Now That’s What I Call Art !

One of the pro-choice gang’s standard regurgitations is that women never take abortion lightly and only have them for the most agonizing and legitimate of reasons.  With pro-choice people it is not always easy to distinguish when they are lying from when they are simply misinformed.  But such is not the case here.  They are lying and several of their fellow travelers have admitted as much.     

In an interview published in the March 9, 1989, edition of the communist publication, Revolutionary Worker, Marilyn Buckham, who was the director of Buffalo GYN Womenservices Clinic, was asked about the reasons women have abortions.  In her answer, she stated, “Women don’t do this lightly.  I’m sick and tired of hearing this.  Ninety-eight percent of women do do it lightly in here…they think of abortion like brushing their dime teeth and that’s OK with me.”

The reality is, if you go to any abortion clinic waiting room in America you will certainly find women who are there for what they perceive to be difficult circumstances.  But make no mistake, you will also find many who are having their second, third or fourth abortion as well as those who are there for reasons that could never be legitimately described as serious.            

But going beyond that, a recent episode at one of our nation’s “most prestigious” universities has raised the question of whether women ever have abortions after getting pregnant on purpose.  In early April, a pro-choice student at Yale, Aliza Shvarts, claims that she artificially inseminated herself repeatedly during the previous year and then self-aborted using various chemicals and herbs.  This was all done as part of a school art project.  It seems that she had video taped herself sitting in a bathtub doing these abortions on herself, and her plan was to project this video onto a cube that had been covered with blood she had saved from these abortions. 

I will concede that my knowledge of art is not very sophisticated.  My main experience in this field was in junior high school when I drew my own state inspection sticker for my Cushman scooter.  Evidently, it was not very good as a local police officer picked up on the forgery right away.  Needless to say, I was lucky to escape with only a ticket. 

But even though my credentials in this area are suspect, I still have to say that Aliza’s art sounds like it would make those Elvis on velvet things you see sold at abandoned gas stations seem like the Mona Lisa.  I’m also more than a little concerned that we will one day discover that this fiasco was paid for with tax dollars through a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts.

In any event, the university tried to extricate itself from this public relations nightmare by informing Shvarts that she would have to publicly state that her story was a hoax before they would allow it to be displayed.  They wanted her to say that the blood was not from abortions but from her menstrual flow.  Apparently, menstrual blood paintings are an approved form of artistic expression at Yale.  (Wouldn’t you love to read the minutes of the meeting where this conclusion was reached.)

Naturally, like any other proud but misunderstood artist, Shvarts refused to compromise and stuck to her story.  She did, however, enter something different in the art show so she would not fail the class.  I don’t know what form the replacement “art” took and I’m pretty sure that I don’t want to know.  Let’s just say that Aliza and I probably have different tastes.  

Surprisingly, the idea that women would abort intentional pregnancies is not a new one.  In the August 18, 1991, edition of the Austin American Statesman, rock singer Sinead O’Connor said she wrote the song My Special Child just two weeks after having an abortion.  She also said that, “It was a planned pregnancy, which I was very happy about.  I was completely in love with the father of the child ... But things didn’t work out between us, and we were both unhappy.  It was too much for him to be able to handle.  He was young and I was on tour, and I was feeling ill all the time because I was pregnant, and I was feeling so awful and I made the decision that it would be better for everybody if I had the abortion.’

About the same time, Oprah Winfrey had a show about women who get pregnant as a ploy to trap men into marriage.  One of the guests stated, with no hesitancy or sense of remorse, that when her attempt at this did not work as planned, she had an abortion. 

There were also revelations about the Olympic committee that oversees enforcement of drug policies discovering a trick some female athletes were using to circumvent the organization’s prohibition against blood doping.  These women were found to be intentionally getting pregnant prior to competition to increase the amount of oxygen in their bodies in order to heighten their performance.  After the competition was over, they would abort.  Olympic officials eventually determined that not only was this happening, it was not an uncommon practice among teams from certain countries.

So how common is it for women to abort an intended pregnancy?  Obviously, no one knows.  But we do know that it is common for women to abort intentional pregnancies when their baby turns out to be handicapped.  For example, in America today, over 90% of Down Syndrome babies are executed before birth and it would be illogical to think that those were all unplanned pregnancies.  On a personal level, through the Life Dynamics abortion malpractice campaign, I have spoken with many abortion-injured women over the years who told me that they had intentionally become pregnant but aborted when something changed in their lives.  One case I remember involved a woman who was forced to have a hysterectomy because of her injury.  She said that she had been trying to get pregnant for two years but aborted after being offered a promotion at work.

From a pro-life perspective, I think we need to keep all of this in context.  In a certain sense, the fact that a woman would have an abortion for frivolous reasons or to end a pregnancy she intentionally sought, is irrelevant.  Some justifications might make us more angry than others, but for the child that’s killed the reasons don’t matter.  The Down Syndrome child carried by a forty-year-old welfare recipient who got pregnant on purpose by a man whose name she doesn’t even remember, is no less valuable than any other child.      

In the final analysis, if the excuses for abortion don’t matter to the children being killed, they shouldn’t matter to us.  Our job is to protect every child in every circumstance.  And that must always be our focus.  

We Hate to Say, We Told You So. But

From the day the battle over abortion began, the pro-life movement has been saying that repeat abortions are a natural and logical progression of the pro-choice mentality.  Unfortunately, a new study by the research arm of Planned Parenthood – the operator of America’s largest chain of abortion mills – reveals that we have been right all along.

Statistics released by the Alan Guttmacher Institute show that repeat abortions are on the rise and that about half of all abortions in the U.S. are now done on women who have had at least one previous abortion.  That is up from about 40 percent just a few years ago.  We have also seen other research indicating that it is no longer uncommon for women to have several abortions.

This new information should surprise no one.  After all, watch any serial killer interviewed on television and you will hear him say that killing becomes easier each time it’s done.  It would be illogical to think that this phenomenon does not apply to moms killing their own babies.

For the pro-choice crowd, these latest revelations have created a public relations minefield.  Remember, since before Roe vs. Wade, these people have always said that abortion is never used as birth control and that women use it responsibly and only in the rarest of circumstances.  For them to now defend the practice of women having repeat abortions would confirm the fact that they’ve been lying all these years.  

In an effort to dodge that admission and appear reasonable to the average person, the abortion lobby’s damage control strategy is to give the illusion that even they don’t support women having multiple abortions.  The good news is that their new position is illogical, dishonest and easily exposed.

Imagine that five individual women had their first abortions today, and a sixth woman had her fifth abortion.  According to the abortion lobby’s newly concocted standard, what the five women did is okay but the sixth woman’s behavior is unacceptable.  The obvious flaw is that, in both cases, the same number of abortions happened.  In other words, by the abortion industry’s macabre reasoning, it is acceptable for five women to kill five children but not acceptable for one woman to kill five children.

There is also a second philosophical question raised by the abortion industry’s contrived concern over repeat abortion.  Simply put, if elective abortion is morally defensible, and if it is not the taking of an innocent human life, then what is the basis for saying it is wrong for a woman to have 10 or 20 or a 100 of them?  Abortion is either right or it’s not, and how frequently it occurs has no bearing on that question. 

The bottom line is, it is naked hypocrisy for the choice mafia to sell abortion as a constitutional right which protects women and then, for political cover, condemn women who freely – or even repeatedly – exercise that right.  It is also dishonest.  For these people to claim that they are uncomfortable with women having multiple abortions is as phony as it would be if the CEO of General Motors claimed to be uncomfortable with people buying more than one car.   

So don’t be deceived.  The only people in America unhappy about repeat abortions are the same ones unhappy about first-time abortions.  That would be you and me.  As for our enemies, a pregnant woman can walk into any one of their death camps and say she is there for her 15th abortion and the only thing that would keep her feet out of the stirrups is a lack of money.  And you can bet the family farm that the killing of her latest baby would not cause the hired killers to lose one moment’s sleep.

Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics