Crazed argumentation

The bill amounts to a near total ban precisely because of how early it cuts off legal abortion. At that stage in a pregnancy, most women don’t yet know that they are pregnant. Even those who do sometimes can’t access abortion care that early, as providers often prefer to wait until eight or 10 weeks of gestation to perform abortions, for safety reasons. Before that stage, it is difficult to rule out the possibility of an ectopic pregnancy, an unviable condition that can be fatal.

The answer to an ectopic pregnancy is abortion. There is therefore no reason to wait until an ectopic pregnancy is detected in order to have an abortion. Or rather, if abortion has been decided upon there’s no reason to wait.

If what is meant is that a 6 week ban means that ectopic pregnancies cannot be dealt with then that’s just confusing writing from this Guardian columnist. But then what actually happens is “treatment for an ectopic pregnancy” and assuming that that really is what is done then even the Catholic Church is fine with that.

15 thoughts on “Crazed argumentation”

  1. The Texas abortion ban is a performance of misogyny

    Over 30 million baby girls have been burned to death in the womb, sliced, diced and dumped as medical waste since Roe v Wade but the people who are against this are misogynists, would you believe?

  2. The article is poorly phrased and written. I think their primary concern is that some people will not be aware they were pregnant and will fail to ask for an abortion within the 6 week limit. This has been conflated with the possibility that ectopic pregnancies will not be aborted after 6 weeks, which is a position being taken by some anti abortion activists (on the basis that the fetus will abort naturally or even possibly become viable), although the Texas law includes a medical emergency exception.

    Whether the ectopic pregnancy counts as an emergency is not clear, I’d assume so, but no doubt some people would argue against this assumption. Given the way the law is structured – allowing individuals to pursue court cases – it seems highly likely that law would severely curtail the availability of abortions, as even medical emergency cases might be pursued in court and dice loaded heavily in favour of the plaintiff. (no costs to the defendant even if they win).

  3. “Whether the ectopic pregnancy counts as an emergency is not clear,”

    Lemme see.. Based on the extremely rare described cases where an ectopic pregnancy has come to term..
    Chance of this actually happening: less than one in a billion.
    Chance of this actually happening without surgical intervention: nil.

    All other cases have a near-zero chance for the foetus to survive, will completely wreck part of the baby factory, will cause severe complications in the mother up to and including infertility and death if not dealt with.

    Yeah… not an emergency.. ( unless you’re part of the hardline “Gods’ Will” crowd..)

  4. The Meissen Bison

    [those who] can’t access abortion care

    If only there were a Nobel Prize for litotes…

  5. @Grikath

    So my view would be that ectopic pregnancies should be terminated – the probability of a successful birth are, as you say, effectively zero. Part of the problem is that the nutcases are insisting that ectopic pregnancies abort naturally, even with the increased chance of maternal death/damage, they should be monitored, perhaps because a miracle might occur. It’s not a big step to seeing every medical emergency resulting in a court case, which would quickly result in abortion clinics finding themselves in financial straits even if they limited themselves to under 6 weeks and medical emergencies.

  6. Dennis, Bullshit Detector

    No doubt the writers at the Guardian – and the readers of the Guardian – consider themselves to be enlightened followers of science… Whereas knuckle-dragging yahoos like Dennis are too dense to understand that sort of thing. Right?

    Except that science tells us life begins at conception, and that at conception a human child has been conceived. So what The Science tells us is that planned abortion fits the definition of premeditated murder quite nicely.

    Note the use of the hoary trope that this is all about misogyny… As if there are no women who oppose abortion. Right.

  7. The Meissen Bison

    Dennis, BD – remember that all the women who didn’t vote for nice Mrs Clinton were guilty of aggravated misogyny so the term has a broader scope today than it did previously.

    -as the poet lamented- sont les neiges d’antan?

  8. Julia – Right?

    Ken – Part of the problem is that the nutcases are insisting that ectopic pregnancies abort naturally, even with the increased chance of maternal death/damage, they should be monitored, perhaps because a miracle might occur.

    I don’t think so, no.

    Maybe you could find a backwoods snake-handling pastor in some church/shack/armed compound who believes that, but I don’t think it’s representative of the mainstream of pro-Life opinion. The Pope wouldn’t go there, and I doubt any Protestant minister, Ultra Orthodox rabbi, or Sunni imam would either.

