Re: Doonesbury this week
Mar. 13th, 2012 09:08 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
averygoodun42So, GBT is taking on the sonogram/ultrasound legislation that's suddenly become popular in the more conservative states that want to ban abortion. And, of course, he's doing it to enormous flak and discontinuation from papers and all that jazz. So, SNAFU.
Anyway, I loved this "blowback" on his site:
TEN YEARS AGO
Ten years ago I got pregnant by my future ex-husband. He didn’t want children, and we argued for two days before I decided to examine the possibility of termination. I had to travel 150 miles out of state to get out from under a 24-hour waiting period, a decision I made after the receptionist at the local Planned Parenthood looked at me like I was dung when I told her I was there for an abortion consultation. In New York, I asked for and got an intravaginal ultrasound. I’d told the doctor of my great discomfort with what I was considering. We were able to see that what I was carrying was an embryo, that the neural tube had not yet closed, and that there would not be a beating heart for another five to seven days. The ultrasound gave me great peace of mind with respect to my decision not to continue the pregnancy. The proponents of mandatory ultrasound need to consider that it works both ways.
I think that's what most anti-abortionists forget: a woman isn't carrying a baby immediately. And even when the heart starts beating, it isn't viable until until 25 weeks. A fair percentage of pregnancies don't make it to viability as a natural course of things, as too many women know.
Under a lot of the proposed legislation out there, there are such stringent limits on what doctors can do that it would kill a lot of women and their wanted babies. My sister-in-law and eldest nephew would not be here because her pregnancy was ended pre-term because she went into eclampsia. Under the letter of some of these laws, she had a late-term abortion.
And then there are the non-viable pregnancies that doctors wouldn't be able to end in a timely manner. My sister found out at 16 weeks that her first pregnancy was non-viable. Under these laws, she would have been forced to carry it until either her body chose to expel it or the baby died. The news that the baby wasn't going to survive was hard enough. Making her go through with the pregnancy until the heartbeat finally stilled would have been cruel beyond words!
(And don't get me started on the "personhood" bills that state life begins at conception. In effect, it would criminalize miscarriage!)
And of course, all of this is besides the fact that a woman's body is her own, damn it! We are not just baby-making machines!
I need to get that bumper sticker that's out there: "Pro-choice, anti abortion." 'Cause when it came down to it, I didn't abort Page because it felt evil to do so, even though my life was on the line. But, well, that was my CHOICE. And my circumstances were very different from someone who is scared or vulnerable or just doesn't want the responsibility.
(Did you know that the sudden decrease in violence in the 80's comes a generation after abortion was legalized?)
Anti-abortion laws assume that women can't make their own moral choices, and you know what? That's insulting.
Not to mention, if abortion becomes illegal, this country needs to have a hard look at its values about the rearing of children. If every baby in utero is a miracle, then that supposes that every child is a miracle. If a child is a miracle, then why are there so damned many hungry ones in this country? Why don't we have simpler adoption laws? Why are we constantly cutting education spending? Why do we ask mothers to pay others to raise their kids instead of paying mothers (or fathers) to do so themselves? If children were really as important as these bill makers say, they would be fighting to make this a socialist country, damn it!
*breathes*
But really, what it comes down to is that a woman's body is her own. Period. Let her make the choice, whether it be for or against termination. She's the one who has to deal with it, after all, since society isn't going to.
Oh, and Shiv, here's some hope for you. There is a push against the insanity that's swirling around this country. There is. And not just from flaming liberals like me.
Anyway, I loved this "blowback" on his site:
TEN YEARS AGO
Ten years ago I got pregnant by my future ex-husband. He didn’t want children, and we argued for two days before I decided to examine the possibility of termination. I had to travel 150 miles out of state to get out from under a 24-hour waiting period, a decision I made after the receptionist at the local Planned Parenthood looked at me like I was dung when I told her I was there for an abortion consultation. In New York, I asked for and got an intravaginal ultrasound. I’d told the doctor of my great discomfort with what I was considering. We were able to see that what I was carrying was an embryo, that the neural tube had not yet closed, and that there would not be a beating heart for another five to seven days. The ultrasound gave me great peace of mind with respect to my decision not to continue the pregnancy. The proponents of mandatory ultrasound need to consider that it works both ways.
I think that's what most anti-abortionists forget: a woman isn't carrying a baby immediately. And even when the heart starts beating, it isn't viable until until 25 weeks. A fair percentage of pregnancies don't make it to viability as a natural course of things, as too many women know.
Under a lot of the proposed legislation out there, there are such stringent limits on what doctors can do that it would kill a lot of women and their wanted babies. My sister-in-law and eldest nephew would not be here because her pregnancy was ended pre-term because she went into eclampsia. Under the letter of some of these laws, she had a late-term abortion.
And then there are the non-viable pregnancies that doctors wouldn't be able to end in a timely manner. My sister found out at 16 weeks that her first pregnancy was non-viable. Under these laws, she would have been forced to carry it until either her body chose to expel it or the baby died. The news that the baby wasn't going to survive was hard enough. Making her go through with the pregnancy until the heartbeat finally stilled would have been cruel beyond words!
(And don't get me started on the "personhood" bills that state life begins at conception. In effect, it would criminalize miscarriage!)
And of course, all of this is besides the fact that a woman's body is her own, damn it! We are not just baby-making machines!
I need to get that bumper sticker that's out there: "Pro-choice, anti abortion." 'Cause when it came down to it, I didn't abort Page because it felt evil to do so, even though my life was on the line. But, well, that was my CHOICE. And my circumstances were very different from someone who is scared or vulnerable or just doesn't want the responsibility.
(Did you know that the sudden decrease in violence in the 80's comes a generation after abortion was legalized?)
Anti-abortion laws assume that women can't make their own moral choices, and you know what? That's insulting.
Not to mention, if abortion becomes illegal, this country needs to have a hard look at its values about the rearing of children. If every baby in utero is a miracle, then that supposes that every child is a miracle. If a child is a miracle, then why are there so damned many hungry ones in this country? Why don't we have simpler adoption laws? Why are we constantly cutting education spending? Why do we ask mothers to pay others to raise their kids instead of paying mothers (or fathers) to do so themselves? If children were really as important as these bill makers say, they would be fighting to make this a socialist country, damn it!
*breathes*
But really, what it comes down to is that a woman's body is her own. Period. Let her make the choice, whether it be for or against termination. She's the one who has to deal with it, after all, since society isn't going to.
Oh, and Shiv, here's some hope for you. There is a push against the insanity that's swirling around this country. There is. And not just from flaming liberals like me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 01:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 02:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:03 pm (UTC)Did you know that in Japan, women for decades were trying to get The Pill approved, but the Japanese equivalent of the FDA was dragging their asses and hemming and hawing and saying it needed further testing. But when Viagra came along, it got passed through approval in record time and the women in Japan got really fucking pissed and pointed out the hypocrisy of decades for The Pill and months for Viagra and then The Pill was finally approved in Japan.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/27/science/japan-s-tale-of-two-pills-viagra-and-birth-control.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
(The Pill was finally approved for sale in Japan in September 1999)