South Dakota: What the Hell Are They Thinking?


Now that South Dakota has actually passed legislation requiring every woman seeking an abortion to be ‘counseled’ by a Fake Clinic, it’s obvious that, in all fairness, every pregnant woman who is considering having a baby has to be counseled at an abortion clinic. Of course that wouldn’t make any sense because, unlike the Fake Clinics, abortion clinics don’t have an agenda for the patient except that she make the best decision for herself!

What would happen if a woman who wanted a baby were counseled at an abortion clinic? The counselor or advocate would ask a few questions and then probably say something like “It sounds as though you know what you want. Congratulations. Can I help you find any community resources to help?”

What will happen when a woman who wants an abortion is counseled at a Fake Clinic? The monstrous deception that occurs in the Fake Clinics has been exposed in films such as the HBO Special 12th and Delaware. Because the Fakes have a well-hidden agenda, everything they do is designed to frighten and shame a woman who knows it is not the right time for her to have a baby. This fraudulence is clearly set out in the instructions given by the diabolical Robert Pearson, who came up with this brilliant and evil plan way back in 1967 when abortion was first legal in Hawaii. Pearson himself acknowledged and defended the deception in a 1994 speech: “obviously, we’re fighting Satan… A killer, who in this case is the girl who wants to kill her baby, has no right to information that will help her kill her baby. Therefore, when she calls and says, ‘Do you do abortions?’ we do not tell her, No, we don’t do abortions.” The volunteers in his centers and others like them don’t mind tricking women because they think they are following some ‘higher law’.  They don’t mind lying and misrepresenting things like the specious breast cancer-abortion link, the dangers of abortion, and most cruel of all, the help available to a woman who realizes that she honestly cannot support a child financially. The original Pearson manual includes: “[o]ur name of the game is to get the woman to come in as do the abortion chambers. Be put off by nothing… Let nothing stop you. The stakes are life or death.” In 12th and Delaware we witnessed a young woman who came to a Fake and was so terrified by what they told her about abortion that she went home and months later knew with great anguish that she was still in no position to have and support a child. But by then she had little choice.

I remember in my own clinic years that when a woman came to our front desk crying and shaking I always knew she had been waylaid by the Fake Clinic directly across the hall from us–the Fake Clinic that advertised Free Pregnancy Testing and Financial Assistance.  There was no financial assistance for abortion in Dallas, Texas.  We did everything we knew to alert women to its existence including telling everyone who called us that the Fake Clinic was next door. But women who were poor, didn’t speak English, and had the very fewest resources went to the Fake Clinic because they believed they would be able to get a free abortion. During one of the most stressful days of their lives, some of our patients still got confused and went in the wrong door. Sometimes the Fake Clinic would actually send their white-coated volunteers out into the parking lot to take our unwitting patients into their facility–like spiders luring flies to their doom.

We always spent extra time with patients who had been to the Fake Clinic because we knew they hadn’t been told the truth. But I was shocked to really GET how powerful the lies were. I counseled with a patient who had been to the Fake. She said she didn’t feel like she could get up and leave even though she knew it wasn’t the right place, because the woman reminded her of her grandmother and she didn’t want to be rude. In counseling she seemed resolved about her choice, so we did all the usual paperwork and lab work. She was early in pregnancy so an abortion was many times safer than continuing a pregnancy. I went through her abortion with her.  After the five-minute procedure she burst into tears and said, “I can’t believe I lived”.

As a result of that experience, we sent a spy over to the Fake Clinic to steal one of their tapes so that we could see what our patients were seeing. We were more than appalled. After that our counseling with victims of the Fakes included extensive debriefing about what they had been told, what they had seen, and how it had affected them. I don’t care how extensive your counseling is, or how skilled, it is damned hard for any woman to feel safe when she been told she will probably die from an abortion.

There are millions of stories of women who have gone to Fakes Clinics. Here’s just one more.

