Iowa Anti-Choicers Admit They Want to Imprison Women for Abortion


A little over a month into 2013, and one thing is absolutely certain: Anti-choice legislators aren’t going to let the damage that their war on women did to their fellow conservative politicians’ electoral prospects slow them down from competing with each other to show who can concoct the most vile schemes to undermine women’s rights. Now Iowa Republicans are flexing their muscles, trying to show that they hate the ladies even more than the forced-transvaginal-ultrasound folks in Michigan, Texas, and Virginia, or the women-can’t-think-on-weekends-and-holidays nuts in South Dakota.

Nine state representatives in Iowa have introduced a bill that would define killing a fertilized egg as “murder”.

707.1 Murder defined.

1. A person who kills another person with malice aforethought either express or implied commits murder.

2. “Person”, when referring to the victim of a murder, means an individual human being, without regard to age of development, from the moment of conception, when a zygote is formed, until natural death.

Murder includes killing another person through any means that terminates the life of the other person including but not limited to the use of abortion-inducing drugs. For the purposes of this section, “abortion-inducing drug” means a medicine, drug, or any other substance prescribed or dispensed with the intent of terminating the clinically diagnosable pregnancy of a woman, with knowledge that the drug will with reasonable likelihood cause the termination of the pregnancy. “Abortion-inducing drug” includes the off-label use of drugs known to have abortion-inducing properties, which are prescribed specifically with the intent of causing an abortion, but does not include drugs that may be known to cause an abortion, but which are prescribed for other medical indications.

The point of this bill is, simply put, to throw women in jail for “murder” for deliberately ending pregnancies—and quite possibly for trying to prevent them, as many anti-choicers continue to insist, despite the evidence against them, that the pill and emergency contraception work by “killing” fertilized eggs. (They work by suppressing ovulation and preventing fertilization.) The language of this is quite expansive. They’re not only counting women who reach out to legal providers for abortion as “murderers,” but also women who go online and buy drugs for this purpose. The broadness of this suggests that they may even try to snag women for “murder” for taking common rue, a herbal medication women use to kick start their period (and potentially end an unwanted pregnancy) if they’re late.

This is a dramatic shift in the traditional anti-choice approach to discussing the issue of how to handle women who seek abortion. While I personally have no doubt that many to most anti-choicers fully intend and have always intended to get to a place where women are being jailed for abortion, the official stance of anti-choice legislators and activists is generally to deny believing that nearly a third of American women should go to jail for “murder.” Maintaining the illusion of disinterest in punishing women for abortion with jail is so important that after Rep. Cathrynn Brown of New Mexico was caught proposing jail for rape victims who get abortion, she rewrote the bill specifically to avoid the accusation.

Claiming they don’t believe that women who get abortions are murderers even while calling abortion “murder” has been a huge part of the anti-choice movement for years. (See discussions about it from 2006, 2007, and 2010, for instance. There’s also this fun video that makes the rounds periodically that demonstrates how inane this little dance really is.) This giant failure of logic stems from a couple of things, but mainly because it’s well-understood that anti-choicers don’t actually think abortion is murder, and just want to punish women for sex. And jail time for sex is just going to strike most people as inhumane in the extreme. So they’ve split the difference and said they intend to jail doctors but not women—a position, that while illogical in its rationale at least made them seem slightly less malevolent towards women.

So what’s changed that some anti-choicers, in Iowa at least, are coming out and not only admitting they want a third of women to go to jail for abortion, but are aggressively pushing for it? A huge chunk of it is the result of the overall shift rightward amongst conservatives in the past few years, a shift that is increasing extremism on many fronts, such as more overt racism and, as we’ve seen in recent weeks, an absolutist stance against gun control that resists even the most common sense measures.

But it’s probably also partially a reaction to the changing landscape of abortion. The growing popularity of medication abortion plus an abundance of illegal pharmacies selling all manner of drugs online and the increasing restrictions on legal abortion have created a situation where everyone believes—even though hard evidence is elusive—that more women are taking matters into their own hands when it comes to abortion. As Ada Calhoun of the New Republic explained:

Online, however, these drugs are readily available, often via suspicious-sounding sites that make claims like: “The Affordable Abortion Pill Will Safely, Quickly Terminate Your Undeveloped Fetus In The Privacy Of Your Home, Save You Time And Hundreds Of Dollars. It Is 100% Clinically Safe, Very Effective And The Most Affordable Abortion Pill You Will Get Your Hands On For Now!!!”

Determining how many American women have had home abortions is exceedingly difficult: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention does not track illegal abortions. There is no blood test for drugs like Cytotec, and so such an abortion is indistinguishable from a natural miscarriage, even to a doctor. However, the proliferation of online dispensers suggests a rising demand. There are thousands of websites selling Cytotec for as little as $45 to $75 (compared with $300 to $800 for a legal medicated abortion in a clinic). Some claim to offer the harder-to-come-by Mifeprex, but may in fact be peddling Cytotec, or aspirin, or nothing at all. (Possible sources for the drugs include Mexico, where Cytotec is available over the counter, or even the United States, since it’s also prescribed here as an ulcer medication.)

The traditional anti-choice stance of blaming the provider while pretending the patient is a mindless baby machine and not a choice-making person is harder to maintain in the face of women acting as their own providers. It’s common for anti-choicers to paint an image of an abortion patient as a woman who simply hasn’t thought about it—this also helps justify waiting periods to “think” it over—and who is a victim of greedy doctors and evil feminists who are somehow tricking women (who they clearly imagine are very, very stupid) into getting abortions. But even anti-choicers with the most active imaginations have to struggle with explaining how a woman can fire up a computer, search around for black market abortion-inducing drugs, and order them without being capable of making a decision and therefore being held accountable to the laws regarding that decision.

So this is where we’re at: Iowan anti-choicers admitting they want to throw women in jail for abortion. It’s an unpopular stance precisely because it lays bare the misogyny of the anti-choice movement. Instead of dithering around with more waiting periods and humiliating mandatory ultrasounds, I sort of hope more anti-choicers start demanding jail time for a third of American women. That sort of thing can offer clarity for people who had any doubt left that the anti-choice movement is, indeed, nothing but a war on 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.

Follow Amanda Marcotte on twitter: @amandamarcotte

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    I think the forced birther stance is more than a war on women. I think it is a paraphilia that combines features of voyeurism, sexual sadism, and exhibitionism. Think about what they do. They carry snuff porn around in public places.

    • http://twitter.com/JenGStarr Jennifer Starr

      I agree, there is something inherently sick about the level of control they’d like to exercise over women.

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        I think that it is time to make forced birther activities illegal as they have done in Canada. What they are doing is not free speech. It is stalking and harassment which are illegal in any other context.

        • http://www.facebook.com/elizabeth.cassebennethum Elizabeth Casse Bennethum

          and I thought stalking was illegal in the United States hmmmm make you think…

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            We have our own home grown terrorists. And no one will touch them because they are “religious” terrorists. Time for us to mobilize again. Every wombnazi bill should be accompanied by a bill making “sexual domestic terrorism” illegal. Ram the bills through just like the Pubbies do.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mary-Elizabeth-Bowman/1654036501 Mary Elizabeth Bowman

            It sure does

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I have been thinking about this for some time. I write about abortion. I was young when there was no Pill and abortion was illegal. A horror show.

        • HeilMary1

          It’s also criminal Munchausen by Proxy womb trafficking by pedophiles for pedophiles.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I had not thought about Munchausen. Interesting idea to turn around in my mind. And yes, read rape statistics in America. You will weep. Children under 12.

          • HeilMary1

            Fetal idolators are motivated by criminal Munchausen by Proxy psychosis. I’m the disfigured survivor of an anti-choice, childbirth-ruined, Munchausen by Proxy mother driven insane by the Catholic Church. Sanctimonious fetal idolators demand we victims (unwanted children and involuntary mothers) suffer so they can playact as our “caring rescuers”. Mind you, they insist on inflicting disease on us because our misery elevates them. They really hate us and enjoy committing unlicensed medical malpractice against us. Would love to see pro-choice lawyers use Munchausen by Proxy criminal charges against these pompous mother killers. I posted on this topic under a different name on this web site before RH Reality Check recently switched to Disqus. Hope I’m not confusing anyone here.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            I am so sorry someone hurt you. The harm done by the sexual sickness of some religions/religious should never be underestimated.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bradley-Flinn/100002252105627 Bradley Flinn

      Really, so when it comes to abortion what rights does the father have other then passably being forced to pay for it.

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        Somebody forced you to pay for an abortion? You have the right to practice abstinence, use contraception, have sex with men instead of women. Once you have let your sperm go, all your choices are gone. That is not unfair. That is biology.

      • Realitycheck

        I paid for my abortion and the “father” realized that his only involvement in the entire birthing process was having an orgasm so it was ultimately my choice and mine alone. No one can “force” you to pay for an abortion, just like no one should be able to force a woman to carry a pregnancy. Your rights involve discussing with a woman BEFORE sex what both of you would want in the event of a pregnancy (like my significant other and I did), and deciding not to engage in sex if your opinions differ that drastically. Those are your rights.

      • Frances in California

        Procreation isn’t a purchase, nitwit.

      • maryann26

        When the father can get pregnant, he can make his own choices. Until then, he has no rights because it is the woman and only the woman whose body and very life are affected.

        • kayatz3

          Thank you Maryann, I agree! Abortion is a constitutionally protected right and the states should not have a stake in this at all. These people are not pro-life, they are pro-birth. And after that…you are on your own. Well, every time a man jerks off, he is killing potential future babies, therefore, he should go to jail too…right?

          • maryann26

            I agree you 100%. If they went to jail, they might think a lot more about the consequences of jerking off.

            Women must control their own bodies. A woman can only be free when she is able to decide if and when she wants children and how many children. Men have always tried to control women through their fertility, keeping them pregnant. A woman’s decision to become a mother is her own decision. A woman’s decision not to become a mother is her own decision. A woman’s decision to terminate a pregnancy is her own decision. Men have no place in this at all because they cannot become pregnant.

        • http://www.facebook.com/silverstorm42 Neal Feldman

          I would not say ‘no rights’.

          I would like to see a male abortion… paperwork mostly, but it would terminate any and all parental rights but also make the male not responsible for the kid in any way… no child support, no deductions on the tax forms, nothing.

          He would only be responsible for 50% of the cost of the abortion.

          At that point the woman can choose to continue the pregnancy but it will be on her own dime.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mary-Elizabeth-Bowman/1654036501 Mary Elizabeth Bowman

            Neal, when a man can get pregnant; abortion will become a sacrament, and there will be Planned Parenthoods on every street corner in the world

          • http://www.facebook.com/ella.warnock.7 Ella Warnock

            Complete with a wine and cigar bar, gourmet snacks, massage therapists, and strippers.

          • crowepps

            I’d only agree to this idea as long as the man got a vasectomy as part of the package.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Why noodge us? It is the court’s position that once born, a child is entitled to the support of both parents. Message: control your sperm.

          • maiathebeegrrl

            The problem with that is that you are trying to create a right of bodily self-determination that doesn’t exist. The only reason women have a right to an abortion (terminating a pregnancy post-conception) is that pregnancy takes place IN THEIR BODY. Absent that reality, there would be no right. Since pregnancy doesn’t take place in men’s bodies, they don’t get that. It’s not “fair” in the sense of sameness, but it absolutely adheres to the principles of equity & justice.

      • Margaret Whitestone

        How are you being forced to pay for abortions? As to your rights, you have the right to keep your pants zipped. Until men have to endure pregnancy that’s the only thing they have (and deserve) any control over.

      • fiona64

        Any pregnancy that the father can gestate, he is welcome to carry. Until then, it is not his life and health on the line (pregnancy is not a state of wellness) and therefore it is not his decision. BTW, I don’t think you can really “force” anyone to pay for anything.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mary-Elizabeth-Bowman/1654036501 Mary Elizabeth Bowman

      Well said

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        Thank you. I have been giving this a lot of thought.

    • fiona64

      I’ve said for quite a while that the far-right’s desires to punish women for daring to have non-reproductive sex borders on the masturbatory.

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        Great minds think alike. I have been writing about this for awhile now. I wrote a manifesto entitled “Wherein I End the Abortion Debate.” Here is a bit:

        My sexuality is private. Why would anyone presume to discuss it with me? Or follow me down the street trying to give me a baby blanket or wave a sign in my face. Simple. They are getting off.

        A fact of women’s lives, from the moment they get close to puberty and sometimes before, is that somebody is always trying to rub up against you. I am drawing a line in the sand. No discussion. My sexuality is private. Mind your own business. That is a truly American value.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1630511468 Betty Eyer

    Why don’t they just cut to the chase and burn them at the stake. That’s pretty much where this is going.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mary-Elizabeth-Bowman/1654036501 Mary Elizabeth Bowman

      Scary but very accurate

  • http://www.townandcountrygirlsrealestate.com/ Paula Denmon

    I have to believe that it will eventually “bite their butts” and the Democrats win the house in the 2016 election. And in the meantime, we have to help women in those states.. I know what it is like…I live in Texas.

    • http://twitter.com/DonnaDiva Donna Gratehouse

      Actually every member of the House is up for reelection in 2014, and the same is true of many state legislatures. Dems have got to stop ignoring midterms!

      • http://www.facebook.com/amy.kirkendall.7 Amy Kirkendall

        The way that the Republicans have gerrymandered their districts makes it unlikely anything will change.

  • Guest

    So many fertilized eggs are aborted naturally and spontaneously before women even know they are pregnant. Does that mean that when a woman’s body spontaneously rejects the fertilized egg she is guilty of murder ( or I guess more accurately manslaughter, although that term seems a little out of place in this context)?

    • bonniesituation

      If the fertilized egg does not implant, the woman is never pregnant.

      • http://www.facebook.com/elizabeth.cassebennethum Elizabeth Casse Bennethum

        what about spontaneous abortions, quite a few women are unable to carry a baby to term will they get put in jail for manslaughter or murder…

    • fiona64

      Exactly. These “moment of conception” nitwits just demonstrate their lack of comprehension about basic biology.

  • Pingback: Your Nightly Need to Know 2/11/13 | A is For

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bradley-Flinn/100002252105627 Bradley Flinn

    When you forgot to also list

    4. Murder does not include a fetal death as defined in
    section 144.1 or the spontaneous termination of pregnancy as
    defined in section 144.29A.

    Was that an accident or just something you did to bolster your claim of a make believe war on woman that you push to advance your politics as you pretend to be a journolist?

    • http://www.facebook.com/cheywardspence Candice Heyward-Spence

      There is a War on Women going on – look at the over sexualization of women in media – all the way to girls at pageants! And then how a mother breastfeeding her baby or toddler is treated like some skank because her boob is performing its primary biological function!

      you cannot fix a problem if you don’t admitt to it… like drugs and alcohol.

    • http://www.facebook.com/nina.perez.94695 Nina Perez

      good to know they are so forgiving of miscarriages. too bad about the rest of the bill, you know the part where punish women for doing something legal?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=585843662 Martine Atherton

      The only way of knowing if a miscarriage is natural or induced is by invasive questioning and testing. How many grieving women are you prepared to accuse of murder?

    • Amanda Marcotte

      I never said they intended for miscarriage to be murder. But I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s put on the table in the future.

      • http://godlessfeminist.wordpress.com/ Jacqueline S. Homan

        It’s already gone there, Amanda. Google “Rennie Gibbs.” There are over 300 women in prison to date across the US due to having miscarriages and stillbirths.

    • http://twitter.com/JenGStarr Jennifer Starr

      There are actually women in several states who have miscarried and been brought up on criminal charges. Either you’re really ignorant of that fact, Mr. Flinn, or you’re deliberately trying to mislead people.

      • Frances in California

        Yes, Jennifer, he is really ignorant.

    • Frances in California

      When the fragging begins, I hope they start with you.

  • http://www.facebook.com/cheywardspence Candice Heyward-Spence

    … . ….. the Stupid is strong in these Anti Choice people.

    Wake up Women and girls! Your a few bills away from having no legal rights at all!!

  • emw12

    These “Jane Crow” measures that they are attempting to pass are absolutely disgusting. The people trying to pass these laws are no better than slave owners, taking away liberty and freedom from women.

  • http://nellewrites.net nelle

    Won’t be long before someone on the right proposes a menstruation and pregnancy registry. Prove you miscarried rather than aborted. Every day their proposals get wilder.

    • http://twitter.com/JenGStarr Jennifer Starr

      Yeah, and it probably won’t be too much longer before certain states seek to restrict the travel of pregnant women, making sure you can’t go to another state to end your pregnancy. And people who advocate for these laws claim to want ‘small government’.

      • crowepps

        They have these for teenagers — google “Fugitive Girl Act”

    • kayatz3

      Already happened in arizona, you’re considered pregnant as soon as you get done with your period, that way they can refuse abortion due to the couple weeks added. thought they were down to 10 weeks or something. And I have heard that proposal out of some guy from the south, prove you miscarried and prove you didn’t cause it some other way…and these dumb conditions go on. But when they ask these congress critters how can you determine who gets what kind of sentence…jail time…they clam up and play dumb. None of this is even thought through in the slightest. Our only hope is to get them out of office. Ladies, the fight is still on.

    • fiona64
  • http://www.facebook.com/juleah.willson JuLeah Willson

    So the idea here, if we take em at face value, is God decides when life begins and ends – not us puny humans

    If God has put sperm and egg together, clearly a baby was meant to be birthed – and we don’t have the authority to intervene with God’s will –

    Okay …. but,

    If it is God’s will that men past a set age can’t get it up, do we have the right to intervene? Viagra is covered by insurance.

    Fertility treatment? How do they feel about interfering with God’s plan in that way?

    And, sex education, to which they also seem opposed, is a smart way to keep egg from meeting sperm research tells us. They block education too.

    They blow up abortion clinics in their fight for life. I personally know doctors who have been on the receiving end of death threats and bricks through their windows.

    Much I don’t understand about their thinking

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/William-Anton-Walters/1161551266 William Anton Walters

      I think the mistake most people make when trying to understand the position of the anti-choice crowd is the assumption that these individuals actually care about the unfertilized egg/zygote/fetus. They do not. The inconsistencies and hypocrisy on their end is not the result of cognitive dissonance or a lack of consistent application of their ideas. Their life is consumed by the hair-splitting, frothy mouthed hatred and fear of anything perceived to be liberal, reinforced by an enlarged, overactive amygdala, see http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1342239/Brain-study-reveals-right-wing-conservatives-larger-primitive-amygdala.html). But one can’t just walk outside and denounce women, spew racist epitaphs, accuse someone you don’t like of being a communist and expect to be taken seriously now-a-days right? So what does one do? Easy answer-find an issue that you don’t really care about (e.g. contraception, debt-ceiling, drug use, etc.) and latch on to it hard. Use it to express your rage and hatred of anything you think is liberal. When someone is elected with a -R after their name, store it in the closet for the next 4 years (you might trot it out for the annual “war on christmas” though).

      So to sum up-stop thinking these people actually give a rat’s a*s about what a woman does with her body. They do want to control your body, but it’s not out of some deep-seated love for the unborn/unfertilized.

      • maiathebeegrrl

        True for some (and certainly true for the anti-choice leaders). But I think it’s important not to underestimate that many of the rank & file anti-choicers DO believe the “preshus-preshus-baybeeEEEs” line. And pointing out the holes in that logic does actually have some effect on them. (I say this because I’ve have personally seen it work on students, who had just bought the hype up to that point)

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mary-Elizabeth-Bowman/1654036501 Mary Elizabeth Bowman

      Excellent points!

  • Pingback: Today in the War on Women - Lawyers, Guns & Money : Lawyers, Guns & Money

  • Susan Anderson

    This is beyond sick. This is a total assault against women and the right to control their lives. This is unconstitutional since the right to abortion has all ready been given. When did people get so inhumane to bring children (real babies) into the world where they are unwanted. Every child deserves love and care. Only the woman having that child knows if she is capable or willing to handle this responsibility. Who are these people who think they know what God intended? Who are these people who think their religion gives them the right to control other people’s lives? And why are so intent in making a difficult situation even more difficult for the women who already suffer the pain of an unwanted pregnancy? Get the right wing nuts out of the bedrooms, personal lives of women and get religion out of our government. This is not the middle east we don’t need the Taliban in America restricting the rights of women to education, property and the right to control their lives!

  • http://www.facebook.com/DavidNHarley David Harley

    There is an awkward collision of sexual morality, hostile attitudes concerning poverty, and racism here. It is the poor, and especially the black poor, whose sexual conduct is leading to either births out of wedlock or abortions. The tangle makes serious discussion nearly impossible.

    Clearly, Catholics have inherited a longstanding opposition to abortion, backed by a set of reasoned views about the relationship of all sexual activities, whether deemed good or bad, to God’s purposes for humanity. Ordinary Catholics may not even have read the Catechism closely enough, or at all, in order to understand the doctrines, but they know that they are there. Even the very many Catholics who have used abortion and contraception in their own families may well feel uneasy about this,at the least. Nevertheless, Catholic doctrine does recognize the health needs of the mother, and this offers a possible way forward, if only the passion, and its use by the bishops as as an identity marker, could be diminished.

    For Protestants, and even for conservative evangelicals, this is a relatively novel indignation. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, there was no consistent general position. It could be argued that panics about unregulated sexuality, especially in relation to abortion and to homosexuality, succeeded in the 1960s the earlier panics about drugs and race as threats to the godly family. The systematic takeover of much of evangelical Christianity by the very different fundamentalists has created a top-down model of belief, empowering authoritarian pastors and disempowering individual thought and conscience.

    Nevertheless, the fears of conservative evangelicals about sexuality are genuine enough, and perhaps understandable in context. The supposed stability of their families really is being corroded, although perhaps more by the high divorce rates in the Bible Belt states. Beliefs about the beginning of human life are held genuinely, although their supporters would probably lack the scientific knowledge necessary to support them Many are deeply hostile to science anyway, preferring to rely upon the “common sense” that has been carefully constructed for them.

    However, the other aspects of this movement are less frequently mentioned but are real enough, I would suggest, although they tend to conflict. On the one hand, there is a strong belief, especially among white conservative evangelicals, that the increasing numbers of African-Americans and Hispanics will overwhelm the white population in many parts of the US. This is seen as having a wide range of social and political implications which would be detrimental or even hostile to those groups from which the anti-abortion activists are drawn. Clearly, the fear here is real enough, even if the causes are misunderstood.

    On the other hand, there exists a belief that large numbers of African-Americans are bringing children into unstable and poverty stricken homes which are nests of welfare dependence, indolence, and crime, headed by single mothers. Clearly, the fear here is real enough, even if the causes are misunderstood.

    Thus, there are reasons why white conservatives, for various reasons, would seek to limit the number of births in the non-white minority communities, while their social and economic beliefs prevent them from seeking the social and economic measures that would mitigate the severity of some problems. They cannot see the importance of improving the conditions of the poor, because they attribute all social problems to the bad moral choices of individuals. Rather than improvements in sex education and healthcare for all, it is abstinence pledges and uterine scans that are offered to young women.

    Race, class, crime, welfare dependence, and poverty all stand as surrogates for one another, yet the desire to get these threatening social phenomena under control fits badly with opposition to abortion and contraception. The sexuality of ethnic minorities, still seen to be threatening as it was in the days of Jim Crow, is what has to be the target.

    The sheer confusion of these motives makes any kind of broad cooperation on social policy to alleviate the conditions of the poor almost impossible. Everything is reduced to conflicts over abortion rather than the education and welfare of young women and their partners.

    • jethom33545

      Are you anything but a very long winded apologist for racism and Christian privilege? I think not.

      Catholic doctrine kills women rather allowing an abortion even if the fetus isn’t viable. This is reasonable to you? You’re sick.

      ” It is the poor, and especially the black poor, whose sexual conduct is leading to either births out of wedlock or abortions.” Can you actually offer evidence in support of this overt racism or do you just shoot from the hip?

      • Frances in California

        Uh, read a little deeper, jet. He’s on our side.

      • maiathebeegrrl

        Um, can you maybe READ the whole thing before you snip? If you read all the way, David seems to make it pretty clear that he is talking about mainstream BELIEFS about the sexual & reproductive habits of people of color. On that, he is correct. A huge part of the anti-choice movement is a result of the racial anxieties of white middle-class Christians.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      I have been a single Mother of three daughters for 50 years. To quote my Mother: You can kiss my Royal Canadian Ass.

    • maiathebeegrrl

      Hey David – this is actually a really good summary of the social history. But if you don’t want to get reactions like “jethom33545″ (which I would guess is fairly common as the average level of reading comprehension is pretty low), I would suggest clarifying your wording about that you are talking about BELIEFS about the sexual & reproductive habits of people of color, rather than implying (unintentionally, I presume) you believe them to be facts (which, if someone read the whole paragraph, you clearly do – but as “jethom” shows us that one vaguely worded sentence at the top is enough to set most people of!)

  • funkzillabot

    …….wow.

  • Frances in California

    Women of Iowa: Leave. Leave now. Don’t ever look back. Take your daughters (and your sons if they are like-minded).

  • disqus_uswkCpSqo0

    I’m a former Iowan and my husband says Iowa is the acronym for “idiots Out Wandering Around.” After reading this, I can say I’m happy I no longer live in that narrow minded state.

  • Anon rust

    I find it funny that the names of 4 of the 9 are : Bacon, Sheets, Fry and Salmon.

  • maryann26

    How many women of Iowa agree with jailing women for having an abortion? How many women in Iowa are following what is happening?

  • Pingback: It’s Woden’s day, so let’s celebrate with links! | Fraser Sherman's Blog

  • Pingback: Iowa Anti-Choicers Admit They Want to Imprison Women for Abortion | HARD TRUTHS & bubble gum!

  • disqus_P7ZH7nfoJw

    They only care about life until we’re born, then they could careless!!!!

  • http://twitter.com/DavidSaint01 David Saint

    Id just like to ask, are these politicians also Doctors? They sure as heck dont seem aware that birth control has other uses. For example, its a valuable drug for those with Acute Intermittent Porphyria (id know, it saved my mothers life and my father came up with the idea..though you will see a Dr in CO claimed it…A relative was in his care once and my father had to tell him what to do..he then took it and claimed he came up with it..true story). I also have many female friends who use it to regulate their cycle. Im just pointing out the most glaring issue, that they obviously dont realize it has other purposes and their actions could effect people who have never nor ever will have an abortion.

    • fiona64

      Nope. They’re all guilty of practicing medicine without a license.

  • http://www.facebook.com/don.stack Don Stack

    And these so called Christians have a problem with burquas on Muslim women?

  • http://www.facebook.com/shawn.r.thatcher Shawn Rhodes Thatcher

    So why not a transvaginal ultra sound for all women every year to make sure that there are no signs that they had been pregnant in the past year. Just wait, it is coming.

  • deedee2die4

    The vast majority of conceptions end in spontaneous abortion, God must love the company of all His little zygotes.

  • deedee2die4

    Any woman that has sex and then: has a drink, does very strenuous exercise, etc. would be up for manslaughter by these Teabillies.

    Republicans, America’s Taliban.

  • Georgina

    I wonder about we women who chose to have permanent contraception (in my case, tubal ligation) performed at an early age? I was pregnant exactly once. I thoroughly disliked the experience of being pregnant, I was miserable constantly from about three weeks after conception until I finally gave birth a million years later. Afterward, I had a lovely baby boy. I was 21, and I just said to myself, “Never again,” and got my tubes tied right on up. Let me tell you how hard it was to find a doctor willing to do so in Texas for a 21 year-old new mom. I wonder if some of these right-wing nuts would deem me a Mass Murderer or Serial Killer, then, because I have chosen not to further be fruitful? Or, is permanent contraception fine because I chose to NEVER have another child and didn’t want the hassle or unnecessary chemicals of the pill for the rest of my life? And no, I don’t regret it at all. It’s my body and my life.

  • Margaret Whitestone

    Lysistrata, anybody?

    • HeilMary1

      Or birth strike!

  • http://www.facebook.com/alice.longworth.7 Alice Longworth

    We need to come up with a gun that shoots the fetus but doesn’t injure the woman. The conservanuts would never interfere with gun rights.

  • http://twitter.com/MarRav3 mar.rav

    Well it is murder, legalised murder.