Let's warn women seeking abortion about unreal...

visit slate.com and read the article "Do Abortions Cause Breast Cancer?"

In case you wondered, the answer is NO. Yet anti-abortion legislators in Kansas have enacted a law which requires that women seeking an abortion must be warned that the abortion could cause breast cancer.

the anti abortion movement is seeking to re-define the phrase "informed consent" in the case of abortion. Unable to outlaw it by conventional legislation, the focus is now on putting up enough obstacles in the way to make sure it does not happen. Women seeking an abortion now may lectured on breast cancer risk, despite the fact that there is apparently no link between abortion and breast cancer. They may also be subjected to a forced ultrasound (the only way to escape the ultrasound is to, bingo, change your mind about the abortion). The operative concept here is that no woman would intentionally abort a fetus after a doctor has told her that she is carrying.

But think about it. The woman came in to get an abortion. Would she be seeking an abortion if she were not sure she is pregnant? Most women know the meaning of the word "pregnant," right? Most women understand that, if they do not terminate the pregnancy, a baby will be born in seven months.

I realize that abortion is a morally debated topic and that ending it is one of the pillars of the Republican Party, but the thinking process here is alien to me.

Comments: 15

Anita D. May 28, 2012, 1:04am UTC

Some things in life leave me astonished. But this scenario leaves me astonished, stunned, angry and afraid. Why? Not because I fear having to make an abortion decision at age 65 that is immaterial, but because I fear the medical field is being stifled by religion, pharma and insurance demands. I wonder if I am hearing real health care information or propaganda for profit or imposed beliefs.

reply to this comment

libramoon .. May 28, 2012, 1:28am UTC

So, we are talking about morality? Because we know how truly moral it is to lie about important potentially life-changing information involving personal medical decisions. We know how truly moral it is to deny free will and moral responsibility to those we are meant to be serving as public authorities. Apparently abortion is an immorally debated topic.

reply to this comment

David K. May 28, 2012, 6:32am UTC

Yet another attack on women's rights by the Republican party.

Vic Damico May 28, 2012, 6:35am UTC

There is a vast difference between being opposed to abortion than it is to be opposed to women. This twisting of the truth is getting old...

Chuck Larlham May 28, 2012, 7:29am UTC

But Vic... the attacks ARE on women. There's no twisting of the truth. The evangelical/fundamentalist christians driving the Republican party are pushing a "submissive wife" paradigm, and forcing women into impossible dilemmas. The only out offered is submission. It's not just opposition to abortion... it's assaultive.

Matthew M. May 28, 2012, 10:16am UTC

That's like saying abolitionists were attacking the rights of slave owners. We dispute the right to abortion, I say it doesn't exist.

Margaret Garside May 28, 2012, 4:49pm UTC

Then don't have one, Matt. Is someone trying to force you?

David K. May 30, 2012, 8:06am UTC

But Vic... the attacks ARE on women. There's no twisting of the truth.

Of course it's an attack on women. Vic's argument is either the result of a complete obliviousness to the topic being discussed or an intentional attempt to distract from the point of the article.

This is about the Republican party forcing a requirement that women be lied to in order to coerce them into not doing something they have a legal right to do. The choice is difficult enough for women to make. But rather than making sure they get honest information on which to make that difficult choice the Republican party believes women should be lied to, coerced, and otherwise treated as criminals.

That is irresponsible. And it is yet another direct attack on women by the extremist ideologues that now own the Republican party.

reply to this comment

Ann Egerton May 28, 2012, 8:08am UTC

This only proves that the anti-choice people are morally bankrupt, not morally superior. If they were as moral as they claimed, they would not resort to deceit or coercion to get their way.

A truly moral person would not lie or, even worse, make somebody else lie. Forcing doctors to lie to their patients is wrong.

David K. May 30, 2012, 8:10am UTC

Well said.

Unfortunately, attacking others and lying is the mainstay of the extremist Republicans now.

It's time for the Republican party to take itself back from its extremist wing.

Matthew M. May 30, 2012, 11:48am UTC

Assuming it's a lie, this would merely demonstrate both sides have moral problems. No surprise.

But they are not equivalent either. One side supports murder. One side supports lies to reduce murder. The former's moral bankruptcy far exceeds the other.

reply to this comment

Margaret Garside May 28, 2012, 4:47pm UTC

Don't doctors who knowingly lie to their patients usually lose their license to practice?

Chris Wiegard May 28, 2012, 9:57pm UTC

true, Margaret. But when Republican politicians lie, it's normal. :)

reply to this comment

Nippy Katz (Not his real name) Demigod about Town May 28, 2012, 7:33pm UTC

Makes sense to me. :)

If your sole purpose is to deter women from ever having abortions by any means, it's only natural that "counseling" might fudge the truth a bit. :)

Chris Wiegard May 28, 2012, 9:57pm UTC

yes Nippy. It's an "end justifies the means" argument. BUT it's not an argument that they actually make in public. In public, it's all about providing medical information to women. why? Because if you admit that it's all about putting up obstacles, some Judge might notice and slap you down.

reply to this comment

Let's warn women seeking abortion about unreal things.

5 people recommend this post

Comments: 15

Join the Conversation