“Then they asked us what we wanted to do and my daughter and I said we decided the best thing for her to do was have an abortion and how much would that cost? The two ladies said ‘please wait a minute’ and left us … They came back with a doll and … scissors … and said: ‘this is what your baby looks like now and we want you to start cutting her up because that’s what will happen if you get an abortion – so start cutting!’ I grabbed her and threw the doll at those ladies and got out of there fast! I later found out it wasn’t a real clinic…” (excerpt from Legal but Out of Reach published by the National Network of Abortion Funds)

With all this evidence, and the founder of this movement himself acknowledging that the purpose of these facilities is to deceive women, what are we to think about legislators who would intentionally subject even one woman to this travesty?

Can it be that they actually hate us because someone told them that Eve was to blame for all the problems in the world? If anyone had any doubts that the recent insane barrage of anti abortion legislation in state after state is based in total disrespect for women, this should make it clear. It truly is a War Against Women.

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.

  • carole-joffe

    Charlotte–wonderful post…and so useful that you took us back to the very interesting origins of these horrible institutions way back in 1967…which only shows the patience of the antiabortion movement, in getting ideas to take hold…thanks for this, carole

  • rebellious-grrl

    Great article! Charlotte, you are so right, this IS a WAR against women. I’m still in shock that SD passed this misogynistic piece of crap. It is absolute insanity! What other medical procedure requires that patients go to a fake clinic, and listen to lies about the medical procedure they want to have? I hope this will be challenged in court for being unconstitutional.

  • plume-assassine

    Wow, thanks for taking the time to expose the history of CPCs. It’s pretty disgusting, but not surprising — obviously things haven’t changed over the years.

    You also made a good point with the scenario about an alternate law “requiring” all women with wanted pregnancies to be counseled by abortion clinics — such a scenario is equally ridiculous, wrong, and an invasion of privacy.

     

    I’m not sure when this unconstitutional law is supposed to go into effect, but I thought of several pointers for SD women seeking abortion who are forced to go through Proselytization Centers:

    • be angry and uncooperative
    • this behavior might lead them to refuse signing any forms saying that you visited and were “counseled” by them… so, as proof:
    • if you have the financial means to do so, buy an inexpensive tape or digital recorder and hide it in your jacket or purse.
    • better yet, if you have the financial means to do so, buy a tiny hidden camera so you can turn Liar Rose’s tactics against the Fake Clinics (except don’t edit the video or audio as they clearly did, haha)
    • or if none of the above works, and they refused to sign any forms due to your behavior, or perceived emotional state, or whatever… Forge their signature.

    ;)

  • ack

    Deleted in case the anti-choicers are watching… Just because I’m paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get us.

  • defender-life

    Ms. Taft,

    I couldn’t be more proud than I am right now of being from South Dakota.  Aside from my obvious disdain for what I call murder and you call “choice”, what is wrong with offering women, and usually young girls, the information necessary to make an informed choice?  Planned Parenthood (what an oxymoron that is) gives the woman one choice, kill your child.  They don’t offer information on adoption, resourses to help with raising the baby…none of that.  They just want their few hundred dollars to kill her baby.  What is so wrong with a woman having that information so she can make an informed decision?  Is it that important that if a woman goes in to have an abortion that she actually goes through with it?  What happened to that “choice” you all profess?

    Have you ever told your readers that Planned Parenthoods mission in its early beginnings was to keep the uneducated, poor black women from having children?  Do some research…it is in some of their documentation.  Did you know that when they hand out those free birth control pills as a “womens health service”, they are actually low dose so that the chances of the woman still getting pregnant are still pretty high?  Gotta stay in business somehow.  Ever wonder why that money-rich organization even needs government funding?  Aren’t they supposed to be non-profit?

    Women have been lied to for years by the “pro-choice” lobby, much moreso than by the Pro-life side. 

    Where do you get this “fake clinic” stuff from?  Sounds to me like a scare tactic.  I guess I could consider  Planned Parenthood fake, they sure don’t help plan to be a parent and they are NOT providing reproductive services. 

    I do agree with one thing though…it IS a WAR…one agaist a culture of death that I will continue fighting until my dying day.

  • beenthere72

    July 1st. 

