Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger
The abortion issue is not solely about a women’s right to choose, it is about the hatred and fear of women’s sexuality. There is a subtext to this movement, shown plainly by the actions of many Anti-Abortion supporters, that goes way beyond the issue of whether abortion is murder. This is not asserting my opinion as to the validity of either side in the Anti-Abortion debate. It is not to stir up a debate for or against abortion. I’ve commented here enough for people to know where I stand on the issue. What has bothered me for a long time on this issue has been whether it is just about being for or against a women’s right to choose? If it is only about the right of choice, then I could at least accept that those who would deny it have sufficient beliefs to justify their actions, without there being another unspoken agenda. Indeed, the original initiator of the anti-abortion issue was the Roman Catholic Church.
The RCC’s position is that society should ensure a safety net to take care of babies and children after they are born. I may not agree with the Church’s teachings, but I applaud the fact that they at least recognize that if you are going to have the State ban abortions, then the State must also have responsibility for taking care of those children not aborted. This makes sense to me as a viable belief to have if you are solely against abortion.
An article in Friday’s Huffpost, got me thinking about this issue and the implications of trying to de-fund Planned Parenthood, a Non-Profit that I believe is providing extremely important services throughout our country. Fully 96% of Planned Parenthood’s services go to identification/treatment of STD’s, Cancer Screening, Contraception, and other vital women’s health services. None of these services include abortions. These are essential services needed by all women. However, the viral opposition to Planned Parenthood funding and the de-funding of its’ programs by various States, comes primarily from those opposed to abortions. Planned Parenthood provides very necessary services to the community at large that government should support. Remember it is a private not public institution, cheaper in provision of these services than can be offered by profit making institutions. Why do anti-abortionists hate Planned Parenthood and other similar Non-Profit services?
One female member of Congress, discussing Planned Parenthood de-funding put it this way:
“The real purpose here, as I’ve come to view it, is to impose a traditional view of a women’s role,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) told HuffPost. “Republicans don’t really care what the benefits of Title X funding are in terms of women’s health, so women’s health is held hostage. Planned Parenthood can prevent 4,000 women a year from dying of cervical cancer with screenings and vaccines, but that is not of interest to them because of a personal and philosophical agenda.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/14/defund-planned-parenthood-birth-control_n_899334.html
What is the personal and philosophical agenda to which Rep. DeLauro is referring? It goes far beyond some peoples deeply held beliefs that abortion is murder. Beyond that belief is that women do not have the right to sexual autonomy and therefore are in need of punishment if they have sex outside of marriage. Therefore, women should be denied birth control counseling, STD identification, and treatment to ensure that they are sufficiently chastened for daring to go beyond the bounds of some people’s religious beliefs. This is the only logical inference to be drawn, and yet if one examines this logically this is highly inconsistent with the ostensible aims of the anti-abortion movement. If they were actually worried that abortions are murder of a fetus, then you would think that birth control, which would prevent many abortions, would be a good thing.
We know that this is not the case. Since the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t approve of birth control, we know what answer they would give. I would suppose those religious fundamentalists who believe in abstention until marriage would also be against it. However, what is a worse sin? Is it “murder” as the anti-choice people deem it, or is it preventing an unwanted pregnancy in the first instance?
I find answer obvious. We generally see murder as the worst of human crimes. One would think that if something could prevent “murder”, better the lesser of the two sins, than the ultimate one. The reasoning of the anti-choice people doesn’t seem to follow that line of logic. Therefore, I can only conclude that the concern to halt abortions is only secondary to the real agenda of some leaders of the anti-choice movement.
My conclusion is that the subtext of this anti-choice movement, at least its leadership, is a hatred of women being autonomous sexually and the concomitant desire to punish them for having sex outside of marriage. This is why they also oppose birth control education. The “abstinence only” meme they push is a failure. As a result we find that incidences of teen pregnancy are higher in states more aligned with anti-choice, anti women’s sexuality values.
“Only a quarter of evangelical teens abstain from sexual activity more than other teens. And expanding access to contraception, rather than abortion, is the best way to delay marriage and promote stable families.”
The above article, a book review, delves more deeply into the subject. The quote I’ve presented provides interesting evidence of the fear that fundamentalist anti-choice people have about female sexuality. Despite all their preaching of abstinence, their teen women are having sex a lot and it makes them angry. Angry at a “permissive” society where sexuality is rampant and angry enough at their “disobedient” children to see them punished for not following their rules. There is probably another dichotomy that exists in that many men are proud when their son has loses his virginity, but enraged if it is their daughter.
The notion of female sexual autonomy is frightening to many religious people, since all major religions have a history of male domination. If women can assert their own right to be sexual beings, then this would also give them leave to assert that they are to have equal footing with men in all respects, including in marriage and worship. This would represent such a radical revolution of ideas to those of religious fundamentalist bent, as to create fear and loathing, which of course translates readily into hatred.
Anticipating objections to funding Planned Parenthood, FactCheck.com presents the following article detailing the funding of Planned Parenthood and showing that the opposition to it can’t possibly be all about abortions. The following relevant quote is from this article:
“Abortions represent 3 percent of total services provided by Planned Parenthood, and roughly 10 percent of its clients received an abortion. The group does receive federal funding, but the money cannot be used for abortions by law.”
In some of the ignorant places on the planet they clip off the clitoris of women so they cannot have pleasure during sexual encounters of the wonderful kind.
Such a crime against women is also a crime against humanity.
Surely some of that ignorance floats around the dumb and dumber circles of the U.S. political dorkosphere, then makes its way into the private business of women.
Not leaving women alone to make their own way in the world probably would trace its way back to the bulls eye, hate central.
blhlls: ” I can respect that view, even if I don’t agree, when voiced by those who recognize the importance of providing alternate sources for the many services provided by Planned Parenthood.”
To me the problem is that alternate sources are not being provided or even allowed. Pro-lifers seem to be for life only until it leaves the womb. The same people who are most against abortion are also against family planning, contraception, pregnancy nutrition assistance, day care centers, and, ultimately, giving public schools the resources to prepare the next generation of workers.
@Mespron, I wasn’t making an argument, I was just warning Tootsie of your disgraceful tactics. And actually your behavior on this short thread alone is exhibit A to the level of discourse one has to deal with. Stay classy, troll.
One of the things I have always found strange about the whole abortion issue is this: This is, for the most part, a conservative issue. The people who protest abortion and even birth control, are among the same ones who rail against the government getting into their private lives.
How is it that the most intimate part of people’s lives; sexual intimacy and reproductive matters, should be the subject of a major push for government intrusion? And it is not limited to just sex and abortion.
Moving on to another important personal issue, let us not forget attempted government intrusion into end of life decisions by family, as we saw in the Terri Schiavo matter.
The cognitive dissonance and hubris are staggering to behold.
Mespo,
Not entirely when you consider how you would categorize partial birth abortions.
Bob:
Seems the common law definition been Tootie-ized by the know nothing right-wing in New York.
He’s just a bully with poor argument skills which is somewhat surprising since he apparently is a licensed lawyer. His arguments are so poorly formed, he has to sprinkle them with personal insults to disguise his lack of knowledge and original thought. He will also often post irrelevant quotes to make it look like he’s “smart.” He isn’t; he’s just a classless lefty bully.
*******************
No argument from me, but I am struck by the sane, logical, idea-based, and polite argument form you’ve adopted. Thanks for being my Exhibit A in the right-wing troll hypocrisy trial.
Tootie, don’t let that empty-headed Mespo get to you. He’s just a bully with poor argument skills which is somewhat surprising since he apparently is a licensed lawyer. His arguments are so poorly formed, he has to sprinkle them with personal insults to disguise his lack of knowledge and original thought. He will also often post irrelevant quotes to make it look like he’s “smart.” He isn’t; he’s just a classless lefty bully.
Mike,
When you exercise power over an individual’s inalienable right of self-ownership, then you have engaged in tyranny by definition. Without that 24 week window, the woman becomes property of the state.
Also note the negative implication of the state’s inability to exercise power over an individual’s right of self-ownership.
The 13th Amendment, while good intentioned, is tyrannical as well. Why? Because to concede that the government has the power to make a law banning slavery negatively implies that it has the power to reinstate it. This is yet another reason why it’s so important to understand the Ninth Amendment.
Tootie-
50 million abortions are not genocide. They are 50 million decisions made by free individual women who choose not to have a baby. Where are there any forced abortions in the United States? It is the individual’s decision, not yours. And that’s what really bothers you.
@Elaine,
Do you mean besides food stamps (about $2,200), housing assistance (about $5,400), Medicaid (about $6,000 for a family of four), the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) (about $1,000 per child), energy assistance (about $400), the school lunch and breakfast programs (as much as $600 per child), and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) (about $400 per person), the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) (about $1,700), plus plain old welfare benefits (2002: typical benefits for a family of four with income up to nearly $21,000)?
So if you were aware of all these governmental benefits and perhaps if Planned Parenthood would use more of their funding and donations for the things you favor instead of abortion advocacy, perhaps you’d be less troubled.
Mespo: “Abortion, of course, is not murder by definition since is is both legally authorized and in furtherance of the right to be left alone by the government.
Mespo,
Note the logical grouping of the NY Penal Statute
2010 New York Code
PEN – Penal
Part 3 – SPECIFIC OFFENSES
Title H – OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON INVOLVING PHYSICAL INJURY, SEXUAL CONDUCT, RESTRAINT AND INTIMIDATION
Article 125 – (125.00 – 125.60) HOMICIDE, ABORTION AND RELATED OFFENSES
Share |
125.00 – Homicide defined.
125.05 – Homicide, abortion and related offenses; definitions of terms.
125.10 – Criminally negligent homicide.
125.11 – Aggravated criminally negligent homicide.
125.12 – Vehicular manslaughter in the second degree.
125.13 – Vehicular manslaughter in the first degree.
125.14 – Aggravated vehicular homicide.
125.15 – Manslaughter in the second degree.
125.20 – Manslaughter in the first degree.
125.21 – Aggravated manslaughter in the second degree.
125.22 – Aggravated manslaughter in the first degree.
125.25 – Murder in the second degree.
125.26 – Aggravated murder.
125.27 – Murder in the first degree.
125.40 – Abortion in the second degree.
125.45 – Abortion in the first degree.
125.50 – Self-abortion in the second degree.
125.55 – Self-abortion in the first degree.
125.60 – Issuing abortional articles.
2010 New York Code
PEN – Penal
Part 3 – SPECIFIC OFFENSES
Title H – OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON INVOLVING PHYSICAL INJURY, SEXUAL CONDUCT, RESTRAINT AND INTIMIDATION
Article 125 – (125.00 – 125.60) HOMICIDE, ABORTION AND RELATED OFFENSES
125.05 – Homicide, abortion and related offenses; definitions of terms.
Share |
§ 125.05 Homicide, abortion and related offenses; definitions of terms.
The following definitions are applicable to this article:
1. “Person,” when referring to the victim of a homicide, means a human
being who has been born and is alive.
2. “Abortional act” means an act committed upon or with respect to a
female, whether by another person or by the female herself, whether she
is pregnant or not, whether directly upon her body or by the
administering, taking or prescription of drugs or in any other manner,
with intent to cause a miscarriage of such female.
3. “Justifiable abortional act.” An abortional act is justifiable when
committed upon a female with her consent by a duly licensed physician
acting (a) under a reasonable belief that such is necessary to preserve
her life, or, (b) within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of her
pregnancy. A pregnant female’s commission of an abortional act upon
herself is justifiable when she acts upon the advice of a duly licensed
physician (1) that such act is necessary to preserve her life, or, (2)
within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of her pregnancy. The
submission by a female to an abortional act is justifiable when she
believes that it is being committed by a duly licensed physician, acting
under a reasonable belief that such act is necessary to preserve her
life, or, within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of her
pregnancy.
Note the word ‘justifiable.’ Justifiable what (implied)?
Tootie:
“You are such a numskull and thus your momma made the wrong fricken choice by letting you be born.
Too bad for the rest of us since you are such a nuisance to humanity and deserve for yourself what you have wished for 50 million some odd others.”
**********************
Thanks for showing us all that true Christian spirit. You love us until we grow up and can think for ourselves.
Record time — I appreciate that, too.
Bob,
I agree an tyranny would be an apt description.
Swarthmore mom,
“I don’t know if the anti- abortion movement totally hates women’s sexuality.”
I understand why some people are anti-abortion. I think there are probably many people like me who are not pro-abortion–but who believe that pregnant women should have choices when their lives are in danger or when they are victims of rape and incest.
One thing I find troubling is that some of these anti-abortion people are the same folks who don’t want to spend any taxpayer money on programs that would help prevent unwanted pregnancies, would provide contraceptives to women, would make inexpensive healthcare available to poor women who are pregnant, would help provide for the children whose mothers were forced to have them.
Mike,
If the state does not leave that first trimester open, it necessarily exercises power over woman that no one may have a right to; i.e. it’s tyranny.
Without that 24 week window, the social contract is rendered illusory and citizen of is rendered to nothing but property of.
Motive, while interesting, is a secondary concern at best.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_KL92oBWcQ
I wonder if these groups have “purity balls” for their sons too.
I think the question is why is the Catholic Church so highly mobilized on abortion politics in the US, when it apparently is not in Italy, which has an 87 percent Catholic population yet has legalized abortion?
Maybe the anti-abortion movement hates the eugenics overtones of the abortion-on-demand movement. Now that liberals have gone back to calling themselves progressives again they think that the rest of us have forgotten their proud eugenics-friendly past. Just because the arguments have shifted to disguise this seedy past, doesn’t mean the effect of abortion and birth control on the lower classes and minorities has. In fact the data clearly shows that abortion and birth control is having the exact eugenic effect the Progressives thought it would. It’s also clear that the fine lefties of this forum don’t seem to mind that so much. Combine that with their hatred of the rubes in fly-over country and, well, you don’t have to be Margaret Sanger to connect the dots.
mespo:
I reckon you have a weak point then, because if your definition doesn’t include the idea of abortion, then it is an incomplete definition. Even the LEGAL definition of genocide according to International Law INCLUDES the forcible sterilization or prevention of persons so they may not reproduce. Thus, the law recognizes there are more ways to skin a cat (murder) than you and nitwits like you would have us believe.
Oh how utterly convenient for the depraved among us!
Denying the right to reproduce, then, as a matter of law, IS a form of murder when forced. In this case genocide.
You are such a numskull and thus your momma made the wrong fricken choice by letting you be born.
Too bad for the rest of us since you are such a nuisance to humanity and deserve for yourself what you have wished for 50 million some odd others.