Roundup: Vitter “Abortion is Not a Women’s Issue”


Nevada Senate candidate can say some really stupid things.  But she’s not the only politician to put her foot in her mouth.  Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) is giving her a run for her money by saying that his aide, who has recently made headlines for being charged with domestic violence, wasn’t in charge of “women’s issues.”

Just handling abortion.

Talking Points Memo reports:

It’s all starting to make sense. In continuing to deny that he assigned his former aide, Brent Furer to be his point man on women’s issues after Furer was charged with domestic violence, Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) now says it’s all a big misunderstanding. Furer’s job, it turns out, had nothing to do with women at all.

If, like Vitter, you don’t count abortion as a woman’s issue, that is.

After his uncomfortable candidate filing event yesterday in Baton Rouge, Vitter faced the press again — this time in Alexandria, where reporters again asked him why Furer’s portfolio included women’s issues. According to Vitter, “he handled issues including abortion issues, including several other issues, but not women’s affairs.”

As Salon points out, it all makes perfect sense when you remember that conservatives believe that abortion isn’t about the woman who is pregnant, but about that potential life inside of her.

Oh, I get it. Perhaps the anti-choice candidate, who has a 100 percent rating from the National Right to Life Committee, doesn’t see abortion as a “women’s issue” so much as a “pre-born fetuses’ issue” or some other such nonsense. That doesn’t explain why Furer was publicly listed the way he was, or why he was charged with working with anti-domestic violence organizations. Regardless, it is plenty revealing, and utterly fitting, that Vitter not only doesn’t see abortion as being particularly relevant to women, but that he saw fit to assign that particular political territory to a man who pled guilty to violently assaulting his girlfriend.

I suppose it’s not very shocking when you think about it.  After all, mostly male legislators have spent huge amounts of time even just this last session in deciding how to restrict women’s access to abortion, especially in Louisiana.  Why would it ever be considered a woman’s issue when so many men are making the final decision?

Video of the exchange follows:

Mini Roundup: As if teen mothers didn’t already have enough to worry about, it looks like they are much more susceptible to birthing premature infants, according to recent studies.

July 8, 2010

La. Gov. Jindal Signs Several Antiabortion Bills – Medical News Today

Poll: Pro-Abortion Barbara Boxer Has Narrow Lead Over Pro-Life Carly Fiorina – LifeNews.com

More Senators Oppose Pro-Abortion Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kaga – LifeNews.com

Sharron Angle’s Advice For Rape Victims Considering Abortion: Turn Lemons Into … – Huffington Post

Sharron Angle: Turn Rape Into Rape-ade – Firedoglake

ACLU Claims Catholic Hospitals Refusing Life-Saving Abortions for Women – LifeNews.com

Michigan Pro-Abortion Groups Back Virg Bernero, Pro-Life Group Supports Cox – LifeNews.com

Good health care includes abortion – Isthmus

Vitter: Furer Handled Abortion, Just Not ‘Women’s Affairs’ (VIDEO) – TPMDC

Angle on abortion, incest, lemons, and lemonade – msnbc.com

David Vitter: Abortion isn’t a “women’s issue” – Salon

Pinay worker in Perth settles suit vs McDonalds over ‘forced abortion’ – GMA news.tv

Ginsburg: Roe will hold – Politico

Males Should Be Actively Involved In Family Planning – Peace FM Online

Should We Need a Prescription for Birth Control Pills? – Babble

What are the most effective contraceptives of today? – Helium

Ethiopia: Speaking Truth on Behalf of Women – AllAfrica.com

Hormonal Contraceptives Have Mixed Success Among Overweight Women – Health Behavior News Service

Teenagers ‘risk premature babies’ – BBC News

Breaking: Middle-aged women like sex – Salon

Study Suggests Link Between HPV, Skin Cancer – MSN Health & Fitness

July 9, 2010

Urges “no” vote on Measure 2 – Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman

Spain’s unrestricted abortion law takes effect – Las Vegas Sun

Delay sought in ruling on dispensing Plan B – Seattle Times

Scientists Discover Most Powerful HIV Antibody Yet – Tonic

UN lauds Namibia’s lifting of travel ban for people living with HIV/AIDS – UN News Centre

Midwives vs. Doctors in US Maternal Mortality Crisis – Inter Press Service

Teenage mothers ‘more likely to give birth prematurely’ – Telegraph.co.uk

Would you tweet during childbirth? – KGO-TV

Mini Roundup:

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.

Follow Robin Marty on twitter: @robinmarty

  • bei1052

    It’s a human right issue, and the same way you and I are afforded basic protections (mainly the right to not be infringed upon), so too should the unborn.

     

    After all, mostly male legislators have spent huge amounts of time even just this last session in deciding how to restrict women’s access to abortion, especially in Louisiana.  Why would it ever be considered a woman’s issue when so many men are making the final decision?

     

    Because no women voted for those men, and those men won entirely on male support.

  • prochoiceferret

    It’s not a “woman’s rights” issue … It’s a human right issue, and the same way you and I are afforded basic protections (mainly the right to not be infringed upon), so too should the unborn.

    Oh, those silly anti-choicers… peddling a form of “human rights” that just happens to violate some rather important human rights of women. Of course, they don’t consider women to be fully human beings, so it’s all “logically” consistent.

    Because no women voted for those men, and those men won entirely on male support.

    They also tend to be big fans of the hive-mind concept. Which is useful, because if women aren’t independent beings with their own thoughts and opinions, what else could they possibly be?

  • crowepps

    Because no women voted for those men, and those men won entirely on male support.

    Are you trying to argue the majority supports this because they elected these guys?  Did a little digging around

    (Figures from 2005)

    Population of Louisiana: 4,523,628

     (2000) percent population 18 and over: 72.7

    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108219.html

    So the adult population would be 3,288,677 approximately

    In the 2007 election

    Total registered voters:       2,826,771

    http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/10/voter_rolls_are_up_in_louisian.html

    So a little over 85% of the adult population is registered to vote

    Total votes cast in election: 1,240,175

    http://patterico.com/2007/10/20/louisiana-election-results/#comment-292584

    So the percentage of the adult population that actually shows up and VOTES is apparently 37%.  Approximately 30% of whom voted for Democrats.

    So the ‘we had an election and we won’ argument is actually an argument that 25% of the population gets to impose their views on the other 75%.

  • arekushieru

    Especially when, by doing so, they violate the rights of those who have wishes, dreams, hopes, desires and wants and physical, social, mental, intellectual and moral agency over those who don’t.  Thereby proving that they devalue women and only value those who don’t have a uterus.

  • bei1052

    Oh, those silly anti-choicers… peddling a form of “human rights” that just happens to violate some rather important human rights of women. Of course, they don’t consider women to be fully human beings, so it’s all “logically” consistent.

     

    Oh, those silly pro-choicers. Trying to turn abortion into an issue of human rights when not every human is afforded, nor can be afforded, the right to an abortion. And as we all know, a human right isn’t much of a human right when it’s not afforded to all humans. And, no, I’m not going to ask how a right exists at the expense of someone else’s life, because I won’t get an answer to that question.

     

    Anyway, did you know that more people view abortion as a matter of human rights then women’s rights, especially younger generations (which doesn’t bode well for the pro-choice movement)? If not, then now you know :)

     

    They also tend to be big fans of the hive-mind concept. Which is useful, because if women aren’t independent beings with their own thoughts and opinions, what else could they possibly be?

     

    I see, I see. What I can’t understand is how you constantly go on about how women as independent beings with their own thought and opinions, yet turn around and lambaste those same women because they don’t adhere to whatever belief system you want them to conform to, somehow assuming that they’re being influenced/controlled by a patriarchal society. I’d point out the irony in deeming anyone who doesn’t adhere to the tenants you want them to adhere to be the victims of the hive-mind concept to be down right mind-boggling, but you’d just ignore it all the same. So why bother?

  • bei1052

    So the ‘we had an election and we won’ argument is actually an argument that 25% of the population gets to impose their views on the other 75%.

     

    No, it’s not. Guess what? If you don’t vote, you don’t get to whine later on.

     

    Anyway, are you going to apply this logic to everything, seeing as how nationally voter turnout is generally around-50%, depending on the area? Of course not. For some odd reason, I’ve noticed how no one ever comes out and says, “Well, gee, state *X* passed some law which makes it easier to abortion an abortion. This is an outrage, for the minority is imposing its will on the majority!”. It’s usually, “State *X* stands up for the values of those who voted them into power”.

     

    Funny? Not really. More of that irony stuff I like to go on about, and using arguments only when it suits you.

  • arekushieru

    Uh, really, maybe that’s because it’s NOT the right to abortion?  Did you ever think about that…?  The likelihood seems to be pretty much nil, right now, eh?  If it WERE the right to abortion then AS a right, AS I’ve explained before, abortion would be limited to a very FEW circumstances where it would NOT be permitted.  The right to abortion means that abortion is protected, most likely by law.  And protection means that it is something that is mandated to occur except under a few circumstances.  Is abortion protected like that?  Not from what I’ve seen. 

     

    We all have organs, the uterus merely being ONE of them (OF course), and they are ALL protected under a right that makes abortion an option that a woman can choose, that you and LBSimon simply denigrate, without support for your stance (unsurprisingly).

  • arekushieru

    Yeah, because like in your last post on this thread, you completely ignored what PCers are fighting FOR.  Not the right to abortion but the right to choose whether to terminate OR continue a pregnancy.  So, with our side they can easily stand up for yours, at the same time, because we can’t force our views on you, unLIKE what PLers HAVE to do to ours.  Sorry.

  • arekushieru

    Really?  And what are you using to support this theory, the Gallup Poll?  Seriously?

     

    If women are against women’s rights, then they follow the patriarchy because it is inherently against women’s rights.  So how can it NOT be a hive-mind, hmmm…?