     

    Found this on motherjones:

    http://motherjones.com/files/cpchistory2.pdf

     

    The Pearson Manual:
    How to Start and Operate Your Own Pro-Life Outreach Crisis Pregnancy Center is the manual authored by Robert Pearson and has been described by law-enforcement officials around the US as a 93-page guidebook of ways to mislead consumers. It instructs staff how to falsely portray a CPC as an abortion provider and how to evade
    client questions on the telephone. Examples found in the manual include:
    • Regarding when a caller asks if they provide abortion services, “there is nothing wrong or dishonest if you don’t want to answer a question that may reveal your pro-life position by changing the caller’s train of thought by asking a question in return”
    • Recommends that staff answer the question “Are you a pro-life center?” with “We are a pregnancy testing center… What is pro-life?”
    • Instructs centers to use neutral advertising, to seek listings in the Yellow Pages alongside abortion clinics and to adopt “dual names”: one to “draw abortion-bound women” and one to attract donations from people against abortion
    • Advises when answering inquiries about their pregnancy tests (the same home pregnancy tests available from a store), “Tell her it’s a refined form of the old rabbit test. This usually satisfies them. At no time do you need to tell them what you’re doing”
    • Instructs staff to “never counsel for contraception”
    • Cautions “do not tell the client that she is or is not pregnant.” Instead, staff are told to only say whether test results are positive or negative
    • The manual reads, “[o]ur name of the game is to get the woman to come in as do the abortion chambers. Be put off by nothing… Let nothing stop you. The stakes are life or death.”

     

    I can’t access this from work, but maybe you can:

    http://www.prochoice.org/pubs_research/publications/downloads/public_policy/cpc_report.pdf

     

    Must read:  http://www.legalmomentum.org/assets/pdfs/cpcfactsheetfinal.pdf

    (this totally supports your tactic ideas to pull a Liar Rose on them)

    In recent years, federal and state government funding for CPCs has expanded dramatically. The largest federal funding stream for these centers is abstinence-only money. This funding has brought inexperienced CPC employees and volunteers into schools to teach abstinence-only programs, replacing trained sexual health educators who had provided comprehensive sexual education. Worse yet, this funding has enabled numerous CPCs to produce their own abstinence-only curricula. Many of these curricula have been criticized for being gender-biased, fear-based, scientifically inaccurate, overtly religious and anti-abortion.

  • beenthere72

    Do you think women are dumb?   

     

    Such an ignorant statement:

     

    I guess I could consider  Planned Parenthood fake, they sure don’t help plan to be a parent and they are NOT providing reproductive services.

  • cc

    “Women have been lied to for years by the “pro-choice” lobby, much moreso than by the Pro-life side.”

    An ironic comment considering that “Defender of Life” is promoting the same old, same old anti-choice lies about how CPC’s help pregnant women to “make an informed choice” when the CPC’s do nothing of the sort. The truth is, as noted by many who have been commenting, that the CPC’s engage in deception regarding a number of things including how far the woman is in her pregnancy and the totally debunked “risks” of abortion. The movie, shown on the awesome Rachel Maddow’s show, “12th and Delaware,” demonstrates the chicanery which the CPC’s resort to in order to prevent a woman from aborting – chicanery which involves lots of “Christian” propaganda.

    “Defender of Life” also peddles the same old tired crap about Margaret Sanger and how she wanted to eliminate black children when the truth is that Sanger worked closely with WEB Dubois in order to assist black women to have access to the same family planning services as white women. MLK, Jr. received an award from Planned Parenthood which he totally supported. Sanger was well acquainted with the poverty of the early 20th century and saw how that poverty was exacerbated by women bearing children they couldn’t afford. Thus, she recognized that control of fertility was instrinsic to getting out of poverty.

    And why should Planned Parenthood offer “help on raising the baby” when their mission is medical. They do provide referrals to the types of services that the conservative “pro-life” Republicans want to cut. In other words, you must have a baby  – but we don’t want to help you after it’s born.

    But I do wonder. If folks from the secular and pro-choice faith community (whom the pro-lifers on Stanek’s blog claim are “heretics” and followers of a false god) got together to run a Crisis Pregnancy Center that offered abortion as an alternative, do you think that they would be allowed to do so? If not, the state of SD is clearly engaging in discrimination.

    But here’s the thing. Woman in SD who need an abortion can travel to a more liberal state. While those with resources will be able to do so, poor women won’t. The “war,” that “Defender of Life” (and you have no right to defend my uterus) speaks of, is a class war against poor women. Ain’t it America…!

     

     

  • goatini

    I’m not even going to respond to every single lie in this post, as the poster is well aware that he is lying, and as students of the women’s equality movement from the nineteenth century through today are well aware that he is lying.

    Mr Defender of Single Celled Organisms, aka Mr War on US Female Citizens, in the interest of oppressing females back into the ancient status of servitude and breeding like livestock, is interested only in “respecting” “life” in the most abstract of manners. The most tenuous of connections that a single-cell fertilized egg, 80+% of which never even implant in the uterine wall, much less make it to full term, has to actual “life”, is what he brags about “defending”, while the civil rights, human rights, freedom, and autonomy of the LIFE of the actual living, breathing female US citizen are just collateral damage of the chattel livestock container of the single celled organism.

    Just another big fat lying hypocrite who wants to put US women back into their 18th century status as livestock. property, and maidservant.

  • reproductivefreedomfighter

    I’ve been to a CPC and I was given false information.  At nine weeks gestation I was asked, oh so tenderly, if I could feel my “baby” moving.  Impossible.  I was told if I chose abortion, I’d be depressed and suicidal.  False.  I felt relief.  I was bullied by a horrible old woman, and if I hadn’t been so sure of my decision to abort already, I would have been traumatized. 

     

    And why did I go there? Because of the false advertising in my college newspaper, which included “abortion referrals.” 

     

    So yeah, “fake clinic” describes CPCs pretty accurately. 

     

     

  • cindy-cooper

    Great article, Charlotte.

    This point — “they think they are following some ‘higher law’” — should be underscored.

    Crisis pregnancy centers or pregnancy counseling centers are essentially evangelical outposts run by missionaries (there might be a rare exception, but doubtful). Their overarching goal is to bring people to their version of God. This article quotes first-hand sources, including Focus on The Family, who make this perspective very clear. 

    http://womensenews.org/story/the-nation/011021/funds-pregnancy-centers-blur-church-state-line

  • beenthere72

    OMG!

    Leslee Unruh, a prominent figure in the Christian right who was at the forefront of the campaign for HB1217, has a history of coercion. She was once charged with offering girls money to carry unwanted pregnancies to term and then put their babies up for adoption; she ended up pleading down to five counts of unlicensed adoption and foster-care practices.

    “There were so many allegations about improper adoptions being made [against her] and how teenage girls were being pressured to give up their children,” the state’s attorney told the Argus Leader in 2003. “Gov. George Mickelson called me and asked me to take the case.” (Dr. Unruh insists his wife settled in order to protect the privacy of girls whose confidential files would be exposed during a trial.)

     

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-03-23/south-dakotas-abortion-law-violates-separation-of-church-and-state/#

  • goatini

    Plain and simple. Profiting from human misery and the sale of humans. She should be in prison for her crimes against humanity.

  • beenthere72
  • goatini

    Unruh lies, lies, lies with that hideous rictus grin absolutely immobile.

    NARAL rep responds with facts.

    As NARAL rep responds with facts, Unruh SCREAMS OVER HER AS SHE SPEAKS, screeching “Lies lies lies!!”

    They’re LIARS, plain and simple.  And Unruh isn’t insane – she knows exactly what she is doing.  

    The people who believe sociopaths like Unruh are either so stupid, so brainwashed, or so sociopathic themselves, that the body language, tone of voice, and visual cues going on, much less the actual words said, in the interview between Unruh and the NARAL rep, simply does not register with them in any way.  They lack the basic innate human ability to tell lies from truth, to tell phony people from genuine people, and to exercise any iota of critical thinking ability.

  • kirsten-sherk

    Thank you, Charlotte. A really moving piece on the human cost of CPCs.

    I was struck by this somewhat smaller point:

    I don’t care how extensive your counseling is, or how skilled, it is damned hard for any woman to feel safe when she has been told she will probably die from an abortion.

    I think it’s telling that women may be told that they could die if they go through with an abortion, and yet they will go ahead with it anyway. Around the world, in countries where legitimate safe abortion providers are hard to find, women will knowingly take their lives into their hands to end an unwanted pregnancy. If we think it’s different here, we are fooling ourselves.

  • rebellious-grrl

    Thanks for posting the link. She is obnoxiously insane! Why would anyone in their right mind listen to her? WTF!

  • rebellious-grrl

    I totally agree goatini. People like Unruh don’t want people to think, especially women thinking about anything else but having babies. She makes me nauseous.

  • rebellious-grrl

    “Defender” does your post come with a barf bag? I feel sick after reading it. The level of misogyny in your post is nauseating.

  • therealistmom

    I mean, it couldn’t be reproductive services- you know, the exams and pap smears, pill precriptions, and the pregnancy test that confirmed a wanted pregnancy? The STD/ HIV screening? Well, no guess that wasn’t a reproductive health related service either. The references to where I could get Medicaid until my (then-husband’s) military insurance kicked in, and the name of an awesome Certified Nurse Midwife who gave me prenatal care and attended the birth of my first child? Damn, guess those aren’t reproductive services either. So, um, what exactly ARE reproductive services?

  • crowepps

    As I understand the ProLife take on it, “reproductive services” are for the FETUS. 

    Women don’t really need all those things generally understood to be included in ‘reproductive services’ because “pregnancy isn’t a disease” and all women just breeze right through with no problems.  Snerk

  • ack

    I drafted a lengthy response to the SD resident, but something went haywire and a huge “YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO COMMENT!” box came up. But I wondered about his wording. “Reproductive services,” in my mind, would mean something different than reproductive HEALTH services.

     

    If this posts, I’d like it if he could explain what he means. We might not be on the same page as far as what services he’s talking about, which makes the discussion difficult if not impossible.

  • arekushieru

    Um, like paying someone to carry a baby to term and give them up for adoption isn’t a gross invasion of privacy, already….

  • lepidopteryx

    Planned Parenthood (what an oxymoron that is) gives the woman one choice, kill your child.  They don’t offer information on adoption, resourses to help with raising the baby…none of that.

    Where do you get this “fake clinic” stuff from?  Sounds to me like a scare tactic.  I guess I could consider  Planned Parenthood fake, they sure don’t help plan to be a parent and they are NOT providing reproductive services.

     

    Funny. The Planned Parenthood clinic I used when I was a single parent not wanting another child offered annual exams, PAP smears, prescriptions for contraceptives, etc. – you know, those things that women need to keep their reproductive systems healthy so that if and when they do decide that they want to become parents, they can do so, and helping them to prevent a pregnancy before they are ready for it.

     

  • feel-rotten

    Would they make an old man or woman with a bad heart valve go see a movie about Dr Frankenstein shredding their heart with scissors too? You’ll die if you have this surgery!

    Well, duh.. You’ll die if you don’t or if you do. EVERYONE gets the distinct privilege of dying.. These bastards seem to have forgotten that portion of life. It’s OK to bomb innocent civilians, but not abort fetuses before coming into this cruel and uncaring world.

  • ahunt

    Planned Parenthood fake, they sure don’t help plan to be a parent and they are NOT providing reproductive services

     

    So the Planned Parenthood facilities that do not provide abortion services are doing what? Please be specific.

  • lepidopteryx

    Not to mention that carrying a pregnancy and giving birth can be fatal for woman and/or baby. Do CPC’s tell women that they take their lives in their hands if they make the choice to give birth?

    I had a textbook-perfect pregnancy and my daughter and I both almost died when my labor went very wrong.

  • rothgar

    I love the tactics but since most people have cell phones and many (even the free ones) have cameras use that. Also, many cell phones can record voice memos and sound files.

