Women on Waves gets graphic

I've written previously about the online peddler of the RU-486 abortion cocktail, Women on Waves. WoW specializes in selling medical abortion pills to pregnant mothers in countries where abortions are illegal.

Reader Martha kindly emailed me the link today, unaware I was already aware. So I thought I'd check out the site for anything new and spotted this (click to enlarge)...

Women on Waves, abortion 2.png

I thought, what the heck is that a picture of? Here's the enlargement...

Women on Waves, abortion 3.jpg

At 1st glance you'd think the photo is PG porn. But this is an abortion website. I can only deduce it is supposed to be showing an aborting mother in trouble... or dying... or dead? Or is she in pain and being comforted? Because mothers cramp when undergoing the RU-486 regimen. I don't know. Thoughts?

I also spotted this, although I won't post it because it's a tad too suggestive. But what is the message here, mothers who are abort are easy? It reminds me of that pro-abort sign from the March for Life, "Won't get laid without Roe v. Wade."


Comments:

extremely disturbing.

Posted by: Kristi at January 26, 2010 5:27 PM


"People needed."

No qualifications listed, nothing. Just "people needed".

Why would anyone trust these people?

Posted by: Janet at January 26, 2010 5:30 PM


I'm going to go with "in trouble." There's no need to disrobe the upper body for an RU-486 abortion, unless perhaps she's hemorrhaging...

Posted by: Kelsey at January 26, 2010 5:31 PM


THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS! I really like your blog!!

Common Cents
http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com

ps. Link Exchange?

Posted by: Steve at January 26, 2010 5:46 PM


That is a strange picture to post. Hmm. I wondered if it was supposed to be a grateful woman hugging the WoW volunteers or something.

I can't tell if the woman is wearing a shirt or not, but if you look at the bottom right of her upper body, it appears she may be wearing something that is bluish-green in color. A halter or swimsuit top, maybe?

Posted by: Kel at January 26, 2010 6:17 PM


If you look real close you can see what looks like the top edge of her tube top on the lower right of her back.

Who knows, maybe they just experienced a group 'obamasm', but it was probably just a group hug/grope to celebrate choicing her child.

You see atheletes do it all the time when they make the big score.

Fist bumps, chest bumps and high fives!

Hi! my name is ---- and I killed my kid.

Maybe they are starting a new 12 step program for post abortive women and men.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 26, 2010 6:25 PM


So do you kind folks support providing contraception to people in developing countries to help women control their fertility? Or programs that support third world women who do become mothers?

I like both Women on Waves pictures. They're provocative. And, oh, the girl in the second photograph is wearing a see-through dress! Shocking! It certainly is time to break the silence around abortion. Having an abortion can be a huge event in a woman's reproductive history, and she shouldn't be ashamed to talk about it (however she feels about the decision).

Posted by: Megan at January 26, 2010 6:35 PM


Sure Megan, but after looking at the "I had an abortion" section, the attitude about sharing one's abortion story and not being ashamed seems to be "...but you first." So few actual picture of women when the website is openly and actively encouraging these women to share photos of themselves and their stories to help other women who might be feeling ashamed. I wonder why?!

They aren't fooling themselves-not really-and you're not fooling anyone here, either. The reason there is shame associated with abortion is because it is a natural and healthy reaction to feel ashamed about harming another human being, especially one's children. Good luck breaking that taboo, honey.

Posted by: xalisae at January 26, 2010 6:41 PM


And, if you can find me an institution that provides ONLY CONTRACEPTIVE SERVICES to women in developing countries AND NOT ABORTION SERVICES ALSO/PRIMARILY, I will support them.

Posted by: xalisae at January 26, 2010 6:43 PM


http://www.womenonweb.org/listpublish-162-en.html

Some pictures, some testimonials. Some feel regret, relief, shame, confidence, happiness, sadness, etc. A range of emotions depending on the individual woman. Nobody's trying to "fool anybody" here, and I think it's patronizing of you to dictate how women "ought" to feel.

Define "natural reaction," please. One time we thought rape was a "natural" expression of "natural" male sexual aggression. Some time ago it would have been considered "natural" for you to never receive an education or learn how to spew self-righteousness in the blogosphere. "Natural" is a relative term depending on historical context. So you can despise abortion, but please don't preach about emotional propriety.

Posted by: Megan at January 26, 2010 6:58 PM


Umm... this is a bit of a stretch, dont you think? Graphic?

She's obviously wearing a halter top ... and hugging someone.

To try to read any further in to that is just comical.

Posted by: Shep at January 26, 2010 7:05 PM


I'll take a stab at it.

She's in the process of pushing out her unwanted blob, has to hold on to the other chick for support during the process, and all this in a luxurious, yacht-like atmosphere on the high seas.

Posted by: carder at January 26, 2010 7:05 PM


Megan,
Would you wear that dress? There are quite a few post abortive women that have come here to say how proud they are about their abortions but darned if they can get that Abortion Pride movement going....

