New WND column: “Coming to America: forensic vagina inspections?”
My WND column today focuses on a recent article in the New York Times, which attempted to connect the U.S. trend toward criminalizing various aspects of abortion to a Salvadorian ban on all abortions that includes prosecuting aborting mothers.
The reason for the NYTimes piece was clear: to frighten U.S. women that “forensic vagina inspectors,” as they are called in El Salvador, may soon come pounding on their doors.
But is there any correlation whatsoever? If not, how can American pro-lifers say abortion is murder but not wish to prosecute aborting women?
Read my column, “Coming to America: forensic vagina inspections,” today at WorldNetDaily.com.
[Photo courtesy of the NY Times.]
Apr.26, 2006 7:57 am |
Stanek columns |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I am pro-choice and I find this argument insane. Roe V. Wade would only keep this issue out of the federal government and leave it at the States to decide. How many times does it need to be said that Roe V. Wade did not legalize abortion, it forced abortion on soverign states.
Yes. I appreciate your honesty. The complaint by some that states like SD are out of line to pass an abortion ban forcing the Supremes to reanalyze Roe v. Wade is ludicrous. It was the Supremes who forced abortion on states like SD in the first place.
I am so glad you picked this topic–I was hoping (guessing) you would!
But Hitt finally located an imprisoned aborting mother in an “old, creaky [prison] facility that inspires the kind of dread that comes of seeing concertina wire and much-painted cinder blocks.
It turns out, however, this woman was actually convicted for aggravated homicide for strangling her pre-term baby, found under her bed. She told Hitt an interesting story of collapsing at home after doing absolutely nothing wrong and awakening mysteriously covered in blood. When she stood up, her second-trimester baby just fell out of her.
“I put my hand on its throat to see if it was moving,” she said, to explain why her fingerprints were found on her baby’s neck.
I don’t recall learning in nursing school to assess whether a patient can move by wrapping my hands around his neck, but it sounds like a strategy that would work.
LOL!
Being originally from North Dakota and only always having one place to obtain an abortion, I question the statement of pro-choicers that if Roe is overturned we will return to the dark back alleys to have our abortions.
Why have there not been an overwhelming number of young girls right now going to the back alleys for abortions, since it is difficult if not down right impossible to get to some of these clinics.? Pick your state where providers are scarce. It is a lie.
Keep up the great columns.
Hi Joe,
I’ve consistently run on the ethical tenant that somehow a consistent and logical position always takes precedent over my own … and therefore personal morality is meant to blend-in with this thought-pattern. I assume your stance towards what is ‘moral’ is similar.
If you are pro-choice (as you claim) do we pro-lifers offer some flawed reasoning that allows you to retain a pro-life stance? The only one that I can think of is the speedy (at times very fast) pro-choice stance vs the reflective pro-life stance. There is a strong impulse to shoot-first-and-ask-questions-LATER. Is this what is happening here?
John
First of all John I am only pro-choice because I know a girl who was raped by her father and she had a criminal background so the law would believer her. She went the police and didn’t do anything about it. She would have had the baby, but was afraid that her father would do something. She was put in this situation with out her consent. So she had the abortion and was forced to live two extra years of being her father’s play thing and was put on birth control by the dad. Nobody would help her except Planned Parenthood. In her situation I 100% understand why she did it and if I were a woman I would do the same. I support many restrictions to abortion, but now seeing her now and the dad got caught and is in jail now, that abortion saved her emotionally. She says it was the hardest but best decision she ever made. I happen to beleive the same.
Thanks Joe,
for the thoughts … hard decision when you are caught between a rock and a hard place … do hope you and she will continue to live a full life … your reasoning though does have a big flaw: and that is that somehow this baby was bad to even exist. That through some strange twist the baby was deemed to be as wretched as his/her father … but when a baby is ‘wanted’ then the baby is sacred. Are babies ‘wanted’ as targets or as gifts? Did PP help her … (maybe – short run) or hurt her in the long-run …. you’ll see, I guess.
John
I am not sayin that the baby was bad to even exist. I am saying that because the baby was conceived in such a horrible way and she was put in such a horrible situation it was the lesser of two evils to get the abortion.
Hi Joe,
geez, is this tough! guess I am a fundamental believer then in paceficism. There are not too many around who believe in this, these days. There is one basic tennant: that there is absolutely NO violent action that has any positive outcomes. There are corolaries to such a belief (and these spell the difference between this and queietism)… the major one being that the innocent are often called upon to absorb the impacts of violence without furthering the circle of violence.
The most renouned practitioner of this in the last century was Mahatma Ghandi. Too often people think of abortion as a solution, it hurts big time and continues to hurt … for generations. Its something like stepping out of the way of a moving car … into the path of a Mac truck.
Abortion is never-ever a ‘solution’ to anything.
John
Joe, 1:53p – I don’t doubt your sincerity, but your friend’s story smells funny. Were she a minor, the police or child protective services would have taken her seriously, no matter what her criminal past, particularly if she were pregnant. Pregnancy is evidence that a sexual crime has been committed against a minor.
Abortion availed her sexual perpetrator the freedom to continue his crime. Had she carried her pregnancy to term, dna would have provided evidence that her father was her rapist.
BTW, most incest is not perpetrated by one’s biological father, another red flag to your friend’s story.
Regards,
Jill
good point, however I have no reason to doubt her story, given Aurora’s police are not the best in the world (not that I do not appreciate all their hard work). But I know she was pregnant and had the abortion. And I know her father is now in jail. Plus we don’t know if the father would have allowed her to carry the father to term. He could have made her get the abortion or punch her in the stomach. And while it is true that alot of times it is a step-parent, it is not unthinkable of a biological parent doing this.
Yes. I appreciate your honesty. The complaint by some that states like SD are out of line to pass an abortion ban forcing the Supremes to reanalyze Roe v. Wade is ludicrous. It was the Supremes who forced abortion on states like SD in the first place.
Roe v. Wade made it illegal for state governments to prevent women from having them. it did not force anyone to have an abortion, it made it legal for a woman to get one from medical professional.