The Washington Times Daily - - Opin­ion -

They couldn’t sim­ply fling the ab­dom­i­nal in­ducer over the wo­man’s stom­ach and claim to have “per­formed” an ul­tra­sound.

Mis­use of the “rape” ac­cu­sa­tion by abor­tion ad­vo­cates against those who use ul­tra­sound pro­ce­dures made even some in the abor­tion in­dus­try un­com­fort­able, as they them­selves fol­low the prac­tice. So­ci­ol­o­gist Ca­role Joffe wrote in that a long­time abor­tion provider posed the ques­tion to col­leagues on a list­serv, “Are we now go­ing to have to con­vince our pa­tients we are not rap­ing them?”

How­ever, be­cause of the hys­te­ria, leg­is­la­tors went out of their way to clar­ify the is­sue by amend­ing the bill to state clearly that it would re­quire only a “trans­ab­dom­i­nal” ul­tra­sound. The bill then was passed by the Se­nate 21-19.

The po­lit­i­cally ne­ces­si­tated change in lan­guage did not ap­pease the mal­ice of abor­tion ad­vo­cates, whose only goal is to pre­vent women from see­ing their un­born baby on an ul­tra­sound mon­i­tor. They not only kept up the shrill rhetoric, but took it a step fur­ther. Dur­ing the fi­nal de­bate on the bill in the Vir­ginia House, Del­e­gate Charniele Her­ring, Alexan­dria Demo­crat, out­ra­geously stated that re­quir­ing the ex­ter­nal “trans­ab­dom­i­nal ul­tra­sound is tan­ta­mount to bat­tery.”

Se­ri­ously? Does that mean that Planned Par­ent­hood of Vir­ginia and physi­cians’ of­fices across the state are “bat­ter­ing” women with “un­nec­es­sary” pro­ce­dures? If not, then don’t all women in the state de­serve the com­mon-sense stan­dard of care that even Planned Par­ent­hood ad­mits is nec­es­sary be­fore abor­tion?

Ev­i­dently not. Sim­ply put, Ms. Her­ring and her al­lies are de­fend­ing sub­stan­dard abor­tion care in their state. They’re do­ing so with in­flamed rhetoric that shows they aren’t re­ally de­fend­ers of women but rather de­fend­ers of those who ex­ploit women. Shame.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.