Skip to main content

Some may think the GOP War on Women was a loser campaign issue and I agreed with them to a point. The point being once you let someone place conditions and limitations of what medical treatment you can have or have funded by the health insurance you purchase; you are on a slide toward something like Ireland's anti-life policy.


The Details Are Worth Exploring

The "War on Women" was defined over time by the GOP rank and file. Once it became clear what the GOP anti-abortion zealot's intentions were/are and how the details of those intentions would interfere with our lives; people had a "wait a minute" moment and voted differently. When idiots talked about forcible rape, legitimate rape and other such statements, it's no wonder a lot of people wrote off those talking heads as crack pots. The election may be over, but the intentions of anti-abortion lawmakers remain unchanged. We must continue to ask for the details of what they believe. It's the details that show what the GOP really stands for.

Abortion law often states an abortion can be obtained to "save the life of the mother", but what does that mean? Most people understand the need to remove the embryo in an ectopic pregnancy, but the legality of that procedure can come into question if something like the Sanctity of Life Bill comes into law and some religious zealot doctor refuses to end the ectopic pregnancy. When is the mother's life in danger? Before or after infection sets in? Before or after the fallopian tube bursts?

We can't allow a politician to hide behind "Of course, abortion should be allowed to save a woman's life" without insisting the politician define what the saving her life standard is. Chances are once the definition is set, it will be rejected as there will be a circumstance that will occur outside the parameter. There are lots of reasons a woman might not be able to complete her pregnancy and that is anguishing enough without having to deal with religious born/contorted laws on top of the personal tragedy.


Why Should We Have to Ask?

The demand for women to prove they "need" abortion services sidesteps the issue of self-governance. Why do we need to ask permission or "prove" the need for abortion? That's the detail that makes most people most uncomfortable. It's one thing to talk about "casual" abortion. It's another to define it.

These are real issues. They aren't fantasies or nightmares. Before Savtita Halappanavar, the Dominican Republic let a 16 year old girl die rather than let her receive cancer treatments that would hurt her embryo. The Vatican excommunicated a doctor who performed an abortion on a 9-year-old girl because the girl's life wasn't sufficiently in danger. When we hold up these individual cases where the politics of law are shown to cruelly supersede the needs and rights of women (and children), these anti-abortion policies are shown to be heartlessly anti-life.


Getting Caught in the Weeds

Some within the GOP understand that getting into the weeds of such issues like rape or abortion is a loser for them. John McCain put it best:

"As far as young women are concerned, absolutely, I don't think anybody like me -- I can state my position on abortion but, other than that, leave the issue alone"
Why? Because when you get into the details on abortion prohibition, it's an untenable position for most women.

Anti-abortion details leads to this International Medical Symposium Policy Position released in Dublin, Ireland (I bolded my main concern):

Prof O’Dwyer and a panel of speakers also formally agreed a “Dublin declaration” on maternal healthcare. It stated: “As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.

“We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.

“We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.”

In a statement, Prof O’Dwyer also said no treatment should ever be withheld from a woman if she needed it to save her life, even if that treatment resulted in the loss of life of her unborn child.

Ok, that policy bites it's own tail. There's no reason to directly perform an abortion, but no treatment should ever be withheld if it's needed to save the mother's life. Except if that treatment is an abortion? Stop, my head from spinning please.


GOP Risk Managment

The GOP has to navigate a fine line and they know it can only be done if they don't talk about the details of their anti-woman, anti-abortion land pro-poverty policy positions.

McCain clearly wants to walk this line:

Fox host Chris Wallace asked McCain if that meant he would support "freedom of choice."

"I would allow people to have those opinions and respect those opinions," McCain responded. "I'm proud of my pro-life position and record. But if someone disagrees with me, I respect your views."

Nice. John McCain is ok with "allowing" people to have an opinion different than his. It's a shame that Chris Wallace didn't follow up with a question that defined what "respecting" differing opinion entails (not that we would). If former performance is any indication of future behavior; McCain means you can say whatever you want as long as we do what John wants.

That a boy, John, keep talking.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (14+ / 0-)

    If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never has and never will be. Thomas Jefferson

    by JDWolverton on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 12:15:42 PM PST

  •  Much the same argument can be applied to (5+ / 0-)

    end-of-life care.  At what point should people be forced to undergo medical procedures and at what point could doctors be allowed to assist with terminating the life?  Why not allow that to be a decision between doctor and patient/holder of living will?

  •  An Abortion Isn't a Treatment For the Mother (6+ / 0-)

    may be their thinking, it's doing something illegal to the fetal citizen.

    It's probably safest not to attempt to project logic into conservative demands. A demand just is, that's all there is to it.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 12:30:59 PM PST

    •  My 17 yo niece is demanding a tattoo for Xmas (3+ / 0-)

      She's not getting one. If I hadn't witnessed it, I wouldn't get what you mean about demands being what they are.

      There was an argument that I could hardly avoid hearing between her parents and her. Reasoning had little to do with the argument. Emotions prevailed. Her ending statement was, "Take everything off my Christmas list! All I want is a tattoo or nothing at all". Her father is seriously considering her request. Insert eye roll here.

      If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never has and never will be. Thomas Jefferson

      by JDWolverton on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 12:38:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  and I would go with the (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JDWolverton

        "nothing at all" option.

        When our son was in 1st grade his very cool friend Jacob had an earring. Son asked if he could get an earring, too. I said, yes, once you're 18, if you want an earring, you can get one.

        He didn't really want one. He just wanted to know the answer.

        The good you do today, will often be forgotten. Do good anyway. ~ Mother Teresa

        by Melanie in IA on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 05:53:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  It's the Same (3+ / 0-)

    With the argument about punishment for abortion providers and women who have abortions if it ever becomes illegal.  Anti-choice advocates simply won't answer your question.  Some priests will.  The only logical answer for anti-choice activists when asked what the punishment for abortion should be is death (or life in prison if you don't believe in the death penalty).  If a fertilized egg is a person, then an abortion is exactly the same as a doctor pulling a 5 year old limb from limb and then disposing of the body while the mother stands by and allows the doctor to do it.  Same with anyone who works at the doctor's office as it would be at least conspiracy to commit first degree murder.  Politicians won't answer this question.  But they haven't figured out how to lie about an answer and look comfortable doing it.

    So, Republicans (and those few anti-choice Democratic pukes), if abortion if illegal, what should be the penalty against a woman who has one and the doctor who performs it?  Please be specific, no BS.  Either tell me how many years or whether it's death, but give me an answer.

  •  The abortion issue is the Republican milch cow. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JDWolverton

    It's the only way they can get some folks out to vote. Ya think people are going to vote for tax cuts for the rich (the real Republican platform)? They had plenty of opportunity to criminalize it when Bush was in office and they didn't do much other than throw up more obstructions to pacify their base.
    They keep trotting out the issue every election, and each time it's more motheaten and tired than the time before. That's why they had to gin up emotion with extremist talk of a complete ban, fetus personhood, and banning contraceptives.

    This comment is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.

    by blue muon on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 03:31:30 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site