Couldn’t have said this better myself:
Part of the reason the abortion debate is so polarized is that the pro-choice faction wants to do just that — look away from the medical truth of what abortion does to an unborn baby. Maybe they should meet Denise Mountenay. Or would they rather look away from her too, because she represents a different unpleasant truth–what abortion does to women? “I was 16 when I had my first abortion,”Mountenay says in an interview from her Morinville home. “My mother said, ‘Denise, you have your whole life ahead of you. Have that operation.’ I thought, I’ll just be unpregnant.”…It wasn’t until after her third abortion that she came across information on fetal development, and “I was like, ‘oh, my God’. It was a revelation. I was absolutely devastated. I read that at three weeks it has a beating heart. This is not a clump of tissue, it’s a little person.”
Pro-choicers are keen on looking away–efforts to show what the baby is through ultrasounds are met with this sort of attack:
Abortion foes have a new tactic: The hope that women can’t look away.
Let me get this straight: ultrasounds showing the beating heart are fanatical? And letting women go ahead with killing their child, without offering that information is compassionate. Kudos (again) to Naomi Lakritz for this sort of compelling column in defence of women’s rights.
_______________________
[Editor’s Note: Tanya’s wrath is directed at the author of the blog, see the second link above, not Naomi Lakritz.]
Tanya can’t believe it: It takes a lot for me to get sincerely annoyed at someone. This lady managed to push some serious buttons. It’s the type of thing where, if she were in the same room as me, I’d say things to her that I’d later regret.
“No woman seeking an abortion does so unthinkingly.” Really? I know one. Would you like to meet her so that you can stop your ignorant generalizations?
“Few, if any, women use abortion as birth control” Is that why 46% of women did not use contraception during the month they became pregnant?
“Elections have consequences. You lost. Go away.” I’m guessing this lady hid under a rock for the eight years prior to Obama being sworn in. It would explain her nonsensical arguments.
OK, I’m done.
by 
I believe that pushing for an informed consent law for abortions that includes ultrasound imagery is a good start for Canada. Arguing for something that does not take away the “choice” – it merely provides more information.
I cannot get over these “feminists”. If they are so sure that abortion is no big deal and it is just a clump of cells, why don’t they want women to see these ultrasounds? Maybe because they know their choice might change?
A new private (!) high-def ultrasound clinic just opened here on PEI (the only jurisdiction in N.A. without abortion on demand btw). A friend got an ultrasound done there and the imagery is amazing! Pro-lifers should be rallying funds together to get this type of imagery to a wider audience. They keep trying to ban images of dead fetuses – they certainly would have no accepted reasoning for banning images of live ones.
Such a juxtoposition would also illustrate the moral bankruptcy, irrationality and anti-scientific basis of their views.
Keep up the great work ladies. ps: Bristol Palin is being interviewed by Greta Van Susteran tonight on FoxNews with her little clump of cells!