Pretty sure that when I hold my I Regret My Abortion sign that people understand I had one. Kinda goes without saying, ya know?

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 26, 2010 7:08 PM


Posted by: Megan at January 26, 2010 6:58 PM
-------

So Megan - here's a hypothetical: if a man was feeling like he wanted to kill the woman who aborted his child, would you encourage him to share that too?

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 26, 2010 7:08 PM


Dear Megan, How blinded you are to the truth - some day all that chose abortion will meet their baby (babies). I believe this - every single *fetus* is a unique creation of God (whether you believe or not - someone does not exist whether we do or not...) You may schluff it (the abortion) off like it's a pulled tooth, but one day we will all answer. I hope no one ever treats people who choose abortion the way they have their babies. God give you peace, he offers forgiveness.

What a sad sad group of women - offering SO little to pregnant women. Pulling into port, helping them kill a living being - and going on their way. Where is the counsel, healing, mercy -- only death on their waves...

Posted by: eko at January 26, 2010 7:16 PM


"Won't get laid without Roe v. Wade."

The cold showers are coming!

Posted by: Gerard Nadal at January 26, 2010 7:18 PM


"I also spotted this, although I won't post it because it's a tad too suggestive. But what is the message here, mothers who are abort are easy?"

Jill,

I think it's supposed to be the answer to Silent No More. It's also an attempt to wed the ugliness of abortion with softness and femininity. Sex sells.

Posted by: Gerard Nadal at January 26, 2010 7:21 PM


www.wmm.com/filmCatalog/pages/c693.shtml
community.feministing.com/2009/05/i-had-an-abortion-and-i-dont-r.html

"So Megan - here's a hypothetical: if a man was feeling like he wanted to kill the woman who aborted his child, would you encourage him to share that too?"

Sure!

Posted by: Megan at January 26, 2010 7:39 PM


Link to all the I Don't Regret my Abortion stories that you want Megan. Please communicate to me how a child did not die in each one of those abortions.

What's your point?

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 26, 2010 7:44 PM


"...I think it's patronizing of you to dictate how women "ought" to feel."

Hey Megan, you dolt, they are saying themselves that women ought not to feel ashamed after their abortion. They are trying to get people to share their abortion stories so that women will not feel ashamed. THAT IS ATTEMPTING TO DICTATE HOW WOMEN OUGHT OR OUGHT NOT TO FEEL.

Aaaand, that was what I was alluding to when I said I had looked around and found very few pictures of the actual women involved when they were trying to get the women involved to take pictures of themselves to say "Hey, I'm not ashamed!" Once again: I wonder why?

And, I suppose I'm going to have to concede that second point to you. Folks like Dahmer and Gacy were only doing what came naturally to them, too, I guess. How terribly prudish of society to try and impose a sense of their behavior being wrong on them.

(Although, I do find you using rape as an example in contrast to abortion absolutely hilariously ironic, considering how similar those two actions are!)

Posted by: xalisae at January 26, 2010 7:53 PM


"People Needed"

This solicitation is ironic coming from an organization that encourages mothers to kill the people growing inside of them. You would think that they would not see much "need" for people...


Posted by: Andrea at January 26, 2010 7:55 PM


And I'm still waiting on that contraception-only charity that helps poor people. I guess it's just not fun for the ribbon-wearing crowd unless they're actually putting the dirty dregs to death.

Posted by: xalisae at January 26, 2010 7:58 PM


Megan:

Do you have any idea of what personal holiness is?

Did you know that God requires personal holiness as part of fellowship with Him?

Did you know that if we regard inequity in our hearts that God does not hear us.

Do you think God changes as the time and fashion change? If so why would He?

Do you know who the author and definer of truth is?

Is truth relative and if so, should my relative truth ever impose on your relative truth? If the answer is yes, then why are there laws prohibiting theft, murder, etc.

What laws of nature do you find to be relative?

Would you fly in an airplane if you believed that the law of gravity was relative and the laws of aerodynamics, thermodynamics, fluid flow, heat transfer, strength of materials, magnetism, and electrical current flow were all relative, i.e., they changed based on whim and feeling?

Here's a clue for you:

"Romans 1:18-25

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen."

Posted by: Phil Schembri HisMan at January 26, 2010 8:01 PM


I'd be all for teaching third world countries Natural Family Planning so the women can learn the natural signs of fertility and space their children without any side effects like blood clots or heart problems or cancer.

Women On Waves: SICK SICK SICK (the org, not the picture)

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 26, 2010 8:02 PM


Megan, Your arguments are so week, I could drive a grayhound bus through them! RJ

Posted by: RJ Sandefur at January 26, 2010 8:32 PM


Megan, I recommend you read an article, written by a peer, "Condoms Won't Fix This"

Kids in developing nations are still dying for lack of basic antibiotics and oral rehydration therapy -- not to mention potable water and basic sanitation.

Which is why I want to throttle people whose solution to poverty is to just throw condoms, Pills, and cheap abortions at people. It's adding insult to injury when people are helplessly watching their children die from preventable and treatable diseases, and the rich people "help" them by trying to spay and neuter them like so many stray cats. We don't need Poverty Pimps going in and throwing abortion and contraception at people whose dream is to have a few children who survive to adulthood (and this is why they have so many children, because many won't survive). They need a chance of survival for their children, not a way to keep them from ever drawing breath in the first place.

You can go to Mercy Ships and underwrite the cost of a well and sanitation so a village can have safe water to drink, or contribute toward a community health clinic that can treat the infections that needlessly end so many young lives. World Vision also provides potable water and basic medical care. Both these organizations get the highest ratings from Charity Navigator, meaning that money given to them is used effectively to reach the target recipients, and isn't sucked up in salaries for administrators, fund-raisers, and so forth

Posted by: Rachael C. at January 26, 2010 8:40 PM


I fail to understand where women like Megan are coming from. Where do they get their standard of truth? Do they know how to argue? What would convince them they are wrong?

Posted by: Mark at January 26, 2010 9:18 PM


I would also venture to say that the "women" who DONT regret their abortions, have:
1- had repeat abortions because it is used as a form of birth control
2-Many of them are sadly lost in their own disfunctional world/lifestyle
3-many of them never had abortions to begin with


Most women who have had abortions and I would definately say the MAJOR majority are silent and dont speak about it either way until something profound strikes them internally and they put it all together.

Posted by: Yvonne at January 26, 2010 9:34 PM


Shame's an affect arising from violation of social mores. Guilt is violation of one's internal belief system. They're different--shame has more of a social dimension.

Oh, and Rachael: duh. Nobody's saying abortion is a panacea, and I've never said I agree with web waves or whatever's mission statement. If you've read my prior posts, you'll see that I advocate a comprehensive kind of reproductive rights--including having a safe environment in which to raise kids, economic security, gender equality, and adequate medical care--which includes access to safe and legal abortion.

Posted by: Megan at January 26, 2010 9:50 PM


I had an abortion 11 years ago, I've never regretted it for a second.

I think its pretty much common sense at this point that for every story of regret, theres another story of zero regret - and vis versa. Its a pretty stupid argument both for AND against legal abortion.

Posted by: Shep at January 26, 2010 9:57 PM


And funny how so many of the women who have abortions and "don't regret it" manage to find their way here and tell us all every day how much they don't regret it. I mean, usually if they come here, they've had some sort of abortion experience-we don't even have to ask anymore. Sometimes I wonder who they're trying to convince.

Posted by: xalisae at January 26, 2010 10:01 PM


Shep:

Self-deception is the ultimate tragedy.

You regret your abortionm you just don't know it yet.

Posted by: Phil Schembri HisMan at January 26, 2010 10:38 PM


Two words come to mind: Creepy and Bizarre!

Posted by: Abortion Support at January 26, 2010 11:27 PM


" I had an abortion" dress followed with the "I had chlamydia" mini skirt and the "I had a pelvic infection" cocktail dress. I mean, if you're gonna live the lifestyle OWN it, ya know?

Posted by: Sydney M. at January 27, 2010 12:02 AM


Ah yes, posting on Jivin' Jill Stanek's Pro-life Powwow is actually a therapeutic exercise. My post-abortion counselor referred me here, right before I went in to get my mammogram. We (the post-aborts!) are here for the same reason as you: to effect some kind of change, hopefully along the side of individual freedom and (sensible) human rights.

Oh, and rape is totally similar to abortion. Absolutely. God, somebody just went in there without my permission and sucked the embryo out. What a disgusting, terribly ignorant comparison. Your daughter has a fine example to learn from. Even if I do have some growing to do, at least I didn't drag a child into this world to endure it firsthand.

Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 12:07 AM


I bought my "Overbearing and Bored Soccer Mom" dress, but I don't think I'll be pulling that out of my bag before age 35.

Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 12:09 AM


Megan, your daughter doesn't have an example to learn from cause she's DEAD. You didn't drag a child into this world, you allowed the abortionist to drag that child into a metal pan.

I guess you're attacking X. You might think we're all bad parents, but there is no act of child abuse more than KILLING your child. That is the ultimate form of abuse towards a child. And you so proudly did that. Congratulations. Then you have the nerve to attack other parents. huh.

Please don't pull the "overbearing and bored soccer mom dress" out of your bag till you're 35. I hope you can still wear it someday. You may find you've killed the only gift God will ever grant you.

Posted by: Sydney M. at January 27, 2010 12:18 AM


Posted by: Shep at January 26, 2010 9:57 PM


"I had an abortion 11 years ago, I've never regretted it for a second."

----------------------------------------------------

I killed several million Jews and never regretted it for minute.

Adolph Hitler


My best friend ran off with my dog and my wife.

I'm gonna miss that dog, but I regret not killing my wife and my backstabbing ex-friend.

Joe Six Pack


I engineerd the murder of 3,000 infidels, but I don't regret it one bit.

Kahlid Sheik Mohamad

Shep,

You are running with some pretty nasty folks.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 27, 2010 12:28 AM


"Oh, and rape is totally similar to abortion. Absolutely. God, somebody just went in there without my permission and sucked the embryo out. What a disgusting, terribly ignorant comparison."

What a disgusting, ignorant statement. Abortion is not just similar to rape, it is worse. In rape, the weak victim usually lives - not so with abortion.

Wow, Megan, you are becoming a premier exhibit of why abortion screws up women. Your ability to think clearly on the subject has gone.

Posted by: Mark at January 27, 2010 12:28 AM


Posted by: Megan at January 26, 2010 6:35 PM


"Having an abortion can be a huge event in a woman's reproductive history, and she shouldn't be ashamed to talk about it (however she feels about the decision)."

----------------------------------------------------

Ranks right up there with breast cancer, cervicval cancer, a tubal pregnancy and/or a hysterectomy.

But there is no guilt or shame associated with any of those other diseases or surgeries.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 27, 2010 12:35 AM


"My post-abortion counselor referred me here, right before I went in to get my mammogram. "

Megan,
I'm curious as to why you are getting mammograms at such an early age.

Posted by: Janet at January 27, 2010 12:39 AM


So do you kind folks support providing contraception to people in developing countries to help women control their fertility?

No.

Or programs that support third world women who do become mothers?

No.

Posted by: Louise at January 27, 2010 2:18 AM


She's obviously wearing a halter top ... and hugging someone.

Actually, it's by no means obvious and the picture is therefore unclear in its meaning/relevance.

Posted by: Louise at January 27, 2010 2:21 AM


That previous post was meant to have the first bit in italics.

Which is why I want to throttle people whose solution to poverty is to just throw condoms, Pills, and cheap abortions at people. It's adding insult to injury when people are helplessly watching their children die from preventable and treatable diseases, and the rich people "help" them by trying to spay and neuter them like so many stray cats.

Rachael, the pro-choicers are the new Marie Antoinettes: "Let them wear condoms!"

Posted by: Louise at January 27, 2010 2:57 AM


We (the post-aborts!) are here for the same reason as you: to effect some kind of change, hopefully along the side of individual freedom and (sensible) human rights.

Yeah, except that having your own child tortured to death in the womb is not a human right. The right to be born, once conceived, is a human right.

Posted by: Louise at January 27, 2010 3:03 AM


I wonder WHY they directed you here, Megan? Maybe in hopes you would come across someone like Carla and actually listen to her so that you can get some REAL help? And why is it that you're getting a mammogram so early on in life? That's odd, don't you think?

"Oh, and rape is totally similar to abortion. Absolutely. God, somebody just went in there without my permission and sucked the embryo out. What a disgusting, terribly ignorant comparison. Your daughter has a fine example to learn from. Even if I do have some growing to do, at least I didn't drag a child into this world to endure it firsthand."

Rape IS a totally similar experience. If you were able to get your head out of your own ass for a moment and think about the world from your child's perspective (yes, Megan, people other than yourself DO exist in this world, imagine that!), you might have seen the similarity between someone forcefully invading your body to have their way with it and you paying someone to forcefully invade your child's body and dismember it for you to have your way with it. Ironic once again that you would call it "a disgusting, terribly ignorant comparison", for you are a disgusting, terribly ignorant person. I suppose I just thought it would be apropos for you.

I hope my daughter DOES learn from my example: lesson 1: Do not harm other people, and protect and care for those you are expected to protect and care for, at all costs.

I'm afraid your child will not be learning anything from you, since you had yours killed before "dragging" him or her into this world. I suppose the only thing your child would've learned from you is that you are heartless, uncaring.

Posted by: xalisae at January 27, 2010 3:16 AM


Even if I do have some growing to do, at least I didn't drag a child into this world to endure it firsthand.
Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 12:07 AM

cool response M.

too bad you see the world as something to be endured....
no matter how you portray it, you will always be the mother...

.... of a dead child

Posted by: angel at January 27, 2010 5:24 AM



Define "natural reaction," please. One time we thought rape was a "natural" expression of "natural" male sexual aggression. Some time ago it would have been considered "natural" for you to never receive an education or learn how to spew self-righteousness in the blogosphere. "Natural" is a relative term depending on historical context. So you can despise abortion, but please don't preach about emotional propriety.

Posted by: Megan at January 26, 2010 6:58 PM

There is likely a genetic basis to what is "natural". Some people are naturally aggressive, while others are naturally compassionate. Psychological characteristics are inherited just like physical characteristics. Environmental factors can influence but not eliminate natural tendencies.

Posted by: hippie at January 27, 2010 6:03 AM


Megan, the whole "break the silence" campaign is an ADVERTISING campaign. Abortion numbers are down. For-profit clinics are hurting. They need more customers. And "Everybody else is doing it" is a powerful marketing tool.

Nancy Howell Lee's research into illegal abortions (back in the 1960s found that the single greatest predictor of whether or not a woman would seek an abortionist wasn't her marital status, income, or number of other children. It was her perception of what her peers would do in a similar circumstance. Any sociologist will tell you that people will engage in an act more if they perceive it as socially normative in their peer group.

