproductive health – and this is never more important than in the face of a crisis pregnancy – it’s worth dissecting McCain’s apparent disgust with allowing women’s "health" to remain a crucial factor in decisions about abortion. 

As Vicki Saporta, writing on RH Reality Check, explains:

While the majority of women choose abortion care early in their pregnancies (89% of all abortions in the United States are obtained within the first 12 weeks – PDF), there are cases where a woman may need to obtain a later abortion in order to protect her life or preserve her health, including her mental health. Contrary to the speculation of some abortion opponents, a woman does not obtain a later abortion simply because she’s "having a bad day." These cases often involve severe fetal anomalies that can cause great emotional distress and be devastating to a woman’s psychological health.

As Emily notes, pundits across the airwaves and internet "tubes" were shocked:

"In a race in which millions of dollars have been spent for the votes of American women, McCain managed..to mock…the notion that late-term abortions should be allowed in cases where a mother’s health is threatened," the LA Times’s Cathleen Decker wrote after last night’s presidential debates.

Chris Matthews said:

You can’t belittle the health exception with regard to abortion. You can’t say the exception is ‘only her possible death.’

But if justifications for the health exception, pundits’ reactions to the importance of acknowledging how crucial a health exception is to women voters, and the actual law of the land are not enough to convince the anti-choice movement and Senator McCain of the medical and public consensus that later term abortions are defensible when a woman’s life is in danger, maybe women’s real life stories about their most personal and private experiences will do the trick? 

Susan Ito’s decisions were her own to make but it was by no means easy. And Susan’s story is heartbreaking. Would it have been made any easier if she had not been giving the "option" of living by Senator McCain or the anti-choice movement? 

I was toxemic, poisoned by pregnancy. My only cure was to not be pregnant anymore. The baby needed two more weeks, just fourteen days.

I looked at John hopefully. "I can wait. It will be all right."

"Honey. Your blood pressure is through the roof. Your kidneys are shutting down. You are on the verge of having a stroke."

I actually smiled at him. I actually said that having a stroke at twenty-nine would not be a big deal. I was a physical therapist; I knew about rehab. I could rehabilitate myself. I could walk with a cane. Lots of people do it. I had a bizarre image of leaning on the baby’s carriage, supporting myself the way elderly people use a walker.

We struggled through the night. "I’m not going to lose this baby," I said.

As William Saletan writes in Slate today, the old arguments are losing ground:

Look at the home page of the National Right to Life Committee, and you’ll see the kind of character-focused, us-or-them rhetoric that has pervaded the McCain campaign and the pro-life movement.

It’s hard to claim that one’s ideology is grounded in care and concern for public and individual good when women’s health is tossed aside as if it were nothing more than garbage.

Senator McCain’s reaction was not surprising, ultimately. It was simply revealing. Valuing women’s health and lives is not political posturing. Openly mocking an allowance for women to terminate a pregnancy in crisis or extreme situations if her health is in danger is. The anti-choice movement has fueled this. Stuck in rigid, reactive and retro ways, the anti-choice movement’s agenda was exposed last night. The balance that Roe v. Wade affords is something they are not at all interested in. There is no balance in this agenda –  the value of women’s lives and health will never measure up to their desire to ensure that women are disavowed of their ability to make personal and private decisions about their own bodies. 

William Saletan’s acknowledgment that Senator Obama’s focus last night on the "boring," technical aspects of the abortion discussion is ultimately better for this country is right. The real focus of the abortion discussion  – on health access and need, information and education – are not controversial issues. Respect for private medical decision making and strong prevention strategies, coupled with a focus on access to health care are hard to debate. Apparently ensuring that women’s health is taken into account when discussing abortion access is not.  

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • invalid-0

    The risk of death associated with abortion increases with the length of pregnancy, from one death for every one million abortions at or before eight weeks to one per 29,000 at 16–20 weeks—and one per 11,000 at 21 or more weeks. (Bartlett LA et al., Risk factors for legal induced abortion-related mortality in the United States, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2004, 103(4):729–737.)

    It is ashame that you must kill your child in order to live the way you want to.

