Opposing View of the Week: "Woodworth's Misogyny" from The Abortion Monologues

Opposing Views of the Week is a chance for you to learn what the other side thinks (if you're pro-life) or for you to learn what the other side thinks of you (if you're pro-choice). I will be featuring a blog post by a pro-abortion advocate every week, with a(n) (attempted) rebuttal. 

 
You can read the full blog post here, called "Woodworth's Misogyny" written by Jane Cawthorne. Before I start to address her points, I just wanted to point out that the very first label she identified with "Woodworth's Misogyny" was #nodebate. I thought that was interesting.

Now onto the blog post:

"To Stephen Woodworth and your cabal of fetus fetishists."

No, we do not have a fetus fetish. Glad we got that cleared up. :)

"Why do you hate women?"

We don't hate women. I'm a women. Most of the leaders in the pro-life movement are women. If you really don't believe me, look at the work that Feminists for Life is doing in the USA, advocating for pregnant women in the workplace and at school. Also, I looked through your "List of Anti-Choice MP's", and it turns out that that 19 of them are women. Huh.

A woman hatin' woman!

"Why are you and your anachronistic patriarchal cabal trying to force your opinions up my vagina?"

Who said anything about your vagina?

 "Why are you forcing Parliament to waste time on a question that has been settled for decades? Give it up, man. It's over." 

You really don't understand the position of pro-lifers if you think that we will ever give up. Until every human being, at ever stage of its life, is respected and protected by society and by law, we will not give up. Considering the 27% of Canadians in 2007 who said they believe that abortion is morally wrong, the 39% of Canadians in 2010 who said that the government should only fund abortions in the event of a medical emergency, and the 15 300 pro-lifers who attended the 2011 March for Life, I think it is quite clear that the debate is not as settled as you would like it to be. Sorry to disappoint.

"Why can't you see the evidence in front of your eyes, and know that denying a woman the right to an abortion only results in driving the procedure underground and bringing harm to women. Are you trying to find ways to harm us? Why do you deny the science and the surveys and the studies and the irrefutable evidence that criminalizing abortion does nothing to reduce its incidence? How can you be so blind to fact?"

Hmm, maybe it's because when abortion advocates speak, their words themselves do not completely support this view! There are many factors that determine whether a particular abortion procedure is safe for women, and illegality is not the foremost one. From the 2009 National Abortion Federation's medical textbook on abortion, Management of Unintended and Abnormal Pregnancy (emphasis my own):

"The high risk of death from unsafe abortion in Africa reflects the procedures used and the poor availability, accessibility, and quality of services for management of complications." (19)

"First-trimester aspiration abortion is one of the safest procedures provided for women of reproductive age. Its use in lieu of dilation and sharp curettage has reduced abortion-related morbidity worldwide." (152)

"Where mifepristone is not accessible, various misoprostol-only regimens are being used... its widespread use in countries with restricted abortion laws appears to be associated with reduction in maternal morbidity and mortality." (122)

"Even in developing countries with restrictive abortion laws, increasing use of MVA (manual vacuum aspiration) and medical abortion methods has reduced abortion-related mortality. (135)" 

"Induced abortion is an impressively safe procedure, particularly but not exclusively where it is legal. (224)" 

"Why are potential people, clumps of cells no bigger than a few milimeters, more important to you than actual women?"

Well, considering that Stephen Woodworth is opposed to a law that says that we are not human until we completely exit the birth canal, when we are no longer mere clumps of cells, I find it odd that you would even bring this up. We aren't just talking about humans at their very earliest stages of life (though we pro-lifers care about them too!!). We're also talking about humans that have arms, legs, a heartbeat, and brainwaves. We're also talking about humans that can learn, play, laugh, yawn, and cry. We're also talking about humans that can survive outside of the womb. These humans are not considered human beings under Canadian law and it is completely legal for a doctor to kill them. Never mind the fact that women are very often hurt by abortion (both physically and emotionally), are discriminated against through abortion (even in Canada), and that more than half of all victims of abortion are unborn women. We care about all women. You seem to only care about the ones who are born.

"You don't get to decide what I do with my body. Only I get to decide that."

I totally agree. I only object when women (or men for that matter) decide what to do with someone else's body. 

"But this is just women we're talking about here, so you don't care. You feel we can't be trusted."

We are not the ones who think that aborting a baby girl just because she is a girl is totally fine. Believing that every person, no matter the age, deserves life and love and respect is the exact opposite of not caring. We are not the ones who think teenagers should abort even if they don't want to. We are not the ones hiding abortion images from women. We are not the ones who refuse to allow women to see their ultrasounds. Believing that every woman has it in her to be a wonderful mother, and giving her the resources to make that possible, does not mean that we don't think women can be trusted - in fact, it means the exact opposite.

I also have numerous posts detailing the efforts the pro-life movement is making towards helping young mothers and women who find themselves in crisis pregnancies have other options available to them besides abortion. Please read through them, and then tell me again that we don't care about women.

"You know that petition you are sending around, the one that you're putting up in publicly funded schools and having Catholic school children sign, the one that shows a woman's pregnant belly and cuts off her head? [...]You've broken that woman into parts, objectified her, made her pornographic."

Catholic schools promoting Catholic values?? Oh noes!! And maybe the petition focuses on the pregnant woman's belly because that is where the baby is - you know, the baby that doesn't have any human rights and isn't even considered a human under Canadian law? And showing a picture of a pregnant woman's belly is pornographic now? That just takes the cake. I guess My Pregnancy Guide and other pregnancy resources which also show pictures of pregnant bellies objectify women and turn them into objects too then, right?

 "Why are you obsessed with women's bodies?"

First Woodworth has a fetus fetish, and now he's obsessed with women's bodies. Notice that the only one talking about vaginas and pregnant bellies is you. 

 "Why can't you go about your business and leave me alone?"

This isn't about you. Its about her.

"Did someone hurt you when you were little and ruin your sense of eroticism and any possibility you have of enjoying a healthy sexual relationship? Did someone convince you sex was a chore done only to procreate?"

You know, just because pro-lifers know that having sex could create a baby, doesn't mean we have no sense of eroticism. Really, the logical leap from "they think sex can make babies" & "they think babies should have human rights" to "they must not have healthy sexual relationships" & "they must think sex is a chore" is astounding. Many pro-life women have lots of kids. How exactly does it follow that they don't enjoy sex?

"How many more generations will we have to wait until people like you are gone?"

Considering that the pro-life movement is made up of quite a few young people, you will have to wait awhile!

 "I have values, and they are just as strong and important and vital to me as yours are to you. The difference between you and me is I'll never try to shove mine up another woman's vagina, or down another man's throat."

But you will use your values to tear apart a fetus limb from limb, inject poison into its heart, burn it inside and out, suck it out, and basically do anything at all that will kill it. And that's okay. Incidentally, abortions generally shove things up a woman's vagina, so I really think you ought to pick another euphemism.

This is the best quote of the entire blog post:

"I'll never support your efforts to force others to abide by your twisted, erotophobic, anti-sex, misogynist, patriarchal bundle of human-rights affronting crap that your motion represents."

And:

"You are waking a sleeping giant. Women are not things for you to possess and command. You are about to find out, we are warriors."

We are warriors, and we pro-life women will fight until our last breath to make sure that all human beings have rights, including the unborn. And there are many women on our side. And we won't stop until abortion not only becomes illegal, but both unthinkable and unnecessary. Good luck in this battle, because when you're against this, you are definitely going to need it.

VOTE on CBC and CTV!

Hi Everyone! So there are two polls that I know of in the MSM on Motion 312, which was brought to the House by MP Stephen Woodworth. It is a review on the question of when human life begins because, according to Canadian law, someone is not a human being until the moment of birth.

Obviously that is the most archaic, unscientific definition of human life ever. SO! If you agree, you really should really go vote in the MSM polls. Currently, the pro-life side is not doing too well so it'd be great to even it out a bit and show that our voices can be heard! With the March For Life coming up, and this Motion being debated in Parliament, its more important than ever to make sure that you have a say in the public discussions on abortion and human life.

Here are the polls:
CBC
CTV (scroll about have way down the page for this one)


VOTE and SHARE :)
 And while you're at it, sign the petition in support of Motion 312!

A nice summary of the Motion from Fr. Raymond J. DeSouza.

Petition in Support of Motion 312

Sign and spread the word! So far there are 2096 signatures - lets see if we can get that number up by a couple of orders of magnitude.

Seriously, share now. We have a really rare chance to be heard in parliament, another one might not come along for awhile!

Stephen Woodworth discusses the motion:

"War on Women"

 
A pro-choice friend of mine has been busy posting articles and videos on the much-maligned "war on women" by the GOP. Usually, I find the stuff she posts pretty annoying (I'm sure she thinks the same thing about my pro-life posts), but I actually found this video pretty interesting. Basically, its a bunch of women quoting some prominent Republicans and their supporters. They end the video with a snappy,

"Women will out-vote men by 10 million. 

You might want to keep that in mind. 

We're Women. 

We Vote."

Besides the first comment about aspirin (gross), and the Ann Coulter quote (seriously - ugh), I didn't really have a problem with any of quotes used as evidence that the Republican party is involved in a "war" against women. So, lets deal with the rest of these quotes, shall we?

"Forcing women to have an ultrasound before an abortion is justified because they already made the decision to be vaginally penetrated when they got pregnant." -Republican Lawmaker

Well, when people say stupid shit like this its no wonder pro-choicers went crazy and claimed that ultrasound laws are government-sanctioned rape. However, those who believe that this is the best reason that lawmakers can come up with in support of ultrasound legislation have clearly not done their research. There is no "negative" in requiring both that ultrasounds be done before an abortion, and that the mother should be allowed to see the ultrasound should she ask. It ensures both safety and informed consent. See my rant about informed consent here. See a pro-choicer's take on the rhetoric surrounding ultrasound legislation here (to quote a key paragraph: "I have considerable concerns about what calling these ultrasounds 'rape' and 'unnecessary' will mean for abortion patients and providers. The reality is that most abortion patients do receive an ultrasound to date their pregnancies [...] the transvaginal ultrasound is a useful and common tool that helps providers perform abortions safely and well."). See this article from the Ottawa Citizen about a women who had just undergone an abortion (another key quote: "Anna asked what the fetus looked like and could she see the ultrasound. She said, 'The technician told me she was not allowed to show me the images and I was unable to see the screen' [...] Bu that's exactly what Anna did want."). In my opinion, the main reason that pro-abortion leaders galvanize pro-choicers against this type of legislation is that the majority of mothers who view their unborn child in an ultrasound decide to keep their baby. Who cares about informed consent or safety when women are deciding to keep their children?

"The agenda of Planned Parenthood includes sexualizing young girls through the Girl Scouts." - Reb. Bob Morris

Well, the connection between Planned Parenthood and the Girl Scouts is pretty well-established. Whether they are sexualizing young girls or not really depends on your opinion of what constitutes appropriate sexual health. But this article from Secular Pro-Life is a great spring-board to do some research on the issue - you can go through the comments to find tonnes of links to more information, including the "Healthy, Happy, and Hot" PP brochure that has apparently been handed out at several GS events. Either way, from the controversy surrounding the PP and GS connection, its easy to see why Rep. Bob Morris said what he said.

"The vast majority of abortions are matters of lifestyle convenience." -VA State Del. Tod Gilbert

This one makes me laugh, because it is, quite frankly, very true. Just take a look at this table from the Guttmacher Institute on reasons why women seek abortions. Or you can read through this blog post which summarizes the stats. The most common reason women choose abortions (in both 1987 and 2004)? They aren't ready for a(nother) child. If that's not a matter of lifestyle convenience, I don't know what is.

 "A woman impregnated through rape should accept that horribly-created gift, the gift of human life. Accept what God has given you and make the best of a bad situation." -Rick Santorum

Frankly, I'm sick of the "rape" card. It is incredibly hateful. It trivializes the experiences of all those who have been raped, and it hurts those children who were conceived and born through rape. To really put a face to the issue, go here and read about Rebecca Kiessling, an attorney and pro-life speaker who was conceived through rape. Here is a quick excerpt of what she has to say: "Please understand that whenever you identify yourself as being 'pro-choice,' or whenever you make that exception for rape, what that really translates into is you being able to stand before me, look me in the eye, and say to me, 'I think your mother should have been able to abort you' [...] 'If I had my way, you'd be dead right now.'" I doubt that the lady quoting Rick Santorum could walk up to Rebecca and say that to her face, and yet, by the insinuation that pro-lifers are at war against women because we believe that those conceived through rape are just as worthy of life and love as those conceived through consensual sex, that is exactly what she is saying.

"Why should the government force you to insure for contraceptives. Are they going to have us have to insure for toothpaste? I mean, this is ridiculous." -Rudy Giuliani

Yup, I agree. And the issue isn't insuring for contraceptives, its being forced to. If you want to read some Catholic's perspectives, go here, and especially go to the Patheos blog Bad Catholic. Marc is pretty hilarious and does a decent job demonstrating why religious institutions understand the contraceptive mandate to be a war against religious freedom and not a women's issue. You can start with his first post, and go from there.

"If we're going to pay for you to have contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want you to post the videos online, so we can all watch." -Rush Limbaugh

Ah, the infamous remarks from Rush Limbaugh, which I believe he has since apologized for. Good for him, and good for the media for pressuring him to apologize for saying such things. Woot! Looks like we're a culture that won't take mysoginist crap from anybody, right? Oh wait.

And to summarize the point of this passionate little video:

"The GOP must have a serious problem with women."

Well, two can play that game. Read over the last link I posted from Michelle Malkin. The point she makes, and something that should be obvious to anyone that does not have an agenda, is that the mainstream left has an equally bad, if not worse, track record in their treatment of women from the opposition. To quote, "Self-serving opponents argue that such attacks to not represent 'respectable,' 'mainstream' liberal opinion about their conservative female counterparts. But it was feminist godmother Gloria Steinem who called Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison a "female impersonator." It was NOW leader Patricia Ireland who commanded her flock to only vote for "authentic" female political candidates." ..." etc. Reading through the entire article, it becomes obvious that this so-called "war on women" is being fought on both sides of the US political spectrum. So is the issue really Republican vs. Democrat? Or is it a political culture that focuses only on snappy rhetoric, shallow scandals, and orchestrated controversy?

I think the answer is quite obvious.

Liberals include abortion as part of their platform

Well, looks like I have no party to vote for any more. LifeSiteNews explains how the liberal party has decided to include abortion as a key strategy in their rebuilding process, after the fiasco that was the last federal election. Well, definitely never voting for them again.

Interesting side note: they also decided to support the legalization of marijuana. I have no opinion on pot being legal or illegal because I just don't really care, as long as its kept away from kids, but this is sure to get a lot of my peers to vote liberal.