This isn't a "remove the shame" to make women who have aborted feel empowered. It's to convince other women that this is the appropriate way to deal with their own problems. To drum up business for abortion mills.

Posted by: Christina at January 27, 2010 6:48 AM


This isn't a "remove the shame" to make women who have aborted feel empowered. It's to convince other women that this is the appropriate way to deal with their own problems. To drum up business for abortion mills.

Posted by: Christina at January 27, 2010 6:48 AM


Some have noted that abortion is most prevalent among those of a certain intelligence range. That is people smart enough to conform to social pressure to get to the clinic and make a decision but not smart enough or confident enough to do better. Some observers of sociology have noted that this tends to decrease the numbers of people in the midrange of intelligence which increases social stratification. Some think this may contribute to higher incarceration rates as society maintains certain standards but fewer are able to keep them of their own volition.

Posted by: hippie at January 27, 2010 7:14 AM


This isn't a "remove the shame" to make women who have aborted feel empowered. It's to convince other women that this is the appropriate way to deal with their own problems. To drum up business for abortion mills.
Posted by: Christina at January 27, 2010 6:48 AM
___________________________________________________
Exactly. They want 'repeat customers', after all.

Posted by: Pamela at January 27, 2010 7:17 AM


Posted by: Christina at January 27, 2010 6:48 AM
-----

Right. Victimization is a profitable enterprise. Follow the money.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at January 27, 2010 7:37 AM


I find it funny that the picture with the woman in the dress has wording under it that says SHOW YOUR FACE. The woman in the picture isnt showing her face, how stupid is that?

Sorry for the caps - my quote/apostrophe key doesnt work. :(

Posted by: Kristen at January 27, 2010 8:13 AM


Megan wrote, in response to Chris A.:

[Chris A.]
"So Megan - here's a hypothetical: if a man was feeling like he wanted to kill the woman who aborted his child, would you encourage him to share that too?"

[Megan]
Sure!

Um... Megan, you've just removed all doubt as to your "troll" status. This is beyond bizarre.

Posted by: Paladin at January 27, 2010 8:13 AM


Megan,
Do you mean a post abortion counselor from the abortion clinic? Or are you seeing a post abortion counselor because you are struggling? Please clarify. Or ignore me. Whichever suits your fancy.

What you don't seem to be getting is that each and every one of us here is trying to get you to see what you do not want to see or acknowledge. We all reach out to you and other post abortive moms in whatever way feels comfortable for us. Stats, facts, experience, wisdom, knowledge, spiritual guidance. The fact of the matter is we are all trying to reach you. I often wonder what the abortion clinic would have done if I had called 7 years later and told them I was feeling depressed over my abortion. That I was having nightmares and drinking like a fish. Hmmmmm...what would they have said?

Anyway, I know what you are feeling as I have been there too. I have been through every range of emotions that a woman feels after abortion. Nobody had to tell me to feel or not feel ashamed. There it was. Shame. I only told 2 people before my abortion and NOBODY after. No one was there to tell me what to feel but feel it I did!!! Pretty textbook actually.

If in the coming weeks, months or years you need someone to talk to I am here. I will continue to be here for you and anyone else who is reading but not commenting. And YES I do get quite a few emails from women who pour their hearts out in emails about their abortions. I have walked the journey, I have done the hard work, I have grieved and healed and grieved some more. Now I am ready and willing to help anyone who is struggling. carla@jillstanek.com

If you need a more confidential mode of reaching out here is the National Helpline for Abortion Recovery. 1-866-482-LIFE

Take care, Megs.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 27, 2010 8:45 AM


Megan's posts depress me more than any others I see on this site.

She is in serious need of prayer. I'll be adding her to my prayer list.

Megan, I would suggest that you not participate in sexual activity until you are ready to welcome a child into your life. "If you don't want to go to Cincinatti, don't get on the train" the old saying goes. It is not fair that an innocent child should suffer for your poor judgment.

Posted by: Nerina at January 27, 2010 11:06 AM


"at least I didn't drag a child into this world to endure it firsthand.
Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 12:07 AM"
---------------------------------------------

Hmmm....methinks Megan is taking Obama's "punished with a baby" too seriously...

Posted by: RSD at January 27, 2010 11:48 AM


Clearly y'all missed the sarcasm. The only post-abortion counselor I've really needed is my mom, and she's been totally supportive. Call her ruthless and heartless (I'd actually prefer that trope to the "delusional weepy post-abort"), but she also thinks it's completely nonsensical to privilege a fetus' interests (ie, its "right to life") over its mothers', regardless of the circumstances.

Also, there is no such thing as an "abortion mill." Maybe you should have called the folks who performed your abortion, Carla. They might have been more willing to talk to you than you think (and yes, I was referred to counseling services should I have needed it). The last I checked, PP provides other services besides abortion (and then, many sites only perform abortions once a week), like contraception, sex ed and fertility counseling. Dr. Tiller certainly gained notoriety for his job, but he, like other abortion providers, are first and foremost OB/GYNS. "Abortionists" are also obstetricians.

Posted by: megan at January 27, 2010 11:50 AM


Dr. Tiller certainly gained notoriety for his job, but he, like other abortion providers, are first and foremost OB/GYNS. "Abortionists" are also obstetricians.
******************************

Yeah, and the Nazis were just family physicians...

Last I checked, my OBGYN didn't make her living by doing late-term abortions daily. Neither do any other reputable OBs. Abortionists are the bottom feeders of the industry.

I wonder...how many living children did Tiller deliver into the happy arms of their mothers? He was not just like every OBGYN. What an insult to the profession.

Posted by: Kelli Author Profile Page at January 27, 2010 11:58 AM


"Hmmm....methinks Megan is taking Obama's "punished with a baby" too seriously..."

Hm. Unsanctioned, out-of-wedlock pregnancy has, historically, been a sign of shame and punishment. It was once (and to a certain degree, still is) a visible marker of illicit female sexuality. Also, if a woman doesn't want a baby, being forced to have one (take "forced" any way you will) IS a kind of punishment. Beyond the physical difficulties of a pregnancy, the woman herself is responsible for ensuring the well-being of a child, whether this means raising it herself or finding somebody else to do it for her. But being pro-choice, I'm sure you think I'd advocate for leaving unwanted infants in trash cans...no. Unlike you, I'm concerned with children who have been born, not solely embryos.

Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 11:59 AM


Megan,
Maybe I should have called. Should have. Didn't.

And off Megan goes on a hundred different bunny trails....

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 27, 2010 12:04 PM


No, I'm not digressing. You're making assumptions about what your abortion provider would or wouldn't have done. I'm providing possible scenarios.

Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 12:15 PM


Megan says "Dr. Tiller certainly gained notoriety for his job, but he, like other abortion providers, are first and foremost OB/GYNS. "Abortionists" are also obstetricians."

Megan, this simply isn't true. There is no association governing abortionists. A general practitioner can be an abortionist. So can a podiatrist or an ENT. I believe Tiller was actually trained as a dermatologist.

While OB/GYN's can perform abortions, you are sadly mistaken that all, or even most, abortionists are ob/gyns.

Posted by: Lauren at January 27, 2010 12:19 PM


"Also, if a woman doesn't want a baby, being forced to have one (take "forced" any way you will) IS a kind of punishment"
---------------------------------------

I wonder, did anybody force you to have sex?

I don't hear any of the abstinent women complaining they were forced to have a baby as a punishment for abstinence.

It's called responsibility for your actions..Grow up.

Posted by: RSD at January 27, 2010 12:29 PM


Please pardon my language from my last post, everyone.

But...someone tells me I'm a bad parent for not having my child killed...just...excuse me?

And, with your mother's attitude, I'm surprised she can manage to find the time for you, Megan. I mean, if her circumstances would've been a little different, she could've had YOU thrown in the incinerator just as easily as you've done to your child. When you call her one of these days, she might make the choice not to talk to you, because she's just too busy to deal with a child right now...

Posted by: xalisae at January 27, 2010 12:42 PM


Megan, if Carla has stated already repeatedly how uncaring and cruel her abortionist was to her, why on Earth would she think that calling them would do her any good if she were hurting emotionally afterward? Making a judgement about someone/something based on an established pattern of behavior is healthy and logical.

Posted by: xalisae at January 27, 2010 12:46 PM


"A general practitioner can be an abortionist."
---------------------------------------

Yup, you're right, Lauren. I have friends in the Medical community and they say that the ones who chose to go into the abortion industry are basically the ones who:

1) have no personal rapport with patients
2) are just in the business for the money
3) have no real desire to help people

These are considered outcasts of the medical profession.

Posted by: RSD at January 27, 2010 1:03 PM


Thank you, X. I won't hold my breath that Megan understood what you wrote but you never know...

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at January 27, 2010 1:12 PM


med students for choice:
www.medicalstudentsforchoice.org/index.php?page=about-us

physicians for reproductive choice and health:
www.prch.org/

Oh gosh, all those abortionists in podiatrist clothing. I'd venture there's probably more cash in foot surgery than a first-trimester abortion, but you never know what tricks those crooks are up to.

Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 4:12 PM


physicians for reproductive choice and health

Hm. You'll need to pick one or the other, I'd think, if by "choice" you mean "choose whether or not to kill your child". That doesn't do much for "health"...

Now, if you mean "choice" in the normal, non-murder-tolerant sense of "morally free to choose what shoes to wear, what soup to order, etc.", then I think you'd be safe...

Posted by: Paladin at January 27, 2010 4:19 PM


"med students for choice"
otherwise known as
'selfish academics not wanting to face their own sexual responsibility and suffering cognitive dissonance'

"physicians for reproductive choice and health"
otherwise known as
'tyrants with burned consciences making money tearing lives limb from limb'

Away with your 'choice' euphemism. The unborn never get a 'choice'.

Posted by: Mark at January 27, 2010 4:47 PM


Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 4:12 PM

"I'd venture there's probably more

cash

in foot surgery than a first-trimester abortion, but you never know what tricks those crooks are up to."

------------------------------------------------------

And, surprise, surprise, surprise, you would be wrong..............................again!

I can only venture some guesses as to why, but I am not guessing about there being more 'cash' in killin pre-natal children than treating bunions.

For whatever reason, 'baby killers' require pregnant women to pay in 'cash' before they render their services.

The exceptions are 'killing centers' like the ones operated by Planned Parenthood who qualify almost anyone who walks thru their doors for a 'government funded' procedure and they gouge the government, and by extension the taxpayer, by billing more services at higher fees than they do for people who pay with a check or credit card or use their insurance.

And oddly enough those 'cash receipts' often find their way into the local landfills and the cash finds it's way into the baby killlers pocket.

Hey muggers! If you are lookin for cowardly victims flush with CASH, then just go stake out the abortuaries in your community.

The abortionists are not likely to report the crime.

They don't want to do anything to bring themselves to the attention of the Internal Revenue Service.

There is one disadvantage.

You will probably have to wash the blood off the money before you can spend it.

There may also be a 'CURSE' attached to the money.

Check with your local priest/priestess, witch, wiccan, cujandera, shaman, bruja/brujo first.

The risks may outweigh the benefits.

Do your own analysis before you act.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 27, 2010 5:10 PM


Hmmm ... people needed huh? What as, workers or 'customers'?

As for that link you wouldn't post, I understand why. One look at the 'model' for the 'I had an Abortion' shirt, (did you notice too that it is in the style of what is called a 'wife-beater'?) it became obvious why she did; she's a slu... sorry, I get carried away at times.

Posted by: Bobby in TN at January 27, 2010 5:17 PM


Attention: Would be muggers contemplating robbing baby killers.

Be aware of the deathscorts.

They are very unpleasant people.

They are bitter and have very short fuses.

They carry video cameras and are likely to mistake you for a pro-lifer.

You maybe spat upon or verbally and even phyically abused.

You are likely to be accused of crime before you ever have the opportunity to make our move.

Maybe you and your moll could disguise yourselves as a pimp and his prostitute. I have it on good authority that baby killers are activekt seeking clients like them.

You may run into some really nice folks carrying signs and handing out pamphlets and praying on the sidewalk.

They probably have very little cash.

But if you find yourself in need of help you can rely on them to steer you in the right direction. They may even give you a lift or buy you lunch.

Just don't tell him you are there to rob the abortiontist.

They will just try to disuade you from taking that course of action.

Next thing you know they will have praying for the baby butchers salvation and if you are not careful you might just get saved yourself.

Happy hunting!

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 27, 2010 5:26 PM


um, women who pay in cash before an abortion are typically on medicaid (which doesn't cover the service) or, for privacy reasons, wouldn't want the procedure itemized on their private insurance bill. enough with the conspiracy theories. most doctors are "in it" for the money, at least in part, and OBs need to make higher salaries to offset the cost of malpractice protection: http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm

No, the unborn doesn't get a choice. Its mother does. Research Q: How many pregnancies in the US are unintended, and how many end in spontaneous abortion, i.e. miscarriage? You'll find the rates to be surprisingly high. Wouldn't it make sense, then, to enact public policy that treats all women of reproductive age as potential mothers? Should we start regulating women's diets and lifestyle choices to make their bodies more conducive to carrying pregnancies? What about mandating folate intake to prevent potential neural tube defects? Why not penalize women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome who get pregnant, considering these pregnancies have a high incidence of miscarriage? Why do we start worrying about the fetus before it's in peril, by virtue of living in a woman's body?

Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 8:29 PM


Because there is an obvious difference between possibly being in a position to become pregnant and actually BEING pregnant, Megan. Boy, you pro-abortionists really hate your science, don't you...

I'm sure you'd love to think that "oh, could be pregnant, might be pregnant, possibly pregnant, pregnant, and not pregnant" are all just too darn close to one another to make a heap of difference, but guess what, Megan: There is a HUGE difference between "PREGNANT" and any other state of being-the difference is the weight of an entire separate human life, and try as you might to disregard this fact now, the gravity of this fact will eventually come to you.

Posted by: xalisae at January 27, 2010 8:42 PM


"No, the unborn doesn't get a choice. Its mother does."

Let me paraphrase so we can see how sick the actual meaning of this statement is.

"No, the baby doesn't get to have any input into whether or not he or she is killed. His or her mother is the only deciding factor ultimately in the choice to have him or her put to death or not."

Posted by: xalisae at January 27, 2010 8:59 PM


"the difference is the weight of an entire separate human life"

and your point? why not penalize a pregnant woman who gives birth to a kid with a neural tube defect because she was a smoker before getting pregnant, or didn't take enough vitamins? pre-pregnancy lifestyle factors are important to a healthy pregnancy. why doesn't preparation matter?

Posted by: Megan at January 27, 2010 10:00 PM


Megan, read "Blood Money" by Carol Everett. She is a woman who had an abortion and then ran a chain of abortion clinics and got really rich doing that. She explains clearly in her book why most clinics are CASH ONLY and cash due before you have the abortion honey...and guess what? It has NOTHING to do with medicaid.

Posted by: Sydney M. at January 27, 2010 10:08 PM


why not penalize a pregnant woman who gives birth to a kid with a neural tube defect because she was a smoker before getting pregnant, or didn't take enough vitamins? pre-pregnancy lifestyle factors are important to a healthy pregnancy. why doesn't preparation matter?

Well, there's a big difference between a sick/disabled child and a dead one.

Posted by: Louise at January 28, 2010 12:53 AM


Megan wrote:

why not penalize a pregnant woman who gives birth to a kid with a neural tube defect because she was a smoker before getting pregnant, or didn't take enough vitamins? pre-pregnancy lifestyle factors are important to a healthy pregnancy. why doesn't preparation matter?

Are you serious?

1) Is there a difference between leaving a rake out for someone to trip over, and bashing someone's head in with that same rake?

2) Is there a difference between going off the road and hitting someone else because of lack of sleep, vs. deliberately running someone down?

Does the word "intent" ring a bell?

Posted by: Paladin at January 28, 2010 11:49 AM


Sure (and I'm also talking about miscarriage, not merely birth defect). But if a woman smokes and eats lots of processed foods, then gets pregnant and has a spontaneous abortion, shouldn't her lack of foresight be classified as some kind of criminal negligence?

Posted by: Megan at January 28, 2010 2:18 PM


Megan wrote:

Sure (and I'm also talking about miscarriage, not merely birth defect). But if a woman smokes and eats lots of processed foods, then gets pregnant and has a spontaneous abortion, shouldn't her lack of foresight be classified as some kind of criminal negligence?

Well... you're using the word "should", so I'll take that as a moral question (what is actually good or evil), rather than a legal question (what the government currently allows or forbids).

I think you can imagine how hard it would be to distinguish culpability, there:

Suppose I leave a peanut butter sandwich out in the open, at my workplace... and suppose someone with a violent peanut allergy happens to visit that place of work, catches a lungful of peanut dust, goes into anaphylactic shock, and dies en route to the hospital. Should I be punished for "criminal negligence"? I really don't think so... because, all other things being equal, I can't reasonably be expected to guard against the remote (though very real) possibility that someone with pertinent allergies might happen by.

Even more complicating is the fact that not everyone's allergies are that severe. I, for example, am allergic to peanuts, but not that severely; eating them simply disorients me for a short period of time (1-2 hours). If one of my co-workers accidentally drops a peanut into my lunch, and I accidentally eat it, should they be punished? Again, I don't think so; the remoteness of their responsibility, combined with the probable lack of severity of the possible reaction, make punishment unwarranted.

Now, let's take your case. For your analogy about vitamins to hold, you'd have to show that neglecting to take extra vitamins *guarantees* damage to the developing child; and that simply isn't the case. Yes, lack of vitamins raises the probability that something adverse might happen; but how would you balance the dozens of variables in this equation? Combine the average American's ignorance of vitamin importance (and good health/diet, in general) with the lack of certainty of any harm, and with the near-impossibility of determining the extent of willful neglect/ignorance, and you get a near-impossible mess, from which no reasonable person could expect to demand punishment.

(Your examples of smoking and drinking are closer to the mark; and I think there might well be some argument for punishing women who abuse tobacco and/or alcohol while pregnant. I don't envy the legislators the task of drafting such a law, though.)

How does this compare to abortion? Well... badly. There's really no reasonable doubt about the effects of a direct, procured abortion (such as can be gotten at Planned Parenthood, etc.) on the health of a child; it destroys health and life, with one blow, with almost 100% certainty... and it's ALWAYS INTENDED. Surely you see the difference?

I'm assuming you were trying to make pro-lifers look inconsistent (and therefore discredit our position) by their seeming willingness to punish abortion (which is directly chosen) and not spontaneous abortions (i.e. miscarriages) possibly brought about by some minor level of neglect. Apples and oranges, I'm afraid; morally, no one can be blamed for anything other than a free choice (whether that choice is to kill one's baby, pay someone else to kill one's baby, insist on binge-drinking after being warned of dangers to the unborn child, or even pooh-poohing warnings about smoking while pregnant).

That, ironically, is where your position falls apart and even defeats itself: unless a woman actually chooses an abortion (in keeping with so-called "pro-choice" ideas), she couldn't have been blamed for the murder in the first place, since she wouldn't have been responsible at all.

Posted by: Paladin at January 28, 2010 3:45 PM


You miss the point about 'choice" in the first place: Does she have the right to murder, EVER?
The answer is "No. Never."
The baby is a person and must be protected from murderous persons by the SAME rule of Law as those OUTSIDE the womb. Location, viability and size have no bearing on personhood.

Posted by: Patrick Burwell at January 29, 2010 12:47 PM