  • rothgar

    According to Howard Zinn (largely confirmed by the Guttenmacher Inst and WHO [who showed illegality cuts the abortion rate by 21%]) in the USA, before Roe, there were around a million abortions occuring EVER year (a GI Senior Fellow told me they estimate the the number at between 600K and 800K) of which 990 thousand were illegal.  Of the women who got illegal apbortions, approximately a third to the women ended up in an ER with severe side-effects.

     

    Talking patience,  these same forces have been trying for nearly 2011 years to undo, or marginalize, the effect of the life and death of Jesus Christ. By outlawing abortion I beleive they will make major progress on this agenda (ironically aided by folks who think they are doing the Lors work – delightful).

    I know the Stockholm syndrome is strong but how many women if crave association with the Church after it has worked so hard to butcher them. 

  • ahunt

    Thank you, lepidopteryx. Hoping that you and your daughter are fine these days!

  • crowepps

    As in the case of Abbie Dorn. 

    The mother of the triplets was injured in childbirth by multiple medical mistakes that occurred during delivery. She is now paraplegic and communicates with others mostly by blinking. A physician said she is only minimally conscious.

    http://www.denverfamilylawattorneyblog.com/2011/03/woman-disabled-in-childbirth-fighting-for-visitation-rights.shtml

    Also:

    http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-blinking-mom-20110322,0,6780053.story

  • princess-rot

    “Reproductive services”

    Something women ought to provide, free of charge and at her own personal expense, to society at large, particularly if she is white. She had the resulting child can pull themselves up by their bootstraps afterward.

     

    “Personal responsibility!”

    It’s all your fault.

     

    “‘Choosing’ life”

    Having no other option, being lied to or outright deceived. Also, poor women are breeding stock for providing inventory to the adoption, military, corporate and prison industries. Also, quantity over quality.

     

    “Pregnancy is not a disease”

    Not by itself, no. This happily ignores that many ordinary functions of pregnancy can have devastating effects on personal health, and that pregnancy can go horribly wrong, but incubators don’t need to know that.

     

    I’m sure there’s more I haven’t thought of, if you’d like to add some.

  • therealistmom

    “What Would Jesus Do?”

     

    Justification for anything that I think or do, usually backed up by twisting the words of an oft-retranslated series of Bronze-age documents.

     

    “Think of the children!”

     

    At least, before they are born. Afterwards they are only useful as part of other indoctrination, as cannon fodder to further capitalist interests, or MAYBE as picture opportunities, provided they are white and straight.

  • saltyc

    “Culture of Life”

    Celebrating gun ownership, taking your kids to a hunting ranch, watching ultra-violent movies and playing ultra-violent video games, and parading pictures of dismembered fetuses that were stolen from the disposal of clinic, disregarding why the abortions occurred. Making that poor fetus die again and again in everyone’s minds. Oh and sanctifying any and all bombings done by our holy nation.

     

    Oops almost forgot: supporting the death penalty.

  • princess-rot

    An addendum to WWJD?

    “It’s God’s will…”

    Obtusely claiming spiritual backup for political and/or personal beliefs. Sometimes used within a plausible deniability context: “It is the belief of my church/friends/family/community/pastor” to try and erase the obvious conceited convienience that $omnipotentdiety supports the viewpoint of X amount people, instead of just one person. You know you’ve made God in your image when he hates/loves exactly the same things/people as you do.

  • michaelh

    Hi. I thought this was a very interesting column and I registered to respond.  In interest of disclosure, I need to say that I think that abortion is manslaughter. I like to know where people are coming from when I read what they write, so hopefully my disclosure is appreciated by all of you as well.

    Is it okay to deceive someone to save a life? Staff at a Fake Clinic believe a fetus is a human.  You can’t begin to think critically about this issue until you understand that the only issue for them is whether a fetus is human.  They have decided it’s okay to commit a lesser wrong (lying) than a greater one (letting someone die.)

    There is debate in that community about this, though. The argument in favor of deception is a utilitarian one: what results in the fewest overall deaths? The counter-argument to that is that nobody knows, in the long run, what “tactic” will result in the fewest abortions.  For example, the number of abortions is dropping in part because there’s a sizeable generation of troubled, single mothers that not existed thanks to…abortions in the 70s and 80s.  How’s that for pro-life pragmatism?

