Anti Abortion Laws Use Barbaric Techniques From The 1600’s

According to anti abortion spin masters, it is the abortion clinic and the abortion doctor, not the woman, who  “murder”. But, actual laws make the woman, not the clinic or the doctor, “guilty”.

It is the woman who must undergo the persecution not unlike that of The Scarlet Letter written by Nathanial Hawthorn in 1850. He was writing a story about the 1600’s. In his story a young mother is forced to wear the letter “A” as a shameful adulteress.

There are two ways to punish a woman for becoming pregnant. Option One is to outlaw abortion. Women will learn by suffering through the pregnancy, anti abortion theory tells us, not to engage in sex.

Anti abortion politicians have chosen Option Two. This is to pass laws requiring the woman to be humiliated for having an abortion. One of these is the ultra sound image.

There are state laws requiring the woman to look at an ultra sound image of her fetus. Some laws require watching the woman’s eyes to make certain she is not diverting her gaze elsewhere. Like The Scarlet Letter, it is about humiliation, sin and guilt.

All this, of course, happens after women walk by anti abortion protesters. A practice in the past was to photograph women coming into a clinic and show it to her neighbors.  This was a variation on wearing an “A”.

Interestingly, the ultra sound almost never changes women’s minds. It is a political game that feeds the egos of mean and nasty people.

10 Responses

  1. nemo82

    why not the abortionist? he shoots the gun, so to speak. and why not an ultrasound? maybe it has something to do with informed consent, just maybe. I could say many things (none of them flattering) re your line of thinking on abortion (and other matters). One thing, however, really needs to be said: too bad you grew up in the Church of Jesus Christ of the Cornfield in Cowlick, Iowa. Seems to me that you have spent much of your intellectual and emotional energy reacting against whatever you were told as a child. Tho’ I can’t exactly blame you for that: I have had something of the same problem.

    1. nemo82 One thing, however, really needs to be said: too bad you grew up in the Church of Jesus Christ of the Cornfield in Cowlick, Iowa

      My blog explained that the current treatment of women is like that of the 1600’s Scarlet Letter. I don’t see anything in your post that suggests I’m wrong.

  2. Jinx II

    I think men should go through invasive body procedures, lectures mandated by the state, and then their wives permission before a Viagra prescription will be written. Unmarried men? Tough luck, the state will not allow you to sin.

    1. entech

      Wives permission ??? I know some, not much older than me, where the wives are demanding the prescription be written.
      On consideration it could be that the prescription be supplied to the wife and she doles out the little blue things as needed, a bit like a nurse making sure you take your medication on cue and not saving a bit to sneak out to the wider world. 🙂

      Did you know that in Judaism it is grounds for divorce by a woman if the husband does not provide a satisfactory sexual relationship.

  3. Steve

    The pro-lifers I know desire to convince the woman of their unborn child’s humanity. I am sure that is the motivation behind any such law requiring viewing of the baby in the ultrasound by the mother. I doubt very much that there is any desire to humiliate by the supporters of such a law.

    1. Steve 6:04 The pro lifers I know desire to convince the woman of their unborn child’s humanity. I am sure that is the motivation behind any law requiring viewing of the…ultrasound..I doubt very much there is any desire to humiliate..

      To determine the motivation of people, it is best to gauge them by what they do or do not do rather than what they say. If political pro lifers were interested in the “humanity” of the fetus they would pass laws helping mothers raise children. There would be money for raising children.

      They have no interest in children–their interest is in the sin of the mother. She needs to be punished, not helped. That is why we see one kind of legislation, punishment, not the other kind, assistance.

      1. ” If political pro lifers were interested in the “humanity” of the fetus they would pass laws helping mothers raise children.”

        Birthrates have fallen in part because it is too costly for many families to raise a child. The government takes half the economy in taxes and another 1/4 of GDP goes to debt service. By the way, do you know what % of abortions are performed on single women. If we were allowed to keep what we earned married mothers could stay at home to raise their children if they chose. Less government, not more, would be “helping mothers raise children”..

        1. Juan Ruiz

          ” If we were allowed to keep what we earned married mothers could stay at home to raise their children if they chose.”

          “If they chose” is the key phrase. How many husbands earn enough for a comfortable living, yet the wife wants to work also? How many couples spend beyond their means and need two incomes to pay for it all? The wife of a friend of mine, the latter who made a nice income, insisted on working, even though a large percentage of here salary went to daycare.

Comments are closed.