This Is "Pro-Life"
Anti-abortion extremists behaving badly
-
Classy, Stanek. Real classy.
(via @kushielsmoon)
-
On Monday Lifenews.com published an (unsurprisingly biased) article about a Florida woman who was taken to the hospital via ambulance from a Planned Parenthood clinic. The anti-abortion “reporter” made two giant leaps to unsubstantiated conclusions: that the woman had probably been having an abortion, and that the abortion was probably “botched.” This despite the author’s admission that he had no evidence to support these claims.
Ever the beacon of responsible journalism, yesterday Foxnews.com covered the story, adding no new information and linking to the LifeNews piece.
Maybe this lack of journalistic integrity shouldn’t come as a surprise, but I was under the impression that Fox News, as a quasi-mainstream news outlet, had marginally higher reporting standards (i.e. facts=good, speculation=bad) than the “news” arms of right-wing advocacy organizations. I guess at this point there is truly no difference between the two.
-
This conversation with a deranged anti is a long but worthwhile read. Highlights include astonishing ignorance about ectopic pregnancy, a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution and the charming invocation of the term “Mongoloidism” in reference to Down syndrome.
From Ramblings from This Side of Sanity: A Conversation with a Pro-Life (Anti-Choice) Activist
-
Jill Stanek admits that she thinks lying to pregnant women to prevent abortions is totally justified and definitely not a sin.
From RH Reality Check: Lying to save lives
-
Another one for the “pro-life” hall of fame: an Arizona nun was excommunicated and demoted from her hospital administrator position for the crime of saving a pregnant woman’s life via abortion.
Sister Margaret McBride was part of an emergency ethics committee meeting called to discuss saving a pregnant woman with pulmonary hypertension. The Sister agreed with the committee’s decision to allow the 11-week fetus to be aborted in order to prevent the patient’s “nearly certain” death.
She was automatically excommunicated and moved to another position at the hospital.
Evidently the church would rather both the woman AND the fetus had died. “Pro-life” indeed.
From IrishCentral: Irish nun excommunicated after abortion to save mother decision
-
“The risk of death when a pregnancy is continued to birth is about 12 times as great as the risk of death from induced abortion.”
-An Overview of Abortion in the United States (page 19)
(Updated to quote a more relevant statistic from the same source.)
-
Protesting at a Crisis Pregnancy Center is a much different experience than protesting at a women’s clinic. This list chronicles the myriad ways pro-choicers take anti-abortion protesters to school when it comes to manners.
From The CPC Watcher: Protesting CPCs vs. Protesting Clinics
-
I saw a comment from crustyriotgrrl about the whole “pro-life” versus “anti-choice” terminology thing, and I wanted to explain how I see it.
First of all, the title of the blog has “pro-life” in quotation marks for a reason. It’s meant as commentary on the hypocrisy of calling yourself pro-life and then acting in ways that don’t seem all that pro-life. Read it more as “so-called pro-life.”
Secondly, I generally try to stay away from the term “anti-choice.” This may be naive of me, but I hope that perhaps if I don’t call them anti-choice, maybe they won’t call me anti-life or pro-death or whatever other nonsense euphemisms they can dream up. Kind of a do-unto-others Golden Rule thing. I find that using neutral language helps keep the conversation calm and reminds everyone to use their inside voices.
So that’s why I usually default to “anti-abortion.” But that’s just a personal preference; I certainly don’t fault pro-choicers who do use the term “anti-choice.”
-
Anti-abortion hypocrisy: why is it always the people railing against big government who insist on forcing government into people’s private lives and medical decisions?
It’s already the law of the land in Oklahoma that women seeking abortions must be offered ultrasounds, but now the hard-line antis want to take away the woman’s right to say “yes” or “no.”
From USA Today: Ultrasound mandates in abortions cross a line
