The Lighter Side of Choice

Hilarious piece in The Onion that you HAVE TO read! 

New 'Anti-Abortion Pill' Kills Mother, Leaves Fetus Alive

NEW YORK—Pro-life advocates celebrated approval of the new anti-abortion drug UR-86 by the Food and Drug Administration Tuesday, calling it a "safe and effective method" for terminating pregnant women while leaving their unborn children unharmed.

Enlarge ImageA doctor explains to an expectant mother how her organs will slowly dissolve with the new pill.

Pfizer, manufacturer of UR-86—dubbed the "last-morning-ever pill"—said the drug is intended only for occasions when the mind-set or politics of the mother threaten the life of the fetus.

"This drug is designed for extreme cases in which the mother cannot or should not be saved, or when her health has been placed before that of her unborn child," Pfizer spokesman Anthony Wright said.

ANTI:

As feminist (and abortion advocate) Naomi Wolf points out (”New Republic,” 10/16/96), we patronize women when we assume they can’t look at abortion objectively. She writes: “The pro-choice movement often treats with contempt the pro-lifers’ practice of holding up to our faces their disturbing graphics…[But] how can we charge that it is vile and repulsive for pro-lifers to brandish vile and repulsive images if the images are real? To insist that truth is in poor taste is the very height of hypocrisy. Besides, if these images are often the facts of the matter, and if we then claim that it is offensive for pro-choice women to be confronted by them, then we are making the judgement that women are too inherently weak to face a truth about which they must make a grave decision. This view is unworthy of feminism.”

If something is so horrible that we can’t stand to look at it, maybe we shouldn’t be doing it.
Why would it be violating medical privacy? They wouldn’t name any woman, they would just show exactly what an abortion is. If you go for and eye surgery, wouldn’t you want to know exactly what it is that they are going to do to you? If you need a heart transplant, they are gonna tell you what they are going to do. And why not with abortion? People (not just women, since this affects EVERYONE) need to know exactly how it’s done. Why scare tactic? It’s just the truth. Ever heard of Emmett Till? You should research his story and see what his mom did with his body. He was a black guy from Chicago that got killed in Mississippi in 1955. His mom has a open-casket funeral for everyone to see what the white guys did to her son.

Comment by javier jeri 04.28.06

PRO:

Actually, Naomi is not a good feminist to cite as a lot of women feel that she does not encompass their views. She has taken a turn towards  conservativitism, dissassociating herself from many of the things that grassroot feminists fight for. People are explained what will happen in abortion proceeders Javier. Medical privacy means not having to WORRY ABOUT your information being released to the public. If women have to worry about their medical information being released it is a possibility that they may forgo services in fear of public chastizement. Do your research before you post comments on our webpage it will make your movement look a lot better if you actually know what you're talking about. Besides the images that Wolf is speaking about are the images you so kindly flash on 30 foot billboards. Guess what? Those images are what happens less than 1% of the time, partial birth abortion RARELY occurs. You want to see images of first trimester and second trimester abortions? it looks like a period. Maybe if accurate photos were shown and not misleading photos of abortions that occur less than 1%… We are NOT talking about the maiming and killing of an african american, to compare abortion to acts of racial hatred is insulting and a tactic i do not respect or admire. I don't think Emmett Till would want you to compare his story with that of a zygote. I think respect for his humanity and dignity is lost when you use it in your rhetoric.

Oh, and, since you don't think we should be doing it What do you propose should be done to prevent abortion? Cause I know we're working towards a lot of realistic goals that could lower the rate of pregnancies and therefore the number of abortions in the US and globally, How many times do I have to say it? By restricting the access to abortion does not mean you are decreasing the need for it, it just means you are putting an ideological bandaid on the issue that isn't really solving anything. Would you rather have women dying from back alley abortions? Would you rather see women die?