Shame on Everybody: Michigan Senate Race Debate Over Abortion

Protest

Shame on everybody.

I would love to single out one of the mud-slingers and propagandizers in this little set-to and say “Fie on you!” But I can’t. So, I guess I’ll just say “Fie on everybody!” and be done with it.

United States Congressman Gary Peters is running for the United States Senate in Michigan. He evidently drug his kids into a debate over an abortion law, saying that as the father of daughters

… I struggle with how to tell them that the state we love and where our family has been for generations is now unfairly discriminating against them and makes health care less affordable.

I understand why this comment would raise the ire of anyone reading it. What kind of man drags his own kids into something this ugly? And what a schlocky way to do it.

Thankfully, the other fine folks in Michigan didn’t attack the daughters directly. But their reply comes close to matching the Congressman’s for sheer jerkiness. According to the pro life people of Michigan, Congressman Peters “wants to make sure abortion is accessible and cheap for his daughters.”

Maybe the harsh winter has frozen their brains up in Michigan. Can anyone in that state talk about important issues without getting down in the pits? I can think of a lot of ways to defend Michigan’s pro life laws, all of them based on principle and a call to higher orders of thinking. I could also, if I wanted, defend a position in opposition to such laws without ever once painting a target on my kids.

ThinkProgressive, which reported this story, added the cherry on top with its painfully biased reporting. Here’s how the reporter who wrote the story described the law in question:

The statement comes in response to a controversial new abortion restriction in Michigan that took effect earlier this month. Women who buy health insurance in Obamacare’s private market are now barred from purchasing a plan that includes abortion coverage, even if they want to end a pregnancy that resulted from rape or incest. They’ll be required to purchase a separate rider if they want an abortion procedure to be covered, which has led reproductive rights supporters to decry the measure as a rape insurance law.

I haven’t read the Michigan law, but there are a number of similar laws around the country. I am assuming that all this one does is not allow health insurance plans to pay for abortions. If someone wants to have abortion coverage in their insurance, then all they have to do is buy a rider providing it. I doubt very much that the questions of rape and incest enter into it.

I’m guessing that the Michigan pro abortion people couldn’t come up with an intelligent way to oppose this law, so they decided to claim that it is somehow aimed at victims of rape and incest. In my humble opinion, this line argument exploits rape and incest victims.

Evidently, a Michigan legislator joined the fray by talking about her own sexual assault in a speech. I’ve watched bits of the debate on this bill, and what I saw was a deliberate mis-characterization of the law in order to exploit women and girls who have suffered these horrible crimes against their humanity. I honestly regard it as a kind of social rape to do this to women.

I could really go off into a rant here, as the subject of violence against women always gets me going. I feel sorry for the legislator who talked about her own sexual assault in this manner. But, as I said, the bill does not address that issue. Conflating it with that issue is propaganda and exploitation of women who have suffered the dehumanizing effects of sexual assault.

I am also sick to the core of hearing people claim that abortion is the answer to rape. Abortion hides rape and lets the rapist off the hook. Abortion is, in a very real way, an accommodation to rape. It is disgusting to me that our idea of “helping” rape victims is to give them the option of adding the murder of their own child to what has already happened to them.

As I said in another post when I quoted a line from Rob Roy, it’s not the child that needs killing. I said this, even though I am opposed to the death penalty, because I want to make it clear who is at fault here: It is the rapist. We need to stop sexualizing and degrading women in our culture, and we also need to put these guys away and never let them out again.

I could say more, but I’m going to stop.

As for the fine folks in Michigan who, on both sides, have taken this debate about the value of human life and the humanity of women down in the basement: Shame on all of you.

  • Fabio Paolo Barbieri

    Back when Bush II was in office, and he passed his crazed tax cuts that essentially made sure (in wartime, too!) that a considerable amount of government expenditure would not be funded, I observed that there was nothing strange about the swift and unstoppable rise in pork and political corruption. If the President had broken the link between income and expenditure so shamelessly, why should any senator or representative fight to hold the line already abandoned by the highest authority in the land? Likewise now. The first person to drag his own daughters in the debate about abortion has been Barack Obama (remember “punished with a baby”?). Once the President has broken the limits of privacy and decency, why should any lesser being hold the line and give up the opportunity of cheap and nasty points?

  • peggy-o

    These are sad days for journalism and politics. Emotional arguments and hyperbole seem to succeed over reason or at least are chosen for soundbites. Until we can counter the ingrained notion that abortion and birth control equal healthcare for women, the cycle will continue.
    Years ago, I produced a Natural Family Planning video for the western Michigan diocese. I was working for a secular company that got the job and not practicing. When it was done I gave up artificial for natural and began thinking about coming back to the church. We can succeed if we can be heard and get a positive message out there.

  • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

    The sad part is that pro lifers must kill innocent babies in any effort to force the birth of fetuses. Calling the murder of babies a “pro life” act is insane.
    Forcing the birth of a rape baby simply denies a woman the opportunity to have a wanted baby, so that makes no sense either. Search: Scientific Abortion Laws

  • irena mangone

    What happened in the day when abortion was not available on tap and women gave birth to babies conceived by rape did they bring up the child or give them up for adoption it would be good if there was sharing of these things by the women involved how did their lives unfold are there any studies . And what about incest that horrible act as well .

  • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

    Obama’s comment that he wanted abortion to be available so that his daughters wouldn’t be “cursed with children” turned me against him in 2008.

    I wish we would start researching the science fiction concept of Death of Personality. If anybody deserves that kind of punishment, it is the rapist- he should be on amnesiac drugs the rest of his life, and anything he achieves in life, rightly belongs to his victims and their children.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X