Purpose Driven Lies and Gender Equality

woman's faceWhat does a government bureaucrat being between you and your doctor look like? That was the go-to canard to scare Americans away from the health care reform bill (or single payer for that matter).

So, imagine your doctor decides he or she doesn’t want you to get a procedure. They don’t agree with it for whatever reason. Your doctor happily lies to you. Tells you – you don’t need it – everything is fine.

You find out later your doctor, with political motivations, omitted facts from you, and your decisions based on what you thought was full information, later caused problems with your health. What precipitated your doctor’s reckless and unethical behavior?

A group of lawmakers decided you don’t have a right to know the truth about your medical condition so therefore a doctor’s fabrications cannot be grounds for a lawsuit.

Your doctors and those lawmakers have decided they know what’s best for you. And you have no recourse whatsoever.

Would you feel conspired against by your state legislature and your health care provider? Yes. And this is exactly what women of child bearing age are facing on a state level: making it okay to lie to pregnant women if it potentially avoids an abortion.

Both Arizona and Kansas are considering bills giving your doctor the legal authority to withhold potentially crucial information about your health and, in this case, your child’s.

This idea of lying to women has been in the quiver of the our-choice-for-you movement since before Roe v. Wade when abortion was legal only at the state level. In 1967, the first of what are now known as crisis pregnancy centers or fake abortion clinics was opened by a man named Robert Pearson in Hawaii. The blueprint for these ruses is still The Pearson Foundation’s manual, “How to Start and Operate Your Own Pro-Life Outreach Crisis Pregnancy Center,” published in 1984. Pearson writes, “Obviously, we’re fighting Satan. A killer, who in this case is the girl who wants to kill her baby, has no right to information that will help her kill her baby.”

In this case, Satan is a girl.

And Satan, being the father of all lies and all – doesn’t have the right to the truth when he gets knocked up.

tina dupuyIn the right-wing-maligned health care reform bill were strides for women’s health, equality and autonomy. The buried lede about Obamacare is it forced insurance companies not to treat a womb as a preexisting condition.

Recently it came to focus (while being declared a war on religion) that birth control must be covered by insurance even if the employer is a religious institution (the exception being an actual church). For the last decade, Viagra was covered by insurance, no problem, and the pill was not. A dysfunction for men was covered and a function for women was out-of-pocket. The Affordable Care Act changed that.

And the right-wing opposes this as a “government takeover of health care.” But when they want to endow your doctor with the ability to dictate their values in the form of dishonesty – health care (specifically women’s) needs to be taken over by government. Stat!

As a culture, would we tolerate this if it were any other medical condition besides pregnancy? What if your doctor was being paid by the soft drink industry to tell you your obesity isn’t from your 5-liter a day habit? What if your doctor didn’t approve of vaccinations and you actually get Meningitis? What if your doctor thought it wasn’t right to tell you about your cancer screening results while in its operable window? And what if some yahoo state lawmakers decided – against all ethics and medical research – to agree with your quack doctor?

tina dupuyIf those things seem outrageous then lying to pregnant women has to be too. If we want to live in a society where women have the same rights as men, being of child-bearing ability can’t be a caveat to equality.

Either women have equal rights under the law or they’re public incubators. And according to these attempted laws in Arizona and Kansas – we’re not equal.

Tina Dupuy
Taking Eternal Vigilance Too Far 

Published by the LA Progressive on March 20, 2012
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
About Tina Dupuy

Tina is a nationally syndicated political columnist, investigative journalist, award-winning writer, stand-up comic and wedge issue fan.

Comments

  1. Tina,
    Allow me to rephrase Robert Pearson’s words this way: A man who comes into a gun shop asking about buying a hand gun with the intent to kill his wife has no right to that information! Would you agree with this statement? First off, your comparisons are not comparable; abortion has nothing to do with women’s health, PAP smears, cervical cancer screening or even pregnancy screening. All these things have to do with treating persons to maintain their life and prevent premature death. Likewise for obesity, vaccinations, meningitis treatments and even conditions that necessitate the use of Viagra. None of these medical treatments kill and therefore they are legitimate. Second, “crisis pregnancy centers” are not “fake abortion clinics,” are not “fake abortion clinics,” rather anti-abortion clinics, meaning they refuse to do what is immoral… commit an abortion… and note that preferred prochoice term, “anti-abortion,” is to be pronounced “anti-killing.”In your commentary you go through a long chain of logic that has nothing to do with the subject of abortion or contraception in order to prop up this artificial idea of equality our culture of death has spawned. The problem is you define equality as what women do in comparision to men and not as what is intrinsic to both of their natures. You like so many other women have bought into radical feminist rhetoric that insists men and women are not different. The trouble is since we all see an evident difference, not just physically but intuitively and affectively, what is in behind the physical, that is spiritually, we strain credulity telling ourselves those differences are just social constructs of a more prejudice era.On the contrary those differences are ingrained in men and women even as their inviolable dignity is. The simple truth is women are meant to be incubators just as their nature dictates and men have no say in this. If this is not true then point out for me one instance where a new human life has come into this world apart from a woman’s womb?Again I say on the contrary, where the real choice exists is when a woman forbids a man from putting anything in that incubator, after which time it is too late and technology is merely a bandaid for the couple’s weak will.So my final point is that “rights” have nothing to do with abortion or contraception because along with every right comes a duty. In the case of sexual intercourse, which is the only means of generating new human life, the duty is to protect that new life rather than finding ways to avoid it, or when this fails, to eradicate it. As such pregnancy is not a “medical condition” comparable to a laceration or disease since it concerns the generation of life rather than a danger to it. This fact applies even to ectopic pregnancy, a real caveat brought up by anti-life advocates to imply we need sweeping abortion access because of this one specific case. Instead what must be distinguished is that since the object of good medicine in this case is to treat the condition of improper implantation rather than condemn the child as pro-aborts do, or damn the mother as pro-lifers are accused of doing… we treat them both with equal dignity; and if in trying to save them both, if one or the other dies, justice has not been violated. Simply put legitimate medicine does not try to kill anyone and so legitimate health care cannot pit a mother against her children born or preborn.In closing I can only ask you is this the kind of information you imply is being withheld by the side you oppose? Are you saying a baby’s life is NOT equal to that of a woman’s (or man’s) life? I suggest you need to clarify these questions in your next commentary.Ratjaws@aol.comRobert Pearson’s words this way: A man who comes into a gun shop asking about buying a hand gun with the intent to kill his wife has no right to that information! Would you agree with this statement? First off, your comparisons are not comparable; abortion has nothing to do with women’s health, PAP smears, cervical cancer screening or even pregnancy screening. All these things have to do with treating persons to maintain their life and prevent premature death. Likewise for obesity, vaccinations, meningitis treatments and even conditions that necessitate the use of Viagra. None of these medical treatments kill and therefore they are legitimate. Second, “crisis pregnancy centers” are not “fake abortion clinics,” are not “fake abortion clinics,” rather anti-abortion clinics, meaning they refuse to do what is immoral… commit an abortion… and note that preferred prochoice term, “anti-abortion,” is to be pronounced “anti-killing.”In your commentary you go through a long chain of logic that has nothing to do with the subject of abortion or contraception in order to prop up this artificial idea of equality our culture of death has spawned. The problem is you define equality as what women do in comparision to men and not as what is intrinsic to both of their natures. You like so many other women have bought into radical feminist rhetoric that insists men and women are not different. The trouble is since we all see an evident difference, not just physically but intuitively and affectively, what is in behind the physical, that is spiritually, we strain credulity telling ourselves those differences are just social constructs of a more prejudice era.On the contrary those differences are ingrained in men and women even as their inviolable dignity is. The simple truth is women are meant to be incubators just as their nature dictates and men have no say in this. If this is not true then point out for me one instance where a new human life has come into this world apart from a woman’s womb?Again I say on the contrary, where the real choice exists is when a woman forbids a man from putting anything in that incubator, after which time it is too late and technology is merely a bandaid for the couple’s weak will.So my final point is that “rights” have nothing to do with abortion or contraception because along with every right comes a duty. In the case of sexual intercourse, which is the only means of generating new human life, the duty is to protect that new life rather than finding ways to avoid it, or when this fails, to eradicate it. As such pregnancy is not a “medical condition” comparable to a laceration or disease since it concerns the generation of life rather than a danger to it. This fact applies even to ectopic pregnancy, a real caveat brought up by anti-life advocates to imply we need sweeping abortion access because of this one specific case. Instead what must be distinguished is that since the object of good medicine in this case is to treat the condition of improper implantation rather than condemn the child as pro-aborts do, or damn the mother as pro-lifers are accused of doing… we treat them both with equal dignity; and if in trying to save them both, if one or the other dies, justice has not been violated. Simply put legitimate medicine does not try to kill anyone and so legitimate health care cannot pit a mother against her children born or preborn.In closing I can only ask you is this the kind of information you imply is being withheld by the side you oppose? Are you saying a baby’s life is NOT equal to that of a woman’s (or man’s) life? I suggest you need to clarify these questions in your next commentary.Ratjaws@aol.comcrisis pregnancy centers” are not “fake abortion clinics,” are not “fake abortion clinics,” rather anti-abortion clinics, meaning they refuse to do what is immoral… commit an abortion… and note that preferred prochoice term, “anti-abortion,” is to be pronounced “anti-killing.”In your commentary you go through a long chain of logic that has nothing to do with the subject of abortion or contraception in order to prop up this artificial idea of equality our culture of death has spawned. The problem is you define equality as what women do in comparision to men and not as what is intrinsic to both of their natures. You like so many other women have bought into radical feminist rhetoric that insists men and women are not different. The trouble is since we all see an evident difference, not just physically but intuitively and affectively, what is in behind the physical, that is spiritually, we strain credulity telling ourselves those differences are just social constructs of a more prejudice era.On the contrary those differences are ingrained in men and women even as their inviolable dignity is. The simple truth is women are meant to be incubators just as their nature dictates and men have no say in this. If this is not true then point out for me one instance where a new human life has come into this world apart from a woman’s womb?Again I say on the contrary, where the real choice exists is when a woman forbids a man from putting anything in that incubator, after which time it is too late and technology is merely a bandaid for the couple’s weak will.So my final point is that “rights” have nothing to do with abortion or contraception because along with every right comes a duty. In the case of sexual intercourse, which is the only means of generating new human life, the duty is to protect that new life rather than finding ways to avoid it, or when this fails, to eradicate it. As such pregnancy is not a “medical condition” comparable to a laceration or disease since it concerns the generation of life rather than a danger to it. This fact applies even to ectopic pregnancy, a real caveat brought up by anti-life advocates to imply we need sweeping abortion access because of this one specific case. Instead what must be distinguished is that since the object of good medicine in this case is to treat the condition of improper implantation rather than condemn the child as pro-aborts do, or damn the mother as pro-lifers are accused of doing… we treat them both with equal dignity; and if in trying to save them both, if one or the other dies, justice has not been violated. Simply put legitimate medicine does not try to kill anyone and so legitimate health care cannot pit a mother against her children born or preborn.In closing I can only ask you is this the kind of information you imply is being withheld by the side you oppose? Are you saying a baby’s life is NOT equal to that of a woman’s (or man’s) life? I suggest you need to clarify these questions in your next commentary.Ratjaws@aol.com

    • Let me guess, Ratjaw- you’re a man. You think women always have a choice about getting pregnant? Ever hear of a little thing called rape? How about birth control pills that don’t work and condoms that fail? Ever hear of complications during a pregnancy that threaten the woman’s life, such as medical conditions that eventually lead to a miscarriage? You’re so desperate to prevent abortions that you’d let doctors break their Hippocratic oath, yet you probably do nothing to keep those fetuses alive after birth. It’s all about control of women, not the ongoing health or life of the woman or child.
       
      Women are not farm animals. You can not force a woman to grow and produce a child. If you want to stop abortions, work on preventing pregnancies. Once a woman is pregnant, it’s her business, and hers alone.
       
      Tell ya what mister, when you can get pregnant c’mon back and we’ll talk some more. Until then, if it’s not your own body that would be forced to remain pregnant then just shut up. It’s none of your business.

  2. It is saddening that so many of our men and women stand by while their children and themselves are treated as cyphers.  It seems to be an insidious darkness growing like a tumor in our society.
    And, we don’t value teachers.  For Gods sake, who and what do we value??
    Don’t get me started there are plenty of commentators out there already.

    • Don,
      I’m not sure what you mean by “we don’t value our teachers” but if you are implying the current battler over teacher’s unions involvement in education has something to do with not wanting good teachers then you are wrong. The battle that recently happened in Wisconsin is an example of trying to scale back union powers that not only do not benefit children because poor teachers are near impossible to get rid of, but to defund public unions who misuse those funds to keep themselves in power despite the serious fiscal problems many states are having. I’m not against unions and insist they are good for the private sector, nor am I against teachers who truly benefit kids by teaching real intellectual content, but am against the abusive powers of both groups when left unchecked.

      If by “cyphers” you mean men, women and children are being ignored then I fully agree with you. I think this is the gist of Tina’s argument, that the pro-abortion side is being ignored when laws are made to prevent further access to abortion or at least limit it. As you can see from my comment to her I disagree and think it’s not about whether both sides arguments are being presented rather the most vital concern is whether abortion and contraceptive “services” harm a person or not? I’ve laid out a case it does and from this point of view am against any information given out by the anti-life side since it is a skewing of the truth.

      So in this way of thinking I can agree with you… hopefully, if this is what you mean in your comment.

      Ratjaws@aol.com

Speak Your Mind

*

Visit us on Google+