  • anna-clark

    … is that women deserve to live.

  • invalid-0

    When the risk of death from continuing the pregnancy is higher than the risk of death in a later abortion, many Women put in this most awful situation decide to preserve their own lives and health.
    This has nothing to do with convenience or lifestyle. It has everything to do with the fact that Women have a right to simply live.

  • invalid-0

    I believe the necessity is to live, survive…not just live the way you want to. Your response is very off-handed. Do you really believe that any woman makes this decision lightly? This is the same nonsense we have been hearing for years, it wasn’t true then, and it isn’t true now.

    From someone who remembers the painful days before Roe v. Wade.

  • amanda-marcotte

    Nice.  I suppose I knew it would come to this.  When I talked to Tiffany Campbell about her coming out in public about having a selective reduction that was necessary to make sure that at least one baby lived, she said the same thing—that she was accused of lying.  

     

    "Live the way you want to", huh?  You make it sound bad that women want to have love, relationships, and good health.  Why shouldn’t a woman live like a human being, who has love in her life and a right to basic medical care to keep her healthy? 

  • invalid-0

    What exactly isn’t true about it? The fact that you are killing an innocent child or the fact that woman do die from late-term abortions? Of course women want to live. People with congestive heart failure need a heart transplant an want to live. But does that mean we kill a person for their heart so that another who needs it can live? No! You all are avoiding the act of abortion, which is the issue at hand. To kill someone for a heart is unethical because it’s murder. To kill a baby because he or she is causing harm to mother is unethical because it is murder as well.

    Of course this is not a light-hearted decision. But you must make the right decision and that is not to kill human life, no matter what position you are in.

  • invalid-0

    Well no Marilyn…self defense is not unethical.

  • amanda-marcotte

    So, by your own measure, that should be banned even though not getting the surgery would obviously be more deadly. 

     

    If you are a true believer that someone shouldn’t be required to give their body’s to another so the latter can live, you should be pro-choice.  A woman should no more be required to give her body to a fetus than you should be required to give me a kidney. 

     

    Your willingness to rate unformed human beings below actual people with lives and loved ones worries me. I realize it’s nice to imagine fetuses as better than real people, because they’r silent and you can project whatever you want on them, innocence, purity, or whatever real people resist.  But most people cherish actual people, with their minds and hearts and personalities and feelings, all things fetuses don’t have, though obviously they will get there if they are born.

  • invalid-0

    self-de·fense /ˈsɛlfdɪˈfɛns, ˌsɛlf-/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[self-di-fens, self-] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
    –noun 1. the act of defending one’s person when physically attacked, as by countering blows or overcoming an assailant: the art of self-defense.

    Self defense is when you stop someone who has CHOSEN to attack you and you protect yourself. If a robber comes into my house and I’m in my bedroom and I say “don’t come in, I have a gun” and I shoot them when they come in, it is not the same thing as a child who did NOT have the choice to come into this world and is being punished for his or her exhistance.

    I know that this is something that you are struggling with, but you can help make other women make the right decision by telling your story. It’s not painful because it was illegal prior to Roe v. Wade. It’s painful because your heart tells you this was all wrong.

    Some femenist believe that abortion is when they are choosing what’s right for themselves, but every woman whom has chosen abortion only did so because someone else has chosen for them. Whether it be a spouse, significant other, or a doctor who tells the woman “it is in your best interest,” or “the other baby’s (in the case of twins) best interest.” Women (and men) who lost a child to abortion are victims of a society that wrongfully pushes a high money-making industry that you all are backing. Be the true femenist. Reclaim your right to chose. The choice your heart makes.

    I am not trying to be insensitive. My best friend has been a victim to this business of killing innocent children twice, and I have never seen a turn for the worse in any other human being. Abortion did not allow her to “love, be happy, dah dah da…” She can’t even look at herself in the mirror. Is that what you want for the future of American women? Not me.

    I will light a candle tonight for all your babies in heaven.

  • invalid-0

    There are so many things wrong with your response on so many levels. I don’t even know where to start!

    Killing someone. PERIOD. That’s how my analogy differed from transplants performed today. It would be wrong to kill someone, like abortion does, for that. It’s not the same as transplants from someone already dead. However, abortion kills a living “actual person” intentionally.

    And your quote “actually people” worries me. When you were concieved, did you know that nothing in this universe held the same DNA as you? Your sex and all the rest of your genetic make-up was already made right when the sperm merged with the egg.

    These are actual people in an early state on development. Like how a one day old baby differs from that same person at 20 years old. I will end on this note: When you are already pregnant, that is not the time to decide if you want to have a baby. YOU HAVE A BABY.

  • invalid-0

    Uh no…I would be just as ethically entitled to defend myself against someone who was coerced or forced into attacking me against his or her will.

    The attacker’s “innocence” is not a factor. My health and continued existance is primary.

  • invalid-0

    There are two issues here. One, you have a right to how you feel about abortion. You don’t have to have one. You can talk to your children and friends about your values, so that the people you know and love don’t have to have one. But your personal feeling about it is separate from how you feel government should be run. This is a matter of privacy and it is none of your nor the government’s business.

    Secondly, I’m really and truly sorry for the woman in your life who regrets her abortions. I wish no woman felt that way, and I wish she had felt able to make her own choice rather than her spouse’s. But for every woman like her, there’s a woman like me who would be so much worse off if I had not had an abortion. You cannot possibly say “every” woman made that choice because someone else told her to. Society is better off when abortion is legal.

  • invalid-0

    Hey Marilyn – Against abortion? Don’t have one!

    Kindly keep your Bible and your opinions away from my reproductive tract, please and thank you. If you seriously believe in saving a fetus over its mother, you are a twisted individual indeed. I most certainly am opposed to abortion as a form of birth control, but you are a lying piece of filth if you would say you would not abort if you were raped, and I can guarantee your “pro-life” brother, father, cousins, and husband would also have an immediate change of heart if that were the case.

    In addition, if you would save the life of a fetus over the life of the mother – thanks a lot, you just killed my own mother. She had an ectopic pregnancy and if she’d carried it to term, her and the child would have both died. Good job. You can go on tooting your so-called moral horn all you want but the fact of the matter is that what I do with my own reproductive tract is none of your business.

    As I said, kindly keep your Bronze Age fairytale and your opinions away from my ovaries. Thanks.

  • invalid-0

    Hey Ally-
    If I told you I was a product of rape, would you say my mother should have aborted me? That’s great. You just killed me. Mothers pregnant from rape are victims too. Now you made me a victim as well.

    Do you really think that if my mother killed me, the pain of rape would go away? It seems it would only make matters worse. hmmmm…

    And as for the ectopic pregnancy of your mother, I am sorry she was convinced by the doctor there is no other option. The TRUTH, not just Bible truth (which I never mentioned, but you did since you have no other argumentative leverage), the TRUTH is that there has been documentation of live births from ectopic pregnancy. See “Abdominal Pregnancy” http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/weekly/aa030706a.htm

    The doctor probably did not tell your mother about this. This is the doctor’s fault, not your mother’s.

  • mellankelly1

    If I told you I was a product of rape, would you say my mother should have aborted me?

    I can’t imagine anyone telling you that you shouldn’t have been born, especially considering that nobody here actually knows you.

    Do you really think that if my mother killed me, the pain of rape would go away? It seems it would only make matters worse. hmmmm…

    Having experienced a rape-related pregnancy that I immediately terminated and would do again under those same circumstances I can assure you that in my case, the point of terminating that pregnancy was to prohibit the birth of a baby, not to assuage the pain of the rape.  It certainly didn’t make matters worse in my case… things got much better and I’ve since given birth to two lovely children (in addition to the one child I’d already had at the time of my abortion.)  See, each individual woman is different and only she can decide the course of her pregnancy (rape-related or not)  Just as I’m certain that your mother wouldn’t have allowed some third-party with no stake in the outcome to decide the course of her pregnancy.

     

    PS giving medical advice when you’re not actually a medical doctor is ill-advised and can oftentimes have dire consequences which is precisely why a woman faced with an ectopic pregnancy (or any other pregnancy which threatens her health) should seek legitimate medical advice and disregard information found on anti-abortion websites.

  • mellankelly1

    but you can help make other women make the right decision by telling your story

    The right decision is whatever the woman facing an unwanted pregnancy makes… certainly how you or I feel about her choice does not define whether or not her choice was right for her.

    Some femenist believe that abortion is when they are choosing what’s right for themselves, but every woman whom has chosen abortion only did so because someone else has chosen for them. Whether it be a spouse, significant other, or a doctor who tells the woman "it is in your best interest," or "the other baby’s (in the case of twins) best interest." Women (and men) who lost a child to abortion are victims of a society that wrongfully pushes a high money-making industry that you all are backing.

    Okay, so… women just couldn’t possibly make their own informed, moral decisions because… because…?  Why now?  Oh, because we are perpetual victims who will be influenced at the whim of whomever happens to be standing near us at the time.  Are you suggesting that a woman’s pretty little head couldn’t possibly be bothered to think for itself?  Are you also suggesting that those in the medical field are not the most qualified to inform us of our choices regarding our health?  Shall we come to you with our medical issues so that you can lead us in the direction of someplace like, say abortionfacts.com or realchoice.org? 

    Be the true femenist. Reclaim your right to chose. The choice your heart makes.

    A feminist believes in the  political, economic, and social equality of the sexes so as a feminist I am pro-choice.  My heart, mind, body and soul made the choice to terminate my pregnancy… no third party had any influence whatsoever in my decision making process. 

    Further, there are unbiased and supportive places for women to go after terminating a pregnancy, such as Exhale.  There are also supportive places for women to go dealing with depression after giving birth to a child.  Any woman suffering as a result of her choice should get the help and support that they so desperately need.

  • invalid-0

    their personal experiences. I think women’s personal stories are so powerful – made all the more so when shared.  We can see that it would be disastrous to put these extremely personal decisions about our lives and our bodies into the hands of our government or anti-choice extremists who want to make these decisions for you. 

    I am grateful for the women here, no matter their belief system, and your courage to share your stories. It’s clear that most Americans want to make sure that there is a balance in our federal laws that take into account both the woman’s health and lives and, most of all, privacy as well as ALL of our interest in protecting viable, fetal life. 

    I would say that "debating" with someone who puts these decisions in such black and white terms is likely fruitless. If you notice, no matter what someone writes – whether it’s a personal plea, facts, medical evidence – someone who believes that this is not a personal, private and individual decision that cannot be made for other women, will never change her mind. 

    Gratefully, that is not the way most Americans think. No woman should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term and birth a child. No woman should be forced to terminate a pregnancy. All we can do is provide the most supportive, caring and equitable environment in this country for our mothers and families to make the decisions that are right for them. This, of course, includes access to health care for all women including family planning and contraception, comprehensive education about how to prevent unintended pregnancies, services for women who wish to keep their babies, policies that help families with living wages and paid family leave. These are POLICY choices that are completely non-controversial. 

    If the anti-choice movement poured just a fraction of what they do to try and restrict access to reproductive health care for the mothers of our country, into expanding services as listed above, our mothers and families would be so much better off. 

     

     

    Amie Newman

    Managing Editor, RH Reality Check

  • anna-clark

    McCain’s use of the word "decision" when it comes to abortion.

    Marilyn passionately believes that abortions are wrong in every case.
    Most of the rest of us here passionately believe that its up to each
    individual to decide if an abortion is right for them.

    But as Amie put it in referring to McCain, "Women have the right to
    make private decisions about their health and lives – it’s more than
    choice."

    We may disagree with Marilyn about what makes a "right" and "wrong"
    decision–but at least we agree that it is, in fact, a decision.

  • invalid-0

    Journal of Fertility and Sterility
    http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2896214

    What is wrong with carrying a baby to term and giving him/her up for adoption? It’s a self-less, strong, caring, loving act that would make a family on the very long waiting list very happy. It also gives the child a chance at life, which is beautiful.

    What exactly is it about a woman’s reproductive tract that excludes a child from the protection of law? If a serial killer was killing people in his home and said the government has no business prying in on him in his home and he could do what he wants, that’s only half true. But he’s killing people. Like abortion does. That’s when the law steps in. I must speak up for the population you pro-choicer’s have forgotten. They can’t speak for themselves, so I will.

    About ectopic pregnancy and medical advice: I am a nurse and I will try and help patients recognize an ectopic pregnancy before it’s too late. The earlier it is recognized, the greater the possibility it is to move the baby to a safer area. Nurses educate patients about their health and knowledge is power. Get second opinions from doctors before deciding anything major. Taking control of your reproductive health does not mean forking over $500 while screamind “I am woman, hear me roar.”

  • invalid-0

    Mellankelly, your saying that the “right decision” is subjective upon whatever anyone thinks is right at the moment. This is the ideology of hedonists and anarchists. I would say our society agrees that murder is wrong, right? So what’s the difference between doing it on one side of the birth canal, as oppose to the other?

    P.S.- I am glad you have gone to a place that has allowed you to grieve for your baby. Are you really going to fight for a cause that wants to tell young girls this is legal and alright?

  • mellankelly1

    Mellankelly, your saying that the "right decision" is subjective upon whatever anyone thinks is right at the moment

    To be specific, I made the statement that "The right (meaning the correct) decision is whatever the woman facing an unwanted pregnancy makes… certainly how you or I feel about her choice does not define whether or not her choice was right for her" and I absolutely stand by my utterly true statement.

    This is the ideology of hedonists and anarchists

    This is certainly news to me… I had no idea that free will could be considered "the ideology of hedonists and anarchists" how deliciously evil that sounds!

    So what’s the difference between doing it on one side of the birth canal, as oppose to the other?

    It’s kind of sad that you wouldn’t know the differences even if you read about them in a science book.

    P.S.- I am glad you have gone to a place that has allowed you to grieve for your baby. Are you really going to fight for a cause that wants to tell young girls this is legal and alright?

    What the bloody hell are you talking about?  I’ve given birth to three babies and there are still three of them running around like little (and big) crazy people in my house.  I’ve been fortunate enough never to have had reason to grieve the loss of a baby and I thank God for that every day.

    PS. I will fight until the day that I die for the rights of all women and my children will fight and their children will fight and so on and so on…

  • invalid-0

    I just watched a video at the environmental working group web site on the child safety act they are trying to get passed which would force corporations to consider children when producing toxins. I urge everyone to look into this. Millions of fetuses are lost every year due to toxins in our environment–I have yet to hear a conservative talk about this important issue. Democrats are far more likely to support pro healthy environment causes then Republicans meaning much wanted pregnancies can be carried to term and less of everyone dieing of cancer. The infant mortality rate in our country is appalling–what about all those wanted babies that are already here and are sick? I wish the extremeist ant-choice peoplw would focus on changing these facts instead of being concerned with what a woman does with her own body!

  • invalid-0

    A woman has the right to defend herself against another’s use of her body for their own benefit or life. Whether this DNA is in an embryo, or an actual person whose DNA will never exists again. One could consistently label any action the woman takes to defend herself against the actual person who needs her body as an act of killing, yet she (as well as men) still have the right.

    No I don’t have a baby just because you want to say so. I never got a conception certificate, I didn’t test tampons for those that fertilized eggs that come out due to incomplete implantation…I will continue to flush these and be thrilled that I do flush them, I had sex while breastfeeding an actual baby (which can cause the lining of the uterus to be inhospitable to new implants – oh my), nor do my actual children have rights over my vagina or body even if its required for their right to live. I celebrated my first mothers day after giving birth….not while pregnant and not by testing my tampons to see if I were a mother 10 years earlier. You don’t know whether I”m a chimera so can’t make statements about my DNA makeup at conception vs. after.

  • mellankelly1

    http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=2896214

    That link provided information regarding a study of reproductive potential after an ectopic pregnancy has ended which is not quite the same as a study suggesting that gestating an ectopic pregnancy is a good idea. 

    I am a nurse and I will try and help patients recognize an ectopic pregnancy before it’s too late. The earlier it is recognized, the greater the possibility it is to move the baby to a safer area

    Moving an ectopic pregnancy?  Really?  From the Mayo Clinic:

    An ectopic pregnancy can’t proceed normally. The fertilized egg can’t survive, and the growing tissue may destroy various maternal structures. Left untreated, life-threatening blood loss is possible. Early treatment of an ectopic pregnancy can help preserve the chance for future healthy pregnancies.

    When you have an ectopic pregnancy, the stakes are high. Treatment may lead to loss of reproductive organs or infertility. Without treatment, the stakes are even higher. A ruptured fallopian tube may lead to life-threatening bleeding.

    I can only thank God that there are reputable medical resources available to anyone with access to a computer in order to counter non-medical advice given by "nurses" roaming the Internet.

  • mellankelly1

    I would say that "debating" with someone who puts these decisions in such black and white terms is likely fruitless. If you notice, no matter what someone writes – whether it’s a personal plea, facts, medical evidence – someone who believes that this is not a personal, private and individual decision that cannot be made for other women, will never change her mind.

    I couldn’t agree with you more… the really wonderful thing about "debating" with these extremists in a forum such as this, is that you also get to reach thoughtful, caring people who after hearing these firsthand experiences appear to understand the vast gray area of this subject.  I’ve had women who truly believed that they were anti-abortion send me private emails thanking me for sharing my story – not necessarily gung-ho on the idea of terminating a pregancy but with a much clearer idea of what this debate should be about.  My own friends and family members have had a change of heart when approaching the subject of abortion after having listened to those whose lives have actually been touched by an unwanted pregnancy (including my own.)  So, when engaging in dialogue with those who clearly do not wish to have a rational discourse, I believe it is possible to reach those who are not active participants in a profound way.

     If the anti-choice movement poured just a fraction of what they do to try and restrict access to reproductive health care for the mothers of our country, into expanding services as listed above, our mothers and families would be so much better off.  

    Ha… sounds like you and Michael Jay Tucker have the same idea… one of my favorite quotes regarding choice:

    If the anti-abortion movement took a tenth of the energy they put into noisy theatrics and devoted it to improving the lives of children who have been born into lives of poverty, violence, and neglect, they could make a world shine. ~Michael Jay Tucker

  • invalid-0

    Forcing a woman to stay pregnant, despite the fact that her life is in danger, is murder, is it not? You seem to be arguing that a pregnant woman’s life is worthless (at least, relative to that of the foetus) and should not be preserved. I find that really problematic, as I think most people would.

  • invalid-0

    You’re woefully uninformed for someone who claims to be a nurse. An ectopic pregnancy, or any pregnancy for that matter, cannot be moved or transplanted without killing the embryo. You wouldn’t be the first person who lied about being a medical professional to further your agenda.

  • sayna

    Great statistics, Marilyn. But you do know that a first-trimester abortion is about 11 times safer than childbirth, right? Why is it that you did not cite rates of death from childbirth as a comparison?

  • invalid-0

    that I hadn’t heard of Michael Jay Tucker before. But after reading your comment I googled him and I love him already :).

    Amie Newman

    Managing Editor, RH Reality Check

  • invalid-0

    …McCain’s loss. Why is it that God’s Own Party (GOP) finds no problem having what? 50? 60? 70-million Americans uninsured for health but has no problem banning abortion adding another million uninsured to the misery, each year? Because their hands in the Republican column wash those of the allegedly financial conservatives who look for new ways to make America, it’s Treasury and its people their own personal piggy-bank, under the guise of reduced government “interference.” Could we really say economy would have been better if those million-per-year abortions were instead forced births?
    All those women who chose abortion should be given tax breaks for not adding costs I could not adequately describe. Let’s just say had they chosen otherwise, phrases like “cradle-to-prison” and “global warming” would have reached our vernacular much sooner than they did.
    McCain’s choosing of Palin was a defining moment where the choice was clear: vote for more misery than we currently have or wake up from a nightmare that began with Reagan.
    We must put our social and financial houses in order so our country and the world can move in the direction our Founding Fathers intended: not as individuals with an “I got mine” agenda, but as Americans.