Abortion rights opponents had a busy week: Attempting to overturn a D.C. law protecting employees from reproductive discrimination; getting the vapors over the perfectly rational argument that choice is key to women’s economic opportunity; and holding bizarre ceremonial reenactments of a bill signing that abolished the safest and most common late-term abortion method in Kansas.
Not surprisingly, our opponents aren’t content with their victories, and still find plenty to complain about. Here’s what the anti-choicers are saying about us this week.
First, a twofer from RedState.com: First, the right-wing website isn’t content with winning their fight against reproductive freedom in D.C. (the U.S. House just voted to overturn the district’s anti-discrimination law, allowing companies to fire or otherwise discriminate employees because of their reproductive decisions). They want to shame the House Republicans who failed to vote for discrimination, calling them cowards who “turned their backs on their friends and betrayed unborn children.” The best part is RedState’s characterization of pro-choice groups’ M.O. (bolds in the original): “Unless you back their agenda of abortion on-demand, for any reason, up to the moment of birth, paid for by the taxpayer, they want to crush you.” Never before have I felt so omnipotent and well-funded.
Like many other right-wing publications, when women defend their bodily autonomy, RedState loves to trivialize it as “complaining.” (Women, amirite?)
This time, the site has set its sights on longtime feminist blogger Amanda Marcotte, who wrote a piece at Slate recently detailing the onslaught of state-level assaults on women’s rights, accusing her of believing that life “only begins at birth” and abortion rights advocates generally of having a “bloodlust [that is] in the arena of obsession.” After some off-point trolling about how feminists “most likely support” Facebook’s supposed 56 gender alternatives, the author goes on to defend fetal personhood laws, like the one being debated in Colorado, and to contend that supporting choice is tantamount to supporting slavery.
Breitbart has an exclusive (EXCLUSIVE!) interview with newly minted Presidential contender Carly Fiorina, in which the disgraced ex-HP CEO president claims that there is no war on women, that there is no such thing as women’s issues, and that pro-choice groups and individuals believe that life does not begin until a baby “leaves the hospital.” She also talks about an apocryphal anonymous friend who had an abortion and regretted it, saying that because the clinic didn’t offer her other options (?!), she didn’t have a chance to “[think] carefully about her decision.”
In an editorial that was published on a national wire service, FOX News contributor and former congressman Allen B. West’s eponymous website charges Hillary Clinton with racism for supporting women’s right to choose. Here’s the logic: Hillary supports choice, which is “death, actually. Death for the unborn.” But actually, “death for unborn non-white babies,” since African American women are more likely to have abortions. That fact, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with poverty, lack of access to birth control, despair, and lack of social support: Nope, it’s because the “abortion industry” has declared it “open season on babies of [the African American] race with the ultimate goal of achieving “Margaret Sanger’s eugenical dream to purify the population.” Backing away slowly…
If you like the Monday Motivation, sign up to have us deliver it right to your inbox! You can also sign up for the Friday Femorandum, our weekly roundup of the latest in reproductive news.