    (I know many of you are disturbed that some of same people who oppose abortion advocate the death penalty. Support life everywhere, right? It’s that utilitarian approach again…they think that killing a murderer prevents him from killing someone else. This is the same reason that some people murder doctors who perform abortions.  Again, the counter-argument in that community is that they do not know that creating a culture of capital justice reduces the number of crimes in the long term.)

    Aside from the problems with utilitarianism, I believe that in the long term, creating a community of absolute honesty is best for everyone, born or not.  People must commit to always telling the truth and setting high standards for others.  It’s not okay to stretch the truth to make a point. Over time, what kind of dishonesty will that lead to? Take for example the old attitude in northern and southern cities that black Americans, or Italians, or Polish weren’t able to co-exist with whites.  Now, the abortion rates are high among those groups and the descendents of those racist WASPs are protesting abortions. Isn’t it likely that the old attitudes caused the modern problem?  I guess I’m making a utilitarian argument for honesty, hah.  Maybe it’s the only thing that will get through.

     

    P.S., you are totally right that Christians who believe Eve caused the fall suffer from it. In Christianity, Adam is entirely to blame for sin and Eve is actually given a promise that a descendent of hers (Jesus Christ) will undo the damage Adam caused.  I agree that believing the wrong thing about Eve has caused some damage. Would be great to see more people, Christians or no, helping to correct the error.

  • ldan

    While I suspect that you’re another one shot troll dropping in to fire off a wall of text and then vanish, I kind of wanted to address a core piece of what you seem to have bothered registering to say. It gets my arguments tidied up in one place, after all.

     

    We don’t respond to the machinations of anti-choicers as if we believe that their actions are based upon their great respect and belief that even the tiniest fertilized egg is life, because their actions have shown that this is not actually what they believe. While there may be individuals that deeply and truely believe this, most are engaged in some form of cognitive dissonance such that their actual stakes are not saving babies, but controlling women.

     

    Exhibit a. Do you see the same crowds out picketing IVF clinics and fertility centers? Because each woman going in for IVF treatment is ‘killing’ multiple embryoes that are not used. Each women headed in for an abortion is, in the vast majority of cases, carrying a single fetus.

     

    Exhibit b. Do you hear the outcry and see the massive fundraising to look into the reasons why so many fertilized eggs (i.e. ‘little babies’ according to the view the anti-choice crowd wants us to believe they have) never implant? It’s a massive and ongoing tragedy if you actually believe those are people, deserving of all the help we can give them.

     

    Exhibit c. The very well-known track record of anti-choice groups to focus on anti-contraceptive as well as anti-abortion rhetoric. Unless we need to be concerned about these lives before they even exist, why fight against better sex education and better contraceptive usage, which would result in fewer of those ‘babies’ ending up existing in the first place?

     

    Exhibit d. Watch how squirrely the arguments get when you come around to pregnancies resulting from rape.  The majority show both some glimmer of humanity, and their core misogyny by claiming that, while sad, those abortions are understandable. For them, it’s not about the fetus being a person, but about the woman being at fault for chosing sex vs. not at fault when raped. It’s all about babies as punishment for sexuality. The fringe who claim to be against abortion in cases of rape…because it’s a person, supposedly, are showing their lack of basic humanity in being willing to force women to volunteer their bodies, health, and possibly lives, to gestate those ‘babies’. So when we glare at these folks for valuing the lives of developing bundles of cells over the lives of the women forced to build them molecule by molecule, I think there’s a solid argument.

     

    Exhibit e. If fetuses are people and so important and worthy of saving…why aren’t hungry, abused, and sick children equally important? Yet, across the board, the politicians who are the most virulently anti-choice are also against any social safety net for these children and their mothers (who may very well have jeopardized or lost their job in order to carry their pregnancies to term). For that matter, they’re agains social safety nets for adults too. (Texas, for example loves to ask women to act as life support for fetuses without recompense. But if you’re poor and need to be on hospital life support, don’t expect to be there long.)

