Ugh. So Kerry Howley pointed out, in a post about the Dept. of Health and Human Services’ not-wrong-but-somewhat-off warnings about the dangers of abortion, that childbirth actually has a higher mortality rate for women than abortion. And then the crazies come out of the woodwork. John Kindley (who appears to be an abortion-post troll) suggests that bringing up the childbirth mortality rate business is somehow wrong or misleading “in light of the fact that deaths from abortion and from childbirth are both extremely rare.” He’s right, sure, but the fact is that it’s generally anti-choicers who trot out the “abortion is dangerous” line as a scare tactic. Reminding people that childbirth is actually far more dangerous seems like a pretty reasonable way to debunk this myth. It’s not as if pro-choicers are running around all “childbirth is dangerous; why don’t you abort all your babies instead!” Somehow, this fact seems to have escaped his grasp, as his preferred term for the pro-choice camp seems to be “pro-aborts.”
I really hope that isn’t a term that catches on. Mainly because it’s, you know, wrong. I know some people will probably argue that it’s akin to framing the “pro-life” side as “anti-choicers.” But, in the most literal terms, that’s true: they do not think people should be allowed the choice to have an abortion. Pro-choicers, however, are not “pro” abortion, as in, like, “Yes, abortion is great! Abortions for everybody!” At the least, some pro-choicers think of it as a morally neutral thing, and others actively want to decrease the number of abortions taking place – which is why they actually advocate education and contraception policies that might help in this.
Anyway, what’s really depressing about the comment thread is that somehow Kindley and some others never got the memo that abortion doesn’t cause breast cancer. Kindley actually believes studies that have disproved this link are a conspiracy, because “if it ever became common knowledge, thousands of women who have been deceived about the “safety” of abortion would have potential causes of action, and the ensuing litigation could dwarf the asbestos and tobacco litigation.” His proof? An astro-turf breast cancer prevention organization run by a “pro-life born-again Christian” with a known hardcore ideological agenda in spreading this link.
Kinsley says, “All I can suggest is that the sources I’ve cited be compared with the sources purporting to “debunk” the abortion-breast cancer link for logical consistency and integrity.
Indeed. Do you trust an ideologue with a anti-abortion front group about breast cancer, or The National Cancer Institute?
i also heard that abortion causes feminism. who will dare to speak the truth about that?
Liz, I have to admire you for your passionate fervor towards abortion and feminism.
hmmm … I am not sure whether that was sarcasm or not
i took it as condascension.
Well as a anti-choice person. i think we can all benefit from being more open minded. Pro-Life anti choice people. come at it from this perspective, and i know because i am one. simple argument. women have more choices than abortion. they can give their baby up for adoption. they can keep their baby. when i go in front of an abortion clinic it appears to me that the “escorts” only want to give the mother one choice. abort your baby. so i guess that is an anti-choice persons point of view.
i will say it differently. pro life people are pro choice. they want the mother to know she doesn’t have to abort. but that she can choose to give her baby or fetus the opportunity to live a full and productive life. so then the pro-choice side says no we just want women to abort their babies then we have to ask who is supporting a women’s right to choose life for her baby? so the anti-choice becomes pro choice. but pro-choice in a different sense of the word. pro-life pro-choicers want the mothers and the forgotten fathers to know that they don’t have to abort their pregnancy but can choose life instead.
)
that is an anti choice side. but in reality we want all people to choose life.
Matt — Sure women have more choices than abortion. That’s why pro-choices support women’s rights to choose between a range of contraceptive services (the choice to get pregnant or not), and a range of options if they do get pregnant, including keeping a child, giving it up for adoption, or having an abortion. It seems silly to be upset that workers at abortion clinics are helping the women who go there get abortions. I mean, the gall! I bet at adoption clinics, the “escorts” want to help people give their babies up for adoption, too!
“But in reality, we want all people to choose life.” Hmm, doesn’t sound so much like “choice” at all then, does it?