Letters to a Young Progressive: How to Avoid Wasting Your Life Protesting Things You Don't Understand (6 page)

Student: In your speech, you say that you are opposed to abortion under virtually every circumstance. If you are not willing to preserve the legality of abortion then I was just wondering whether you would support any of the following programs, which would ease the repercussions of making abortion illegal. For example, would you support national health care in order to provide medical check-ups for women? Also, would you support a national daycare program for those who cannot afford to stay home with their babies? As an educator, you know the importance of education. So I am wondering if you would support additional sex education programs in our public school system. And, since not everyone goes to school, would you support publicly funded sex education classes for adults?

 

 

Me: Ma’am.

 

Student: I’m not finished yet.

 

Me: I know you aren’t finished, but most people just ask one question and you are firing off a number of them. I think I can save you some time by answering all of your questions with one simple answer: No, I would not.

 

Student: Why aren’t you willing to support any of these measures?

 

Me: Because each one includes either the word “national” or the word “public.”

 

Student: I don’t understand.

 

Me: Well, put simply, each time you use the word “national” you are referring to the national government. Each time you use the word “public” you are referring to the local government. Either way, you are suggesting you will drop your support for abortion in exchange for more government spending. Now let me ask you a question. Are you a graduate student?

 

Student: I am.

 

Me: What is your major?

 

Student: Public Policy and Administration.

Me: Well, there we have it. All of the government programs you recommend would be run by people with Masters in Public Administration, or MPA, degrees. What you are really asking me is whether I would be willing to trade government jobs for live babies. I think that is truly shameful. I am here to help save lives, not to help grow the government. And if you concede that abortion takes life, then you should oppose it without any further financial incentive.

The Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), the research arm of Planned Parenthood, estimates that there were 1.21 million abortions performed in the U.S. in the year 2005. Of the 1.21 million annual abortions, approximately 88% (1.06 million) are performed during the first trimester. The other 12% (150,000) are performed during the second and third trimester. In 2005, the average cost of a nonhospital abortion with local anesthesia at 10 weeks of gestation was $413. The Women’s Medical Center estimates that a 2nd trimester abortion costs up to $3000 (with the price increasing the further along the pregnancy goes). If we take the $413 average for 1st trimester abortions and use a $3000 average for 2nd and 3rd trimester abortions, here’s what we get: $438 million is spent each year on first trimester abortions and $393 million is spent on late term abortions. That means that each year in the U.S., the abortion industry brings in approximately $831 million through their abortion services alone. If you add in the $337 million (or more) that Planned Parenthood (America’s largest abortion provider) receives annually in government grants and contracts, the annual dollar amount moves well past 1 billion.

Abortion, to put it plainly, is a very lucrative business, and this has been true from the beginning. By last count, Planned Parenthood (a tax-exempt organization!) has $951 million in total assets!

1.
Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs).
It has been ten years since we at UNC-Wilmington established a Women’s Resource Center (WRC). For nine of those ten years, I have been trying to get our local crisis pregnancy center linked on the WRC website, which is hosted by our university. But the feminists who maintain the WRC website have refused to include the link, claiming that they don’t have room on the website for both Planned Parenthood and the CPC. They have also said they cannot include the CPC because it is “overtly religious.” But most feminist criticisms of CPCs have not centered on religion specifically. Instead, they have centered on the more general accusation that CPCs try to make women feel guilty if they are even considering an abortion. These critics sometimes say that the real motivation for showing ultrasound images of the unborn baby is to make the woman “emotional” in order to get her to avoid making the “rational decision” to abort.

But all of these explanations gloss over the fact that CPCs cost the abortion industry money. And money is a big reason why Planned Parenthood and its feminist allies would like to keep abortion safe, legal—and frequent. If Planned Parenthood is a pregnant woman’s only source of counseling, then the chance she will keep her baby is only about 10 percent. By contrast, some CPCs claim that by offering alternative counseling they can increase the chances that a woman will keep her baby to about 50 percent. And if the CPC is equipped with ultrasound technology (and the woman sees her unborn baby via sonogram), then the chance she will have her baby actually skyrockets to around 90 percent.

2.
Breast Cancer Awareness.
When I first heard that abortions significantly increase a woman’s chances of getting breast cancer, I was confused. I simply didn’t get the connection. But upon further reflection, it makes perfect sense. When a woman gets pregnant she experiences a rapid growth of breast tissue. An abortion creates an unnatural condition since the woman’s breast tissue is growing to prepare for a baby that is no longer there. That is the reason why women who have first trimester abortions double their chances of getting breast cancer. Professor Joel Brind of City University of New York has written a comprehensive study of the subject called
Review and Meta-Analysis of the Abortion/ Breast Cancer Link.
Here’s what he has to say about the level of cancer risk brought about by abortion: “The single most avoidable risk factor for breast cancer is induced abortion.”

Now, ask yourself a question, Zach. In all the years that our university has sponsored breast cancer awareness seminars and speeches, have you ever heard a discussion of the issue of abortion? Clearly, discussing the role abortion plays in breast cancer poses a risk to those who profit from providing abortions. And so the information is routinely suppressed. If you don’t believe me, then just do a quick Google search of our university website. Nowhere—not in any course syllabus or any other published document—is the link between breast cancer and abortion mentioned. Nor is any professor at our university (besides me) currently discussing or researching the issue. It is simply dumbfounding.

3.
Parental Notification Laws.
In addition to preventing free speech on a wide range of issues like abortion and breast cancer, feminists often try to prevent the free flow of information between private parties—where there is a chance that the information might reduce the number of abortions. A prime example of this phenomenon is the staunch feminist opposition to parental notification laws. When a twelve-year-old girl becomes pregnant, there is little sense arguing that she has the maturity to understand the consequences of an abortion. Indeed, there is little chance that she understood the consequences of sex in the first place—hence the unexpected pregnancy. So she really should talk to one or both parents before having an abortion. Nonetheless, the feminist movement fights tooth and nail against parental notification laws because there is a very good chance that parents will be opposed to their little twelve-year-old getting an abortion. And, as we discussed previously, such opposition would cut into the profits of the abortion industry.

So now we find ourselves in a strange place in America. If a teenager wants an abortion, she can have it. But if sometime later on she becomes upset and cries hard enough to get a headache and she needs an aspirin, then she’s out of luck. The school nurse can’t give her an aspirin without first securing parental permission. Abortion “yes,” but aspirin “no.” Which one would you say is more likely to be harmful to a twelve-year-old?

4.
Reporting Statutory Rape.
Over the course of the last several years, numerous undercover sting operations have caused Planned Parenthood great embarrassment. In some of the operations, young women have called a Planned Parenthood clinic to report that they were pregnant—specifically identifying themselves as under the age of consent. In recorded phone calls, Planned Parenthood employees make it clear that they are willing to provide abortions—without reporting the statutory rapes. Recordings of some of these phone conversations have been released to the media, causing great embarrassment to the “pro-choice” movement. After several of these sting operations were conducted over the phone, some pro-life organizations decided to start conducting them in person using hidden cameras.

In June of 2008, two college women volunteering for Students for Life of America (SFLA) entered two clinics in North Carolina posing as underage girls. One posed as a fifteen-year-old, and the other posed as a fourteen-year-old. Both claimed they had just had unprotected sex with their mother’s boyfriend, who was in his thirties. Each girl also told the clinic workers that the boyfriend had suggested that she come get the “morning after” pill. According to North Carolina law, this information is enough to trigger mandatory statutory rape reporting. In other words, anyone aware of such information must report it to proper state or local authorities.