If Saving Women is Really the Goal . . .

Now that the political season is back at our throats, we are again hearing the abortion lobby trot out its usual collection of distortions, half-truths and outright lies.  Of course, one of their favorites is the old line that since women are going to have abortions regardless of what the law says, we have to protect them against dangerous back-alley abortions.

This assumes that the legal abortions women are getting right now are safe, but we'll let that fairy tail slide for the moment.  We'll also ignore the fact that, if abortion were outlawed today and illegal abortionists started springing up next week, every one of them would be someone who is pro-choice.  In fact, every woman who was ever killed or maimed during an abortion was killed or maimed by someone who was pro-choice.  That means the obvious solution to the back-alley abortion problem is for the pro-choice mob not to do them.  But like I said, we'll ignore that for now. 

What I'm wondering about is this.  If the motivation for legalized abortion really is to save the lives of women, why aren't the people who make that argument also calling for the repeal of laws against rape?  After all, it is not uncommon for a woman to be killed by a rapist so she can't identify him to the authorities.  Legalizing rape would save those women by taking away the rapists' motivation for killing them. 

Legalization could also result in the establishment of rape clinics where rapists could take their victims instead of dragging them into dangerous back-allies.  These facilities could offer clean rooms, condom machines, emergency contraception and perhaps even doctors on staff in case the rapist injures his victim.  We could also issue licenses to rapists requiring them to undergo monthly testing for AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. 

Remember, the pro-choice argument is that women are going to have abortions regardless of what the law says, and that keeping abortion legal will make sure they occur in a clean and safe environment.  Well, those dynamics also apply to rape.  We know that keeping rape illegal has not stopped women from being raped, so why not try to create a more “enlightened” nation where rape is safe, legal and rare?

And by the way, as ridiculous as this suggestion is, if our goal is saving women's lives, it makes as much sense as legalized abortion.

What the Pro-Aborts Won't Say in D.C.

The American abortion lobby is poised to hold its death march in Washington, D.C., and renew their commitment to the slaughter of premature babies.  Of course, they will cynically disguise their agenda as concern for the lives of women who might be killed if abortion is again made illegal.

As always, these people are lying through their teeth and as proof I predict the following:

1) There will be no mention of the women who are currently being killed in their "safe and legal" abortion clinics.  At LifeDynamics.com, we list several hundred of them and we know of several hundred more including at least six in just the last few months.

2) There will be no mention of the American women who are being murdered by pro-choice men because these women refuse to submit to abortions.  This is a common and very well-documented problem that has victimized women for years.

3) There will be no mention of the suspected link between abortion and breast cancer.

4) There will be no mention of the women who are raped and sexually assaulted in these "safe and legal" abortion clinics.  This problem was well documented in my book, Lime 5.

5) There will be no mention of the almost universal use by abortion-industry lawyers of the "slut or nut" defense against women who bring malpractice suits against abortionists.

6) There will be no mention of what the abortion industry intends to do about the substandard quacks they know are working in their "safe and legal" abortion clinics.  Even some industry apologists have admitted that they can only attract the washouts and losers of medicine, with one chain of clinics killing at least 10 women as of February of 2000.

7) There will be no mention of what the abortion industry plans to do to stop over-the-counter sales of emergency contraceptives despite the fact that these drugs are known to cause serious problems in some women.

8) There will be no mention of the new internet abortion business in which the pro-choice crowd is teaching underage girls how to use powerful and dangerous drugs to induce abortions on themselves.  In the past, these drugs have proven to be potentially fatal, even with medical supervision.  Now, the abortion industry is showing 13-year-olds how to get them without a prescription.

9) There will be no mention of the fact that the American abortion industry is currently operating a nationwide pedophile protection racket (see ChildPredators.com) despite the known consequences for young girls who are victimized by older men.

The list goes on and on, but the point is that one would have to be either stupid or naive to believe that America's abortion profiteers care about the welfare of their customers.  As is always the case with these people, the bottom line is ... the bottom line.

Giant Right-Wing Conspiracy Strikes Again

Last October several Arizona women complained to authorities that while they were having abortions at a Phoenix area clinic, abortionist Brian Finkel sexually molested them.  Most of these accusations involved fondling the breasts of these women, massaging their clitoris, or performing oral sex on them.  Naturally, Finkel had a plausible explanation for all this.  He said that because these women were not medical professionals they didn’t understand what a complete gynecological exam entails. 

Unfortunately for Finkel, it appears that the Phoenix police are not medical professionals either.  They charged him with 17 counts of sexually molesting his patients, tossed him into the slammer, set bail at over $200,000 and scheduled a trial for August 5th. 

When the story made the local media, police reported that calls poured in from other women saying that they too had been sexually assaulted by Finkel.  Over the next few weeks, the number of victims soared.  The police even found a few of Finkel’s ex-employees who had witnessed these assaults but remained silent because they were afraid of what he might do to them.  Evidently, their concerns were not unfounded.  In an interview with police, Finkel stated, “I got a gun and they don’t.  They’re gonna’ get in a fight with me and they’re gonna’ lose.”  

As the new year rolled around, Finkel remained a guest of the state and things were proceeding in a pretty logical manner.  Then on January 16, 2002, Judge Pamela Franks made what is destined to become a landmark legal decision.  I won’t bore you with the legalese, but it goes something like this: whenever the number of women accusing an abortionist of sexually assaulting them goes up, his bail should go down.  Acting on this freshly discovered legal principle, she ordered that Finkel’s bond be cut by more than half.  Two days later he picked-up the tab and strolled out of jail. 

Meanwhile, the number of victims coming forward had reached more than 100.  This prompted the grand jury to issue an additional 43 indictments for sexual abuse and seven more for sexual assault.  On January the 26th, Finkel was rearrested and this time bail was set at $650,000.  Unfortunately, the lunacy that had so ravaged poor Judge Franks had begun to spread.  Another Arizona court official ruled that the bond posted in the first incident would cover this one as well, and ordered that Finkel be released.  A couple of hours later, he again strolled out into the sunlight. 

What I want to know is: where is the national media on this story?  After all, it has the two staples of contemporary American journalism – sex and violence – and yet six months have gone by without a peep.  Surely there is no political agenda at work here.

Now if you think the national media is ignoring it simply because they see it as a local story, ask yourself the following questions.  What would they be doing if a leader in the pro-life movement was accused of sexually assaulting more than 100 women and then threatening his female employees with a gun?  And what if he was allowed out on a reduced bail, rearrested for 50 additional charges, and allowed out a second time with no bail at all?  Call me cynical, but I’m betting this would be the lead story in every newscast and newspaper in America.  The media and others on the Godless Left would hammer away until the accused was hauled back to jail and this loony judge removed from the bench. 

Of course, recognizing that I could be wrong and thinking that maybe the Arizona Chapter of the National Organization for Women could shed some light on this situation, I called and talked to their spokesperson, Janet Andress.  She was familiar with the case and assured me that these women were lying.  When I asked why NOW always takes the side of women who make sexual assault allegations except when they are made against an abortionist, she seemed a little befuddled.  However, she quickly recovered and went on to explain that this whole episode is part of a giant plot concocted by a local pro-life organization but she was not sure which one it was.

I found it reassuring to locate someone who had a handle on this situation.  Thanks to Ms. Andress’ keen insights, we now know that more than 100 women – all of whom were pro-choice enough to actually have abortions – conspired with (a) some unidentified pro-life organization, (b) several former employees of Finkel’s abortion clinic, (c) the Phoenix Police Department, (d) the Maricopa County District Attorney’s office, and (e) the grand jury, just to destroy some hapless abortionist whose only crime was to give really thorough gynecological examinations. 

And to think, Janet figured this out all by herself and she’s not even a medical professional.


Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics