Proof that the GOP are Hypocrites when it comes to Abortion

[AmericanLiberal]

About 250,000 abortions happen per year because women cannot afford the cost of a new baby.

Women need maternity coverage in health care; men and women need parental leave. Child care would enable parents to support their children.

These would be costly, but not nearly as much as the $600 billion prescription drug bill. If the GOP Congress really though of abortion as murder and not just an advantageous wedge issue, they would have passed bills designed to prevent economic abortion long ago.

Im not saying all, but most in Congress, apparently only care about restricting abortion RIGHTS, not reducing abortions themselves.

[ogradda]

1. it's like them being against birth control.

really doesn't seem to make much sense to me.

[rodeodance]

2. adoption has been the answer for'economic' abortions and for the

most part this has not been acceptable for many women

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. I've heard

that the hardest thing a woman can do is give up a baby for adoption, especially if the only reason she did so was she couldn't afford to keep the child.

[AmericanLiberal]

8. I don't understand the situation with adoption

If the mother gives it up for adoption they still have a son or daughter out there being raised by others and it is going to be a lifetime ordeal. I am a man but even for me a situation like this would be almost like a nightmare, knowing that I could run into my own child somewhere or be "tracked down" 20 years later.

The fact is, even with the adoption option, economic abortion still exists. I may not know completely why it does. But Congress completely ignores this. Bush completely ignore this. They pay lip service to the pro-lifers yes, and they prevent birth control and contraceptive education. However all their activities are around government restricting womens' options, they do not actually do anything about economic abortion, which would require them to actually help the poor.

Going on DU is like preaching to the choir but next time you debate a pro-lifer, challenge them as to why the GOP with control of government, does nothing about economic abortion, given their professed concern about the so-called right to life. Remember, those 250,000 abortions per year are supposed to be valued as human life by these people. If you controlled Congress and genuinely believed the pro-life rhetoric, would you be doing nothing about economic abortion? No!

[hadrons]

4. smoking causes thousands of spontenous abortions, but the

fundies don't do anything about it because:

1) anti-smoking is a "Democratic thing"
2) many fundies also grow tobacco
3) those shits like their smokes

[no_hypocrisy]

5. When I debated a right-to-lifer, I dared her to advocate taking

the word "bastard" out of the dictionary so-to-speak. When EVERY child is valued by the community, maybe there will true right-to-life. She accepted my premise.

[sweetbutterfly]

10. that's a good point

Many states have changed their laws to reflect that no child shall be considered "illegitimate" and to recognize the birthright of the child, regardless of the marital status of the parents...an important first step.

[iverglas]

14. totally OT but funny

This item has been widely reprinted; I read it in this month's Harper's while sitting out my time in a medical lab waiting for blood tests, and no doubt startled the older folks next to me when I brayed. Here's a report from one of the protagonist's adversaries in the Australian newspaper world:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/02/1080544691600.html?oneclick=true

There were enough MPs, though, from both sides, who hugely enjoyed the brief single-column item tucked away on page 2 of this week's Monday edition of The Australian, which read:

"CORRECTION. A story headlined 'Syria seeks our help to woo US' in Saturday's Weekend Australian misquoted <NSW> National Party senator, Sandy Macdonald.

"The quote stated, 'Syria is a country that has been a bastard state for nearly 40 years, but should have read, 'Syria is a country that has been a Baathist state for nearly 40 years.' The Australian regrets any embarrassment caused by the error."

I see one comment elsewhere that perhaps the senator meant to say "Baptist" (followed by some twaddle about Jimmy Carter and Israel, Carter not being the first name that would spring to my mind when comparing and contrasting Baptists and Ba'athists).

And hmm, on topic in today's news:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Churches-move-against-lateterm-abortions/2005/02/01/1107228700718.html
(requires easy free registration)

The nation's religious leaders will flex their political and financial muscle through their backing of a new anti-abortion lobby as the Prime Minister refused yesterday to curtail the late-term abortion debate.

... Speaking in Singapore, Mr Howard said: "I think some of the ideas being put forward about providing people with assistance in relation to choices, I think they're good. It's good to look at the issues from a practical positive point of view rather than an argumentative one.

... Anglican, Catholic, Baptist, Presbyterian, Buddhist, Hindu, Lutheran, Sikh, Salvation Army, Wesleyan and Seventh-Day Adventist churches all signed a statement issued yesterday opposing late-term abortions.

The statement calls for all women considering abortion to be told of the health risks, the stage of foetal development and the nature of the medical procedure, and to be given seven days to reconsider their decision.

Gosh ... nothing there about calling for all women considering abortion to be given information about birth control.

Any "pro-life" outfits in the US proposing such a thing?

[WildClarySage]

6. You're original premise is all wrong

they don't care about restricting abortion. They care about restricting non-procreative (ie. other people's) sex. Especially sex they don't approve of... gay sex, masturbation, any position but missionary...

They aren't interested in babies, all they care about is stopping someone from gettin' lucky.

[Jackie97]

7. I agree with you.

When I was against abortion, I was for all of what you talked about. Something about Republicans are just self-righteous in nature though. They think women should be perfect enough not to have an unwanted pregnacy to begin with. Nobody's perfect though.

What this really comes down to is some self-righteous need to control how much women have sex and who they have sex with. If men were having the abortions, there would be a clinic in every town.

[AmericanLiberal]

9. Thank you

Jackie,

I know people who are pro-life now and support economic programs for new parents, and since it doesn't infringe on abortion rights, it's a win-win area for both sides, which is very rare to have. But the leadership and the media never talk about this aspect of the debate. That's what I'm mostly upset about. They only talk about the parts where the two sides will always be at odds. They never say "why don't the Republicans try and actually prevent economic abortion rather than sit around and wait for the Supreme court while spewing hollow rhetoric year after year"? Seriously, all the GOP has done is pass the partial birth abortion ban... guess what, that would not affect 99% of all abortions, even if it were to be applied. And I doubt Tom DeLay was surprised when it was basically deemed unconstitutional in Courts. The fact that they have been in control of Congress for 10 years and done so little on the issue that is supposedly so important to them, when there ARE other avenues of action besides overturning Roe v Wade, seems to me to indicate that they're not very sincere.

Democrats don't talk about economic abortion either, but they have different reasons for doing so. Economic benefits for raising children is simply a humane thing to do, the US is the only industrialized nation with no paid family leave. And it is very hard to find child care. Unfortunately the Democrats recently have been pretty thin on the ideas.

Sex is too natural to make such a large demand as risk having one's life transformed, on such a basic thing. Some people go through their whole lives and do not want children. I don't, but they should be free to make that choice without being denied sex, it is one of the biggest choices they will ever make.

-Tony

[sweetbutterfly]

11. I agree and disagree

You are right that there are many pro-life groups that also focus a large amount of their attention on helping the pregnant woman find the financial resources necessary to either keep the baby, or at least have a healthy pregnancy through offering pre-natal care to those who can not afford it. There are also such groups who are strict about remaining non-political and non-religious, wanting only to provide support for the woman and her child, and not involve themselves in the politics of the issue.

I disagree,however, that denying abortion rights is equivalent to denying sex. Many pro-lifers (also not published) do also advocate and believe in birth control through other means (pill, condoms, etc.). Not all pro-lifers are attempting to control the amount of or type of sex engaged in by women, contrary to popular belief.

[Maat]

12. Some people consider BIRTH CONTROL PILLS to be abortion..

if all they are talking about is late-term abortion, I can settle that discussion right now. Less than 10% of the abortions occur after the first trimester, and they typically involve desperate situations in which the fetus is critically deformed and the health of the mother is involved. So, those are beyond attack, since anyone insisting that a woman carry an infant to term that is going to die shortly after birth is just plain crazy (un totally uncaring about the burden the family and society is going to bare).

Now, let's talk about those occurring in the first trimester, in which the zygote/fetus is about one-half-inch long. Terminating the pregnancy is a much better alternative to abandonment, neglect and abuse. People need to get real, and understand that we do not have enough adoptive parents right now. The system would collapse and people would see some really ugly situations if millions more babies were born. Every child a wanted child!

[iverglas]

13. let's put that one to the test

"Many pro-lifers (also not published) do also advocate and believe in birth control through other means (pill, condoms, etc.)."

Let's test it by looking at some of these folks you talk about:

"pro-life groups that also focus a large amount of their attention on helping the pregnant woman find the financial resources necessary to either keep the baby, or at least have a healthy pregnancy through offering pre-natal care to those who can not afford it"

... who are often found operating "crisis pregnancy centers".

I ask Google for "crisis pregnancy center" "birth control".

Since I'm talking to google.ca, presumably, the first hit is a "CPC" in Winnipeg, Manitoba:
http://www.pregnancy.mb.ca/main.htm
whose main page has a link called "Birth Control", which goes here:
http://epigee.org/guide/

The information provided here is designed to help you make an informed decision about birth control. Only safe, appropriate methods that genuinely prevent conception are recommended. Whichever method of birth control you choose, remember that, aside from abstinence, all birth control methods sometimes fail, even if used properly and consistently.

Nonetheless, if you are sexually active, good contraception can greatly reduce your chances of pregnancy.

Hey, sounds good! So let's see what they recommend.

Let's try "Oral Contraceptives":
http://epigee.org/guide/pill.html
-- the first two paragraphs read:

Hormonal methods of birth control appear in many different forms and are extremely popular due to their ease of use and efficacy. These include oral contraceptives, injectables, and implants, all of which have multiple birth control mechanisms, including some which take effect after fertilization. There are also numerous side-effects and health risks which can be entirely avoided if the other methods of birth control discussed in this guide are used instead.

"After reading <about post-fertilization effects>, I realized I could no longer justify prescribing the Pill. I think most women feel life begins at fertilization. When they find out about the post-fertilization effect, they're surprised and some even rethink their decision."
-Cynthia Jones-Nosacek, MD, Family Physician, Milwaukee, WI

Wow. That's quite a recommendation. I'll bet those CPC folks recommend the pill to every woman who walks in.

Hmm ... how 'bout that "natural family planning" stuff?
http://epigee.org/guide/natural.html#text

FERTILITY AWARENESS

Fertility awareness, or natural family planning, has been used successfully since the 1930's to predict a woman's fertile days. These methods are based on the fact that fertilization is most likely to occur around the time of ovulation. Intercourse is avoided during those times when a woman is fertile, thus preventing conception. Fertility awareness methods are the only methods of birth control which require the cooperation of both partners. Advantages of these methods are that they are very inexpensive, do not require the use of artificial devices or drugs, and have no harmful side-effects. In addition, many people prefer a natural, mutual method of preventing pregnancy.

Damn, I'm seeing a lot of how-to links there, but not a single article critical of the method (except for that one about how the calendar-only method might not be real good).

How 'bout those condom thingies (which, I would note, generally do "require the cooperation of both partners" ...)?
http://epigee.org/guide/condoms.html
http://epigee.org/guide/condomfaq.html

How effective are condoms in preventing pregnancy?

For adults, the failure rate is about 14% per year of use. That means every year about 1 in 7 condom users experience an unplanned pregnancy. For persons under the age of 18, condoms were found to have a failure rate of 18% over one year. For unmarried minorities, the condom failure rate is 36% per year, and for unmarried Hispanics, the failure rate is as high as 45% annually. Spermicidal condoms have not been proven more effective than the non-spermicidal type.

Huh. For the "sympto-thermal method" of "natural family planning", we got an average failure rate of 15% ... but no breakdown by age, ethnic group, etc. Funny how that's relevant for condoms.

Anyhoo ...

That Winnipeg CPC place provides that link (and only that link) at its website for BC information -- but describes the services it provides, itself, thus:

These are Some of our Services ...

Free Pregnancy Tests
Information about Pregnancy
Accurate Information on Abortion
Adoption Education and Support
Post Abortion and Infant Loss Counselling and Support
Clothing for Both Mamma and the Child
Furniture and Food
A 24-Hour Crisis Line
Emergency and Long-Term Housing
Extensive Referrals and Networking
Short and Long-Term Counselling
Pre-Natal and Parenting Classes
Bible Studies and Spiritual Guidance
Non-Judgmental Support and Acceptance
And Lots and Lots of Love

Not seeing any birth control services there.

On to number 2 on the list, the Westside Pregnancy Resource Center in West Los Angeles, which (unlike the Winnipeg CPC) *is* "now a fully licensed medical clinic":
http://www.wprc.org/11.18.0.0.1.0.phtml

Hmm. Interestingly, that page is a verbatim lift from the stuff at that epigee.org place. Ah yes, "Excerpted from the Epigee, birth control guide. Used with permission." Just selected excerpts though, apparently; nothing about condoms ... ah, here we are; a more complete page:
http://www.wprc.org/birthcontrol.phtml
-- but no, all the rest of it is straight from epigee.org too.

http://www.wprc.org/services.phtml
Nothing at all about birth control counselling/services there. But heck, there's a link to how to order up a speaker from:

Reality Check is a group of young adults speaking about Sexual Integrity (the emotional, physical, social and intellectual benefits of saving sex for marriage). Our message empowers today's youth to make healthy decisions for their future.

Do you suppose they'll demonstrate condom use if you ask nicely at one of their presentations?

This is just one opinion, but I'm betting it's not one person talking out of her bum:
http://www.lifeandlibertyforwomen.org/issues/issues_deceptive_crisis_center.html

There are approximately 45 antiabortion and so-called crisis pregnancy centers in Colorado and according to the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) in April of 2000; there were more than 3,200 of these centers nationwide. According to the antiabortion organization Family Research Council they outnumber abortion providers by a 4 to 3 margin. We know these so-called crisis pregnancy centers are fundamentally Christian based, don’t believe in abortion and their primary goal is to stop as many women as possible from having an abortion, which of course means they have to get women into their centers who are considering an abortion but don’t know they are antiabortion and anti-birth control. These centers won’t refer a woman, even if asked, to not only an abortion provider in the community but to a doctor for
birth control.

And they're just so honest and up-front about what they're doing.

So when the Greater Baltimore Crisis Pregnancy Center says
http://www.gbcpc.org/

We provide a helpline, free pregnancy tests, material assistance, parenting classes, confidential peer counseling, limited obstetrical ultrasound, medical and community referrals, information on birth control, fetal development, abortion, adoption and parenting classes.

... well, I just wonder whether they're living all the way up to that motto they publish:
http://www.gbcpc.org/about/

Every woman has the right to be fully informed.

So how 'bout you, sweet thing?

Can you show us some of these folks you tell us about:

"Many pro-lifers (also not published) do also advocate and believe in birth control through other means (pill, condoms, etc.)."

?

I mean, I suppose if they're "not published" ... whatever that means ... you might have a hard time of it ...

But will you give us some idea of the basis for your statement, at least?