     

    And finally exhibit f: They’re even against abortion in the cases of fetuses with defects that are incompatible with life. Nevermind that pregnancy is inherently draining and dangerous, most anti-choicers feel that it’s women’s role to risk life and health in this fashion even for fetuses that cannot survive. Catholic hospitals will risk women’s lives, delaying abortions for doomed pregnancies that are killing them.

     

    The end result is that they do not respect life. They only claim to respect one specific kind of life while ignoring the women that specific kind of life relies upon. The fact that this creates immense problems for women, intrudes upon their lives and very important decisions, and even kills them, is all shrugged off.  If it’s an argument of utilitariansim that you’re going for…frankly, it’s all too obvious that these are tactics used to control women and their sexuality since that’s the actual outcome of all their arguments.

     

    Done with my own wall of text for the next one-shot, concern troll to walk into.

  • arekushieru

    In order for abortion to be manslaughter it would have to satisfy two criteria: 1) It is something other than the termination of a pregnancy. 2) It is killing; as it currently stands, it is neither.  

    Confused?  Then, lemme spell it out for you:

    Pregnancy = implantation of the fetal portion of the placenta into the uterus.   Killing = cause of death.  At most, abortion removes the fetus from its life support, thereby making it incompatible with life.  Much like removing an individual from artificial life support, makes him/her incompatible with life. Iow, physiological suicide, which does not equal the cause of death necessary to be considered manslaughter.  Legal and medical records agree.

    For example, the number of abortions is dropping in part because there’s a sizeable generation of troubled, single mothers that not existed thanks to…abortions in the 70s and 80s.  How’s that for pro-life pragmatism?

    I have never heard a ProLifer espouse that particular point of view, before…. So, I’m curious as to how you have come across it…?

    Anyways, if the anti-choicers were really concerned about saving lives, their methods are rather suspect.  They would force a woman to provide health care to a fetus, but deny similar health care to those born.  They would lie about abortion in order to save the life of a fetus but refuse to lie for someone who is waiting on an organ transplant list, for the very same reason that a fetus needs the uterus, to survive.  The only reason that this makes any sense is if they refused it because they believe that they shouldn’t have to sacrifice what they believe everyone else should.  Meaning, that concern for life has nothing to do with it.

    you are totally right that Christians who believe Eve caused the fall suffer from it. In Christianity, Adam is entirely to blame for sin and Eve is actually given a promise that a descendent of hers (Jesus Christ) will undo the damage Adam caused.  I agree that believing the wrong thing about Eve has caused some damage. Would be great to see more people, Christians or no, helping to correct the error.

    Btw, I am a Christian. Although I believe the story of Adam and Eve is merely an allegory, I do believe Eve sinned, just not to the same extent as Adam.  Eve was deceived by Satan (an allegory for the ‘world’) while Adam was simply deceived by another human (Eve), yet Eve’s punishment (yes, she was punished) was far greater than Adam’s. A descendant of Eve’s AND Adam’s will undo the damage caused by them, respectively.   

     

     

  • arekushieru

    Each women headed in for an abortion is, in the vast majority of cases, carrying a single fetus.

    That number can be reduced even more, since even when they are carrying more than one fetus, they might be going in for a selective reduction, for any number of reasons. Another piece of evidence for their hypocrisy and the conundrum they leave themselves in, because many claim it’s better to save one life than lose two, when the pregnancy brings complications to a woman’s life, yet they even protest when a woman goes in to have an abortion performed on one fetus because both fetuses may die, if she doesn’t (as witnessed in the case of Tiffany Moore Campbell).  If this isn’t about valuing one life over another’s, then they wouldn’t protest an abortion in the latter case. If it is, they would admit that they do value fetal life over women’s lives and the fact that forced pregnancy denies a woman her right to life, as well.  

    But if you’re poor and need to be on hospital life support, don’t expect to be there long.

    Huh. Even more evidence.  Removal of life support in the case of those born is much more palatable than that of removing the life support of those that are not yet born.

  • scottulsa

    “I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.” ~ Susan B. Anthony