    Seems to be more of a red herring, much like how trannies are always banging on about the vanishingly tiny number of people unfortunate enough to be born intersex, in order to justify sterilising any little boy who seems too interested in Barbie dolls. Which itself is just fetish-shielding, predating on the confusion of children to reframe adult male paraphilia as a civil rights issue.

    It would definitely be a bad thing if the abortion option was withheld from women suffering from an ectopic pregnancy or any other condition which threatens her life, but I reckon the chance of this happening in the United States in 2021 is near zero.

    We do know for a fact that while the pro-Choice lobby has successfully bamboozled a lot of people by talking up mercifully rare and extreme cases – ectopic pregnancies, rape, incest, etc. – the abortion industry in the US has claimed more than ten times as many lives as the Jewish Holocaust. I know, Godwinned and whatnot, but if 62 million preventable deaths doesn’t give people pause to ask the question “are we the baddies?”, I don’t know what’s up with them.

    What was sold as “safe, legal and rare” is depressingly common, and the vast majority of its victims would otherwise be healthy and alive.

  9. @Ken ” the nutcases are insisting that ectopic pregnancies abort naturally,”

    Truly nutcases..
    Ectopic pregnancies do not abort.. They’re not in the place where they can abort the natural way.
    What happens in almost all cases is that the foetus eventually starves, or is attacked by the immune system, leaving a lump of necrotic flesh inside and near sensitive bits of a woman’s anatomy.
    If the cell mass is small enough it can be scrubbed by natural recycling in the body, but the larger lumps are a disaster waiting to happen. And must get excised like you would a tumor, with all the associated damage..
    ( I don’t even want to contemplate the sheer amount of damage/risk and pain to the mother in advanced stages of development.. a nut-kicking seems mild in comparison..)

    The immune reaction is possibly worse and mostly invisible, as it can drastically reduce fertility with the same partner if not suppressed, not unlike the Rhesus-factor complications but more specific.

    I’m trying to wrap my head around the possibility of , even in the US.., a judge ordering a woman to go through all that risk “on principle”, and not opening the avenue of having himself declared Unfit for Duty, and I simply can’t.
    An ambulance chaser/”principled” lawyer mad/deluded enough to try and bring it before a court, yes.. But not a judge going along with it.

  10. Grikath is right. I know a girl who had an ectopic pregnancy. While not super religious she had been trying for a baby for years. Despite knowing that even with a miracle the child would be severely handicapped she took her time deciding to terminate.
    She’s OK now but infertile. Without the abortion she probably would have died.

  11. Regardless of the science or ethics of this, isn’t it great that there are 50 different states with 50 different approaches toward this issue? That way, if it’s important enough to you, you’ll travel to another state where the laws are more lax. If you have the means to get pregnant, then you have the means to somehow cross state lines. There are people who have barely any money in their pockets, who are still able to get a used car and drive across the entire country.

    You don’t have to get a new driver’s license. You don’t have to learn a new language. You don’t need a passport. You don’t need a work visa. You don’t have to abandon your family. You don’t have to start using a new currency. You can even go back home to Texas right afterward. Aren’t state’s rights great?

    Gee, I wonder which people are trying to get rid of state’s rights…

  12. @Dennis, Bullshit Detector says “science tells us life begins at conception, and that at conception a human child has been conceived”. No science does not tell us that – far from it. At conception the ovum and sperm are already alive. Life began billions of years ago – possibly only once. At conception, the result is a single cell – not a child. A single cell is no more a person than a grain of sand is a sand dune (if a sand dune had as many grains of sand as the human body has cells, it would be about 30,000 cubic metres). Once the ovum is fertilised, there’s only about a 30% chance it will implant, so 60% of them will never be people. In some cases the zygote splits into two (or more) giving twins (etc), so it obviously couldn’t have already been a person. On other, very rare, cases two zygotes can fuse to produce one organism, a chimera, which, if development is successful, end up being a person. So, again, obviously each of the two cannot possibly have already been a person.

    And if after all that you still think that every single cell which is alive and human is a person, I suggest you scrape the inside of your cheek and then, as you dispose of the gunk produced, ask yourself who you are murdering.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *