The left’s outrageous outrage at ultrasounds revisited

posted at 5:25 pm on February 21, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Opponents — most notably Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick — of a Virginia law to require a woman to have an ultrasound before she aborts her baby have argued that such a requirement is equivalent to rape. After all, they argue, “the transvaginal procedure” entails “forcible penetration.” Never mind that not all ultrasounds are transvaginal or that rape carries consequences an ultrasound just flat-out doesn’t.

Now, though, these opponents have boxed themselves into a corner: As it turns out, the Virginia League of Planned Parenthood routinely performs ultrasounds before they perform abortions. Alana Goodman unmasks the true motivations behind supporters and opponents of the law:

In other words, the real reason pro-choicers oppose the law isn’t because of the “invasiveness” or “creepiness” of ultrasounds. It can’t be it. Virginia Planned Parenthood clinics already include them in its abortion procedures.

And let’s be honest. The main reason pro-lifers support the Virginia ultrasound bill isn’t out of medical necessity — not if these scans are already standard operating procedure at clinics.

This fight, like virtually all abortion law fights, is about how much of a role religion and morality should play in regulating these procedures. Pro-choice activists seem to have no problem with ultrasounds, as long as they’re done for medical reasons. But the fact that ultrasounds tend to already be part of abortions isn’t enough for pro-life activists. They want the main purpose for the scans to be promoting the “culture of life.”  The Virginia law would mandate doctors to display and describe the ultrasound to the patient. And the image could end up dissuading many women from going ahead with the abortion.

While the pro-lifers have been pretty open about their motives, the pro-choicers – whose motto used to be “safe, legal and rare” – haven’t been. If they want to oppose the bill in order to keep morality out of abortion laws, that’s fine. But the rape comparisons are fundamentally dishonest and insult the intelligence of the public they’re trying to win over.

Perhaps Dahlia Lithwick would argue that, by the very fact of choosing to have an abortion through Planned Parenthood, a woman is consenting to have an ultrasound, thereby rendering Planned Parenthood’s ultrasounds “unforced.” Medical reasons compel these ultrasounds, she might say, whereas the ultrasounds required under the Virginia law are required for “no medical reason whatsoever” (actually, she did say that last part). Could it not, then, also be said that, by the very fact of choosing to have an abortion in Virginia (or any state that has such a law), a woman is consenting to have an ultrasound? It’s not as if the Virginia government is mandating that all women have an ultrasound at a certain age no matter what her own personal choices have been.

This is Lithwick’s cue to write a follow-up to her original article.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

OK. I’m still laughing over women getting vag!nal ultrasounds ‘without a sedative’.
OMG!
LMFAO!

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:30 PM

I’ve had one. It was no big deal. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on February 21, 2012 at 10:40 PM

I’ve had one. It was no big deal. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on February 21, 2012 at 10:40 PM

PErhaps we don’t see it as a big deal bcs we enjoy ‘rape’.
We were asking for it, you know.
I mean, I didn’t know whether to curl up in the fetal position & cry all day, or smoke a cigarette.
So confusing.///////

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Seriously? I would hope that we could discuss a topic (even one with this level of emotion) without this much graphic language.

I always believed that persuasion is best done without invective.
Just sayin’

armygirl on February 21, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:53 PM
Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:30 PM
Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:29 PM
Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:29 PM
Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:27 PM
Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:24 PM
Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:22 PM

What happened? Did you forget to change accounts or are you really that schizophrenic

Gwillie on February 21, 2012 at 11:04 PM

@Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 10:21 PM”

You replied to me 3 times, and all read as outright deranged.

1) I never compared it to a penis.
2) I never compared it to rape.

Though perhaps by putting that together, we can guess why you in particular are going in for such routine exams then.

The wand size is typically 1 1/4″ thick, which is larger than a tampon, and yes, the size of some “marital aids”.

Having a doctor probe you is invasive, and can cause discomfort or pain. Typically, invasive treatments use topical sedatives. When opting to terminate a pregnancy, you are expecting to be put under. Neither are done for an ultrasound.

Can’t fathom why those born with female parts would find this invasive? Since I doubt you have experienced this first hand, either as a patient, or an observer, there is a reason why they apply a lubricant before inserting the sonography wand. The procedure can take some time, and involve going deep inside to provide a proper image. Women born with female parts, and Men experienced around female anatomy know this can be a differentiate between women, dependent on how their shaped, tipped, etc.

contrarytopopularbelief on February 21, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Seriously? I would hope that we could discuss a topic (even one with this level of emotion) without this much graphic language.

I always believed that persuasion is best done without invective.
Just sayin’

armygirl on February 21, 2012 at 10:59 PM

I’m being a sarcastic b!tch.
So?
You don’t have to like it.
Sometimes I like to make my point that way. Seriously, don’t read what I’m posting if you don’t like my style today.
I’m usually very amiable & less sarcastic.
I just feel like being so lately bcs of the high level of evil stupidity on display concerning this issue.

What happened? Did you forget to change accounts or are you really that schizophrenic

Gwillie on February 21, 2012 at 11:04 PM

I enjoy my sarcasm making my point. If you don’t, feel free to not read my posts.
I also had a lot of time on the toilet & had nothing better to do.
Taking a crap & reading a bunch of crazy crap seemed to go hand in hand.

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:10 PM

Gwillie on February 21, 2012 at 11:04 PM

And before you get anal about the time involved,yes, I do have to spend that much time taking a crap bcs I have a lot of large fibroids which can cause me to have to spend a lot of time taking a crap.
I guess I could have watched some YouTube videos that were mindless instead.

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:12 PM

I always believed that persuasion is best done without invective.
Just sayin’

armygirl on February 21, 2012 at 10:59 PM

I will give you some advice I have come by in my almost 43 years, which may not be much, but consider it:
Sometimes invective communicates passion & makes an impression.
That impression may be initially negative, but will stick out in the person’s mind.
And perhaps some time down the road, that ignorant person will remember that & coupled with more experience & information be able to reflect objectively upon it & recognize it for what it was originally intended to be: shock.
Invective, has at times caused me to think twice about something.

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:18 PM

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:10 PM

Your opinions would have more weight to them without the language is my only point. You are free to say what you like until the Captain bans you.
Thanks for weighing in.

armygirl on February 21, 2012 at 11:18 PM

OK have fun all.
I’m not a prisoner to my colon anymore.

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:18 PM

until the Captain bans you.
Thanks for weighing in.

armygirl on February 21, 2012 at 11:18 PM

If you can recall in all of my history, & on here as well, I’ve never said anything tat is bannable.
You look at someone like Blake & what he’s leveled off at annoyinglittletwerp,
That kind of talk is downright terrible.
Nathor on the other hand, IMO, has not communicated that sort of thing to anyone here, but I may be wrong.
I defend nathor at this point. He’s not like Blake.
He just kibbitzes on who should or should not be killed.
Which I suppose is invective enough.

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:18 PM

Thank you for your advice. I have been on the earth slightly longer than you, but I do try to see all sides of an issue and so I am trying to see yours. I have sometimes used invectives for shock, but I use it rarely because it invariably loses it shock value and crosses over into ugly.

Again, you are free to say what you like.

Have a nice night.

armygirl on February 21, 2012 at 11:22 PM

That impression may be initially negative, but will stick out in the person’s mind.
And perhaps some time down the road, that ignorant person will remember that & coupled with more experience & information be able to reflect objectively upon it & recognize it for what it was originally intended to be: shock.

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:18 PM

Doesn’t seem to have done you any good.
let me try…
A lot of hate involved in defending the action of taking a life from the simple proof that it is in fact a life.

Gwillie on February 21, 2012 at 11:59 PM

I enjoy my sarcasm making my point. If you don’t, feel free to not read my posts.
I also had a lot of time on the toilet & had nothing better to do.
Taking a crap & reading a bunch of crazy crap seemed to go hand in hand.

Badger40 on February 21, 2012 at 11:10 PM

the whole point I was making was how you were clearly taking both sides, arguing one side then countering your own arguments, like you were tiring to lob softballs to yourself to knock out of the park, then failing even at that.

Gwillie on February 22, 2012 at 12:10 AM

Okay, so abortion itself is invasive, but that doesn’t change the very nature of ultra sounds where they stick a giant invasive plastic wand inside of a woman, without any sedative involved. This truly is the point where the Pro-Life crowd becomes irrationally scary.

contrarytopopularbelief on February 21, 2012 at 8:56 PM

OH Em Gee!

This is hilarious! A sedative for a vaginal ultrasound! LMAO!

When I was in infertility treatment I used to have one or two of those every month. They are completely painless, and comparing them to rape is the height of stupidity!

JannyMae on February 22, 2012 at 12:16 AM

Gwillie on February 22, 2012 at 12:10 AM

Have a nice night. Time for some good sleep.
Catch ya on the blog again soon.

armygirl on February 22, 2012 at 12:20 AM

Your opinions would have more weight to them without the language is my only point. You are free to say what you like until the Captain bans you.
Thanks for weighing in.

armygirl on February 21, 2012 at 11:18 PM

Chill out.Badger’s been here a looong time-as have I.
We know the limits here.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 12:49 AM

I am late to this thread, but thanks Tina for posting about this. I read the Slate article a few days ago, and it has bothered me ever since. The big flaw in Lithwick’s logic is that there is, in fact, a perfectly good medical reason for the ultrasounds mandated by the Virginia law. The medical reason: to educate the mother that this is a unique human life she is about to kill. Such a law is necessary because abortion providers routinely lie to their patients, telling them that this a ‘lump of cells’ or other misleading language to pressure them into an abortion.

bitsy on February 22, 2012 at 7:36 AM

I love how you make up crap and pretend I said it. I suggest you overcome your inability to address what I actually did say.
Blake on February 21, 2012 at 6:42 PM

So, let me get this straight: If an OB has the sad job of telling parents their baby has Down’s Syndrome and they decide to abort, some of you morons think the OB should start mocking and belittling them?
Blake on February 21, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Seems to me that nobar was just following your lead. Or perhaps you can point out exactly where annoyinglittletwerp was advocating that doctors belittle their patients if their unborn baby has a gentic defect? I seemed to have missed that somehow.

VelvetElvis on February 22, 2012 at 7:40 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on February 22, 2012 at 12:49 AM

Yes, I know how long you both have been here. I think you missed my point. Badger had ceased debating and crossed over into pure name calling and was pretty graphic about it. I merely suggested that her arguments would be stronger without the name calling.

It takes a much larger vocabulary to insult someone without using anatomical references.

armygirl on February 22, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3