Saturday, December 19, 2009

The Outrage of the Day

This outrage of the day comes to you courtesy of "Online posting of women's abortion information challenged in Oklahoma."

WTF??? Are you kidding me that this is even a feasible, viable thing to consider doing???

And I want to get this out right now: I am pro-choice. You wouldn't consider having a website where you listed the names of women who had Botox or plastic surgery, or a list of men who have sought treatment for ED. How would this invasion of privacy of a medical procedure be any different?

"A judge in Oklahoma extended on Friday a temporary restraining order on a law that would post information online about women who get abortions in the state. In extending the restraining order, Oklahoma County District Judge Daniel Owens denied the state's motion to dismiss the case, putting the measure on hold until a February 19 hearing."

There is no merit in having this kind of information being made public. It would open the women up to ridicule and threats. And possibly even the doctors too that perform the abortions. To me, this sounds like a way for the Kansas-based anti-abortion group Operation Rescue to shame women into having unwanted babies. Or at the very least, bore them into leaving the clinic.

"The law, passed in May, requires doctors to fill out a 10-page questionnaire for every abortion performed, including asking the woman about her age, marital status, race and years of education. In all, there are 37 questions the women are to answer...The Center for Reproductive Rights argues that the measure is unconstitutional and in violation of the state's "single subject rule" because it covers different aspects of abortion."

This part just kills me: "State Sen. Todd Lamb helped draft the abortion legislation and describes it as "a common sense measure with bipartisan support." He said the left has tried to skew the law's intent through a campaign of misinformation. We're not trying to embarrass anybody, hurt anybody or make anybody's identities known. That's not the purpose of the legislation," the Republican lawmaker said...Lamb, who is running for lieutenant governor, rejects that notion. How can it violate women's privacy, Lamb said, if their identity is kept confidential? The measure specifies women's identities will be protected. "Nothing in the Individual Abortion Form shall contain the name, address or information specifically identifying any patient," it says."

Oh, come off it, Sen. know that at some point, private information about the women will be made public online. Some anti-abortionist will go undercover, get a job at some clinic, collect info and then post it online. Are you prepared to provide for the safety of the women and the clinic once that happens? PETA has employees that work undercover to uncover animal abuses. Do you think Operation Rescue wouldn't try that? That is, if they haven't already.

This is just disgusting. Women shouldn't be treated as just birthing vessels. We are able to think for ourselves, whether or not we want to be pregnant or even continue a pregnancy. Abortions are not dangerous to society as a whole, so it doesn't need to be treated in this kind of manner. If the lists are allowed, this will become a modern day version of The Scarlet Letter. We as the American society of both men and women should sit back and allow ourselves to de-evolve (I know that's not a word, but work with me) in this way.

No comments:

Post a Comment