You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Pro-Choice’ tag.
How many more examples do we need of the lethal nature of the supposedly “pro-life” position? Let’s clear this up by naming them correctly, for the record, when you hear the term “Pro-life” you need to replace that with “anti-woman forced birth advocate”. Why? Because what forced birthers are about is stripping women of their rights and of their bodily autonomy. Beatriz, like Savita Halappanavar, is being put in mortal peril because where she lives the forced birth brigades ideas are reality, and women really do not have rights.
“The 22-year-old woman suffers from severe and complicated illnesses. Her doctors have told her that she will likely die giving birth, and the unborn child will most likely live only a few hours, but she is prevented by law from having an abortion. “They [the Supreme Court] were not convinced this is the way… they are saying Beatriz is not in danger and she must pursue the natural way of delivery and we must see what happens,” said Mata. “It isn’t just an abortion, it is a necessity,” said Mata, in an earlier interview with CBSNews.com”
Yeah. The all male supreme court has ruled that this woman is not in danger and must continue with birth. Their noble dedication to preserving life is noted.
Beatriz is carrying an anencephalic fetus, which means it has no brain and is only expected to survive at maximum a few hours after birth, even if she carries it to full term. Beatriz has lupus, worsened by a kidney malfunction, and it is very dangerous for her to be pregnant. “The doctors are saying it’s very critical because the lupus may be reactivated and if the lupus is reactivated it is very dangerous for her health,” he added. She is now 26-weeks pregnant, and every day it becomes more risky for her to be pregnant and have an abortion at such a late stage.
This is what happens when legislate against women. Women are endangered and their lives are at risk.
According to a 2012 report from the Central American Women’s Network, 628 women have been imprisoned in El Salvador since its anti-abortion law was enacted in 1998. Twenty-four of these women were indicted for “aggravated murder,” after an abortion, miscarriage, or stillbirth. “The only way now is to go to the international courts,” said Mata. Meanwhile, Beatriz awaits her fate in hospital, separated from her 14-month old son and her husband. “Everyday, the health of Beatriz is [getting] worse. If they wait another week or two weeks, she will be too feeble to endure the operation,” said Mata.
So because of the religiously inspired pro-life fuckwittery of the Roman Catholic Church (this is what a society where they have tangible influence looks like) it is most likely Beatriz will die.
No rant today – this is too outrageous and too cold for a rant. This is an tragic (because it is preventible) object lesson – women die and are dying because they are denied their reproductive rights and rights to bodily autonomy.
That is all.
One of the cheap rhetorical tricks that forced birth advocates often use is the idea that somehow “Science” (ya know science, that vast shadowy monolithic structure) supports their crappy arguments and thus lends weight to their assault on women and their rights. One of the easiest tells illustrating the rhetorical, rather than scientific vein of this particular argument, is that idea that we have a definite grasp of when “life” begins. Unsurprisingly, the anti-choice position relies on a gross simplification of what the bio-medical position actually is on when life begins. The irony is very rich as fetus fetishists often assign the label of “anti-science” to pro-choice people arguing against them and their misguided campaign for life.
I’m not really a fan of arguing from authority (This introduction is a perspective from an evolutionary biologist, for the record.), but I swear, if see one more out of context reference to a embryology text during an argument, I will practice immediate defenestration of the offender in question.
This next quoted section is from Blazer S, Zimmer EZ (eds):The Embryo: Scientific Discovery and Medical Ethics. Basel, Karger, 2005, pp 1– 20 (ed. minor formatting changes for effect)
This chapter began with the central ethical question of ‘when does life begin?’ The evolutionary answer to this question makes it devoid of ethical
implications concerning the sojourn from conception to birth (although it has other, profound ethical implications). Instead, the evolutionary and
genetic arguments presented in this chapter indicate that a more meaningful ethical question is:
Where do we place ethical thresholds in the continual process of human
Biology provides no clear defining event to answer this question because diploid human individuality arises gradually during the mitotic phase of our life cycle and not at fertilization. Perhaps there is no single ethical threshold in dealing with the mitotic continuum and the attendant gradual emergence
of functional genotypes and individual traits. Although modern biology does not provide an answer to the above question, knowing what the question should be and what it should not be is the critical first step in any debate. Thus, modern biology, and particularly evolutionary biology and genetics, can play an important role in the ethical debates concerning the passage from conception to birth.
So let the record be set straight that science doesn’t not precisely know when “life” begins and that very possibly it is the wrong question to be asking.
Ah, the forced birth lobby has finally pissed off enough women to start the inevitable slapdown of their deplorable, retrograde fundamentally anti-woman position. Let’s keep this video in the “abortion” feed for a long time, in light of that goal, I encourage everyone to share and repost this clip on their blog, so our anti-choice friends know exactly what they are up against.
It is nice when the anti-woman, fetus-fetish brigade starts getting worked up. The thin veil of “protecting life” is torn away leaving only the desperate misogyny that is so typical of the anti-choice zealots. This from the Feel that pro-life love! Tumblr.
DPC: Lol, people who think it’s okay to use someone’s body against their will and think that anyone will benefit from forced pregnancies and birth. Lol, people who think think that an embryo is more important than a grown person. Lol, people who think being born is a right.
DPC: I can lol all day.
J: Forced pregnancies and birth? Hahaha don’t get pregnant then asshole. No one said the unborn were more important, but keep putting words in someone’s mouth to make yourself look less like the stupid selfish cunt that you are. Saying being born isn’t a right doesn’t make any sense. You’re just making up stupid shit now.
DPC: Oh shit happens, peopel get pregnant. Abortion is a legitimate way of dealing with it.
DPC: And oooh, name calling. Fiesty.
DPC: But I’m not putting words in your mouth, you are making the embryo more important than the born person because you don’t give a fuck about how hard and debilitating a pregnancy can be for people, and you certainly think people should suffer through just so that itty bitty baby can be born and solve nothing. Just so that you in 20 years can go “I don’t have to provide for you, go fucking work or something you lazy ass”.
DPC: Being born isn’t a right, it’s a privilege. Now go kiss your mother for suffering for you.
DPC: Not just “name-calling”, but an insult that implies that being a woman and not self-sacrificing is a horrible thing. Unsurprising considering who it’s coming from.
Go to the Guttmacher Institute website for more information.
The Guttmacher Institute is all about giving women the rights to control their reproductive future and of course, their bodies. The pro-woman, pro-choice position is based on evidence and facts that no amount of prayer, handwaving or appeals to emotion can over come.
Being that your position(my beloved anti-choicers) is almost always a combination of those three factors it has come time to admit you’ve lost and now its time to move on. I’m sure there are other worthy causes that require your nuanced attention – perhaps trying to get creationism into the school science curricula, or getting the 10 commandments put somewhere special that will tickle your deranged god-neuron in the appropriate fashion.
Of course, you won’t let this one go. And I’m glad, because it exposes most of your platform for what it is: The hatred of women and their right to bodily autonomy. So nurture your fetus-fetish, post your fetus-porn, harass women trying to make the best choice for themselves and their families – it all contributes to your eventual downfall. Women will win, despite your most despicable efforts. You’re doing your worst right now and it isn’t enough, nor will it ever be enough.
So sit down and enjoy the video, the sooner you clue in, the less painful it will be.
I needed some time to digest this story… Sorry folks but that is a lie. I needed some time to come back to a (relatively) coherent state before I could write reasonably about what went down with Savita Halappanavar.
A post filled with nothing but white-hot rage and invective against the pustulant ass-pimples known as pro-lifers (anti-choicers, for the sake of veracity) and their equally pustulant,delusion friends, the Catholic Church would serve little purpose other than giving the other side ammunition about how nasty I am (Humourless Feminist, Too Sensitive, Crazy Socialist, Militant Atheist etc…the list is long ). No, my ninnyhammerd-half-witted friends won’t get the pleasure because in Savita’s case there is nothing for me to add, the absolute horror and immorality of their position is chillingly clear - and a young woman had to die because of it (and women are dying of it here in North America too).
Let’s just look at how our pro-life catholic friends “helped” Savita Halappanavar – Analysis from Dr. Jen Gunter (I’m referencing Jen’s post to make my point, she does not hold the same opinion as I). [ed. bold text mine]
This is what is known. Savita Halappanavar was 31 years old and happy to be pregnant with her first child. Then, at 17 weeks, tragedy struck and she was “found to be miscarrying.” Her husband reports that she was in “severe pain” for three days at the hospital and a termination was requested. He says this request was denied because Ireland is “a Catholic country.” He and his late wife were led to believe that the law would only allow her to be delivered when there was no fetal heartbeat.
What does the standard of medical care say about this treatment? Without access to the chart, “miscarrying” at 17 weeks can only mean one of three things”
A) Ruptured membranes
B) Advanced cervical dilation
C) Labor (this is unlikely, although it is possible that she had preterm labor that arrested and left her with scenario B, advanced cervical dilation).
All three of these scenarios have a dismal prognosis, none of which should involve the death of the mother.
Okay, ground rules set. There were no mysteries here, the medical playbook is straight forward.
The standard of care with ruptured membranes (scenario A) is to offer termination or, if there is no evidence of infection and the pregnancy is desired, the option of observing for a few days to see if the leak seals over and more fluid accumulates. If no fluid accumulates and by some chance the pregnancy manages to go beyond 24 weeks (the vast majority of pregnancies with ruptured membranes delivery within a week), survival is unlikely given the lungs require amniotic fluid to develop. I have seen the rare case where a woman with no infection (and no fluid) elects conservative management in the hopes that might make it to at least 24 weeks in the pregnancy, however, I have never heard of a baby surviving in this scenario. Regardless, if at any point infection is suspected the treatment is antibiotics and delivery not antibiotics alone.
The standard of care with scenario B involves offering delivery or possibly a rescue cerclage (a stitch around the cervix to try to prevent further dilation and thus delivery) depending on the situation. Inducing delivery (or a D and E) is offered because a cervix that has dilated significantly often leads to labor or an infection as the membranes are now exposed to the vaginal flora. Many women do not want wait for infection. A rescue cerclage is not without risks and is contraindicated with ruptured membranes or any sign of infection. Rescue cerclage is a very case by case intervention and well beyond the scope of this post. These decisions are difficult and the mark of good medical care is that all scenarios are discussed, all interventions that are technically possible offered, and then the patient makes an informed decision. All with the understanding that if infection develops, delivery is indicated.
Medically speaking, Dr.Gunter explains the outcomes of what these religiously addled doctors did, or more specifically did not do.
As there is no medically acceptable scenario at 17 weeks where a woman is miscarrying AND is denied a termination, there can only be three plausible explanations for Ms. Hapappanavar’s “medical care” :
1) Irish law does indeed treat pregnant women as second class citizens and denies them appropriate medical care. The medical team was following the law to avoid criminal prosecution.
2) Irish law does not deny women the care they need; however, a zealous individual doctor or hospital administrator interpreted Catholic doctrine in such a way that a pregnant woman’s medical care was somehow irrelevant and superceded by heart tones of a 17 weeks fetus that could never be viable.
3) Irish law allows abortions for women when medically necessary, but the doctors involved were negligent in that they could not diagnose infection when it was so obviously present, did not know the treatment, or were not competent enough to carry out the treatment.
What we do know is that a young, pregnant, woman who presented to the hospital in a first world country died for want of appropriate medical care. Whether it’s Irish Catholic law or malpractice, only time will tell; however, no answer could possibly ease the pain and suffering of Ms. Halappanavar’s loved ones.
This is what we get when we allow insipid religious prevarication into important parts of our society. Mythology and magic have no place in secular institutions, not now and not ever. Yet we still allow the bullshite in despite the injuries, deaths and pain it causes. Religion poisons everything and everyone it touches and yet Religion is just one head of the hydra that conspired to end Savita’s life. By now the ironically named “Pro-life” band of fetus fetishists need to take their bows and unsuccessfully try to wipe their bloody hands of this uncomfortable case.
Savita’s death is on their hands because this is what you get when you don’t value women as people and see them only as incubators. Savita and other women are dying because of the batshite-insane anti-choice nuttery that goes on that somehow makes it okay to take women out of the pregnancy equation and deny her rights. So have your prayer vigils, your fetus-porn, your 40 days of fuckwittery - all so you can feel fucking morally superior(?) when a women like Savita Halappanarvar dies? Your fetid morality is repugnant and has no place in a civilized society… none whatsoever.
You know what the best tell is from these anti-woman fetus worshipping zealots is? The absolute fucking silence from the pro-life side of things when details of Savita’s death rang around the world. The author(s) over at Reasonable Conversation nailed it with this post which I excerpt here. [ed. bold text mine]
The fact of the matter is, these people can only thrive when the deaths are anonymous. The moment we had a name for one of the victims of their horrible and irrational beliefs, they needed to shut up and hide so nobody could ask them if Savita Halappanavar should have died, if it was god’s will, if they should have allowed her to be treated. They can’t answer these questions because the answers they would give would make them look like monsters if they were honest and undermine their message if they lied.
This. A thousand times just this.
This is why we fight for the rights of women because the regressive religiously addled view women as second class citizens not worthy of human rights or treatment. Your torpid bronze age shenanigans have gone on for much too long and hurt too many people. Where is the apology from the pope? Where is the outcry from the anti-choicers? There is none because they cannot or will not see the monstrous evil of their positions, better to whip up some more fetus porn or get some more red duct tape and pray to your imaginary sky-daddy.
When the consequences of your bullshite come to light the religiously anti-choice zealots scurry away from the light of reason(rule one in the nutter playbook), when the unnamed become named and the travesty of your rotten ethics is bared to light you offer no defense, because there is no defense for your untenable immoral position.