Dissecting phony ‘war on women’
By Barbara L. Lyons, executive director, Wisconsin Right to Life
Editor’s note. This first appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Time for some woman-to-woman talk. Because we women are under siege, or so we are told, and it is our votes that the creators of the phony “war on women” (WOW) want to garner, let’s talk facts.
Proponents of abortion state that abortion is about “choice.” Yet when the opportunity arose in the state Legislature to at least limit the abortion coercion that occurs all too frequently, it became a “war on women.” All this common-sense legislation does is require the abortionist to determine, in private, if the woman is being coerced.
Is it always a loved one who accompanies a woman to the abortion clinic, or is it someone who threatens the woman and wants to be present to make sure she has the abortion? Isn’t coerced abortion the real war on women?
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports that 14 women have died during RU-486 chemical abortions. That statistic bears repeating: 14 American women have died during RU-486 chemical abortions. Yet somehow it is a “war on women” when a law is passed to ensure that the woman seeking an RU-486 abortion actually has an in-person physical exam, not a conversation over a webcam, and that she return to the abortion provider for follow-up. The FDA, the National Abortion Federation, and the American College of OB-GYNs all recommend the physical exam and provider follow-up as protocol for medical [chemical–RU486] abortions. Is protecting the safety, health and lives of women really a war on women?
The rhetoric reached high decibel levels when several states enacted laws to require that a woman seeking an abortion view an ultrasound of her child. The hysteria included comments that these laws were meant to shame women and that use of vaginal ultrasound was equivalent to rape. Really? One study reports that 99% of abortion clinics use ultrasound before abortion–they just don’t let the woman see it. Vaginal ultrasounds are routine before chemical abortions to determine the baby’s gestation and whether there is an ectopic pregnancy. Is it a war on women to protect women from dangerous application of RU-486 abortions? To allow women to have all pertinent facts before making a permanent and life-altering abortion decision?
Sex selective abortions and infanticide are rampant in countries such as China and India, with female babies as the most common victims. In some areas of these countries, the ratio of men to women is shockingly unbalanced. If this isn’t a war on women, what is? Yet, proponents of abortion strongly oppose legislation in Congress that would prohibit sex selection abortions in the United States to prevent discrimination against women, which could create the grotesque gender imbalance that exists in other countries.
Depriving Planned Parenthood of taxpayer funding tops the “war on women” list. Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest abortion provider. By its own statistics, pregnant women receiving services at Planned Parenthood are nine times more likely to have an abortion than receive prenatal care or an adoption referral, with financial gain for Planned Parenthood. So, you and I, as taxpayers, are supposed to foot the bill for Planned Parenthood to “counsel” pregnant women who then are referred for abortions. Isn’t this horrendous conflict of interest the real war on women? And why should the taxpayer be complicit in underwriting the nation’s abortion giant?.
All I can say about the “war on women” is: WOW! Let’s manufacture a phony “war on women” and try to sell it to you and me. I’m not fooled, and you should not be, either, after reading about these common-sense protections of women.