Tea Party vs Abortion – The New Fight

The exceptions for the health of the mother, rape, and incest are under attack.  As the anti-abortion movement exposes its true face – a theocratic desire to control women’s reproductive options in all circumstances – they are also removing all pretense at compromise.  The newly invigorated anti-abortion movement is going to oppose contraceptions.  They are going to force children to give birth.  They will fight tooth and claw to not only destroy Roe v Wade, but to go further and actively pass legislation making childbirth mandatory for any woman fertilized during sex.

This is the battle we are facing and to win it we need to pull its arguments entirely out of the shadows.  (We also need a new consistent and memorable name for the anti-abortion crowd.  Potentially “forced-birthers?”).  When Republicans argue against contraception they are really saying “Women do not have the right to prevent themselves from being impregnated”.  When they remove or reduce the rape exception they are saying “Women do not have the right to withhold consent from being impregnated”.  A woman who is raped can go to the doctor and get medication to handle any std’s picked up – but will not be able to prevent pregnancy – even if that was the rapists aim.  When conservatives oppose exceptions for the health of the mother they are saying “Women do not have the right to life saving medicine if they are pregnant”.

The right wing’s vicious new hard line on abortion is an assault on more than a woman’s right to choose to give birth or not.  It is an assault on a woman’s right to live and aiding an abetting rapists at inflicting trauma.  If we are going to win we need to tackle this extremism head on and aggressively.

Advertisements

2 Responses

  1. Forced-birthers, ha! Funny, but ineffective because most people would think you are ludicrous for using that term, and tune you out.

    In my experience, “anti-choicer” is the best way to reframe the debate, and when I use it, I have noticed a subtle, but real effect. People who are prone to wavering are less likely to pull the “but what about teh babiez” argument if you refuse to introduce “life” into the debate. When you call the anti’s exactly what they are, it also makes the debate easier, because the name is a natural segue into the fact that yes, they are against abortion, but also any other free and liberated sexual choice a woman could make.

    • A very good point. I think labels like “forced-birther” and “anti-women” are sharper and more effective for the right audience, but those audiences are smaller. Both labels also potentially might alienate one’s audience, and should thus be used with care. Anti-choice probably is the best for now.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: