Skip to comments.Incomparable Liars: Abortion does not equal health
Posted on 07/20/2014 6:56:55 PM PDT by Daniel Clark
Incomparable Liars: Abortion does not equal health
by Daniel Clark
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D, Conn.) has introduced a bill called the Womens Health Protection Act, although if you read any farther than the title, which hed rather you didnt, youd find that it and practically everything that follows is a lie.
The purpose of the bill is to nullify state laws that were passed in reaction to the crimes of Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell, which imposed previously nonexistent health and safety standards on abortion clinics. If youre wondering how the repeal of those standards would serve to protect womens health, it wouldnt. Abortion and womens health are mutually exclusive categories. To protect abortion, as this bill would do, does not protect womens health any more than it protects the health of their unborn children.
Liberals see women as a homogeneous collective whose only purpose is to serve the Democrat political agenda. Thats the only way they can convince themselves that theyre protecting women by promoting abortion. If its good for the party, it must be good for women, and if countless individual women must be harmed for the sake of the collective, then so be it.
Employing the trusty legal-and-therefore-safe canard, Blumenthals proposal states, Legal abortion is one of the safest medical procedures in the United States. How must one measure safeness in order to reach that conclusion? A safe procedure is one that reduces or eliminates a physical threat to the patient. When a woman has an elective abortion, she creates a danger to herself that had not previously existed. How safe is that?
An abortionist doesnt have to be a serial criminal like Gosnell in order to be a danger to women. The fact of the matter is that dedicated, talented, ethical doctors do not become abortionists. One of the ways in which this is evident is that abortion advocates want to force medical students to be trained in abortion, because so few of them will subject themselves to it voluntarily. They want to be schooled in the healing arts, after all, not in dismembering and killing the most innocent members of the human race.
Even the supposedly mainstream elements of the abortion industry are anything but protectors of womens health. For years, Planned Parenthood instructed women to take misoprostol (one of the two drugs that make up RU-486) by inserting it directly into the birth canal. Had they cared a whit about womens health, theyd have heeded the FDA guidelines stating that misoprostol is only to be administered orally. (That means the pills go in her mouth, you callous quacks!)
In keeping with the typical evasiveness of the pro-abortion movement, the bill repeatedly refers to something called abortion services, as if those were ancillary procedures that are a degree of separation from abortion itself. People dont refer to legitimate medical procedures this way. If you had your appendix out, you would say you had an appendectomy, not appendectomy services.
Abortion advocates recognize that theres something uniquely terrible about the act that requires them to construct a whole new lexicon to conceal it. Yet the Democrat bill would prohibit any state restrictions or requirements that did not also apply to medically comparable procedures. We need to have highly publicized congressional hearings on this matter alone. Perhaps the people who have had these medically comparable procedures can appear as witnesses to explain what those procedures are, and what makes them comparable to abortion.
The aim of an abortion is to produce a tiny human corpse. Theres no real medical procedure about which anything comparable may be said. In any medical procedure, the desired outcome is that all parties involved come out alive. When that is the result of an abortion attempt, it is said to have been botched.
Referring to abortion and medically comparable procedures is like referring to turpentine and other beverages. Nobody who thinks about it will believe the first item belongs with the others, but if you simply state as a given that it does, who knows? You just might fool somebody.
The intention of the bill is not that it pass, of course, but only that it further the Republican War on Women theme through the defeat of so-called womens health protection. In reality, it's the Democrats who are waging a war on unborn children, with women as collateral damage. Does that sound equally overblown? Well, if were going to argue about which side is waging a war on the innocent, the question of whether the alleged aggressors are actually killing people ought to be considered relevant.
-- Daniel Clark is a writer from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He is the author and editor of a web publication called The Shinbone: The Frontier of the Free Press, where he also publishes a seasonal sports digest as The College Football Czar.
Abortion is not about a woman’s health. It is about her babies death.
it’s also not a form of birth control like some abortion supporters claim
the fact the majority of women never have an abortion, and never talked to a baby butcher, or set foot in an abortion mill, proves it has nothing to do with healthcare.
further equating it to tumor removal is ludicrous. people don’t grieve tumors or are depressed tumors are gone. they don’t have mock funerals for tumors or name their tumors.
To think that pregnancy is an illness that can be cured by killing the unborn child is such twisted logic. There’s illness there alright, mental/spiritual illness.
Abortion data shows a correlation to a higher incidence of breast cancer.
A woman’s whole body chemistry is thrown off kilter when a fetus is removed from the womb too early.
Not being a woman who has had an abortion, I can’t say what it does mentally to them. The human mind can rationalize and hide certain feelings, but it never forgets.
Mothers who choose abortion are much more prone to suffering death from various causes (suicide, accident, homicide, death due to medical causes) than Mothers who give birth, Mothers who suffer miscarriage, or Women who have not had a pregnancy.
There is a heightened death rate after abortion for all causes together: Compared to women who carry to term, women who abort are 3.5 times more likely to die within a year.
Maternal Mortality in Finland Women of reproductive age (15-49) who died between 1987 and 1994 9,192 women studied. Source: STAKES, the statistical analysis unit of Finland’s National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health. “No Pregnancy” (second row) set as baseline-1.0, against which are measured rates for Birth, Miscarriage and Abortion.
The Finnish post-abortion death statistics are considered particularly reliable because there is little opposition to abortion in Finland: it is a “settled issue”, there is little domestic controversy, Finland is one of the most prosperous countries in the world. “The quality of service in Finnish health care is considered to be good; according to a survey published by the European Commission in 2000, Finland has the highest number of people satisfied with their hospital care system in the EU: 88% of Finnish respondents were satisfied compared with the EU average of 41.3%.”
This is why they call it "abortion" (the vague term) instead of the correct, specific term: "abortion of a pregnancy."
You are right about the mental/spiritual illness, but it starts before the actual abortion.
The idea that MEN or WOMEN cannot control themselves, cannot be responsible enough to abstain from sex until they are ready to have a child is ridiculous.
This bill needs to be aborted.
Trying to stick to the subject.....
The following procedures should NOT be covered under HEALTH CARE INSURANCE.
Cosmetic Plastic Surgery (unless due to injury)
Those are just a few that I can think of.
Pregnancy is not a sickness. Abortion is not health care.
Mental health care (adult babysitters) chiropractic care, prescription drug coverage, preexisting conditions.
(Those are some big "cha-chings")
Amen! Preach it FRiend.
Legal abortion is one of the safest medical procedures in the United States.
I hardly think the baby being aborted would agree with this statement!
Abortion is murder!
“To think that pregnancy is an illness that can be cured by killing the unborn child is such twisted logic. Theres illness there alright, mental/spiritual illness.”
I just came from celebrating our daughter’s 45th birthday. She has two children, the youngest of which is 21 months, so she’s still a baby (although just barely, as agile as she is). So when I read your comment, with my visit only a couple of hours distant, I am left wondering what kind of female cretin could do ANYTHING to harm that little soul! Our daughter, as is the case with most mothers who are worth a $hit, would gladly give her life immediately to insure the safety and longevity of both of her children, and so would both her husband and me. WTF is wrong with both women and men who have so little regard for these precious little lives? No wonder we have the $hit government we have today!
Blumenthal’s mother should have aborted him! What an ugly MFer, and that’s only the part of him you can see. Inside it’s far worse!
“W** is wrong with both women and men who have so little regard for these precious little lives?”
Pure selfishness. That’s the reason behind half the Ten Commandments:
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. Your shall not steal.
9. You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house, wife, manservant, ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
This is nothing new. I suppose once one is OK with the murder rap, everything else would be green lighted.
I don't see how a medical procedure can be called safe when one of the two people on which it being performed is killed in the process.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.