[WildClarySage]

15. I actually went to one of those clinics

once to see what would happen. I wasn't pregnant and knew I wasn't, but I wanted to see how they operated. When I called, I specifically mentioned that I wanted abortion referral if I was pregnant. (The name of the clinic, WomenCare, was pretty neutral, so I wasn't sure if they in fact were that sort of clinic.) So I went in and requested a pregnancy test. I was given a 3 minute pee stick test and after being asked to complete a 'questionaire' (complete with loaded questions like "Would you choose an abortion if you knew it could damage your fertility and you might never be able to get pregnant again?" and "Do you wish to inquire about counseling services for trauma from a past abortion"?) After the questionaire, which took about 10 minutes to complete, I was told that my test wasn't ready and if I wanted to I could watch a short film while we waited. The propaganda film showed four stories of women who each chose to not to abort, including one woman whose BC failed, one who was raped and another woman who had health problems. Three of the women in the stories started out saying they had chosen adoption and went on to explain what a wonderful peachy thing that was. The acting was terrible and the stories were heavy handed and preachy. When it was over, 30 minutes later, I got up and went to the receptionist and asked if I was going to be able to receive abortion referral information and she just asked me to wait a minute. When the 'counselor' came out, she said my test was finally ready and it was negative. She gave me a bunch of crummy brochures on abstinence and on how awful and sinful abortion was, and also several of those Chick brochures telling me how Satan couldn't wait for me to fornicate again.

[iverglas]

16. classic tale

Here's another, from "Kelli", someone I "know" (on-line) quite well:

http://eileen.250x.com/
The preface to Kelli's story:
http://www.eileen.250X.com/Main/infrmdC/CPC_Sting.htm

Some years ago now NARAL checked the quality of the advice provided by Crisis Pregnancy Centers.

As a result of that there was and is a warning on the PP site advising that CPCs be approached with caution and that their information and tactics were less than accurate and desirable.

When anything is said in debate concerning this study we are constantly told that those tactics and information techniques are no longer used. But is that true?

If Kelli's experience is anything to go by it's still the same old business as usual at the CPC.

Kelli's detailed account of her experience follows -- worth reading the whole thing, which mirrors your account virtually to the minute, but since Kelli actually was pregnant -- "In reality, my husband and I planned this pregnancy and are very happy about it." -- she got more attention. ;) And she pushed the envelope a bit.

A little while before her visit to the CPC, Kelli had done a literature review of published studies of women's post-abortion experience.

I decided to push a little, and said, "I noticed your literature says there's an increased risk of breast cancer. I know for a fact that for every study you could point to, I could show you two that demonstrate no link." She said, "Well, we feel abortion is unsafe. And we just want you to have all the information that's out there. Did you know abortion causes emotional problems years down the line?" I said, "No professional medical body such as the AMA supports that position." She said, "Oh, yes, research shows post abortion syndrome is a type of post traumatic stress disorder." I said, "Once again, I know for a fact that no study with adequately rigorous scientific standards and methodology has demonstrated such a thing, and that actually the opposite has been shown." The three ladies just looked at me. I said, "You know, she <indicating older grandma> told me you guys had statistics proving abortion is riskier than childbirth. I'd like to see those statistics, if only for my own entertainment." The director rather tightly said there were some citations from "the New England Journal of Medicine" in my "Abortion: Some Medical Facts" booklet. (When recounting my tale to my husband, at this point he laughed and said, "come on, they must've figured out you were a ringer by then!" Heh – could be.)

Oh ... and I don't see anything in her story about receiving birth control information, either.

[renaissanceguy]

17. It's a dick thing.

(This coming from a man.) It seems that many men out there are power hungry, and yes, think with their dicks. This is not to say that women don't think with their clits, but from what experience I've had, plenty of women out there don't.

Neocons want the two sexes to keep their "distinct" black-and-white traits. They want women to be subservient to men, whereas the men can go screw whomever they want. (As long as they don't get caught, and as long as they pray after they do it, it's all good.) They are repudiated by gays because gays go completely against those gender stereotypes. How dare lesbians not need or want a man for pleasure? How dare those "fags" let another man dominate them?

It also seems that it is the men who are more outspoken against gay rights and the right to choose. Women, either by nature or by nurture, tend to be more understanding or tolerant of other viewpoints.

http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.14741193