Yesterday, South Dakota became the first state to force women to schedule counseling sessions at Christian-run pregnancy centers before they can schedule an abortion. The state has essentially deputized unqualified, anti-abortion volunteers with dubious medical training to pressure women into bringing their pregnancies to term. But that’s not all!
From the New York Times:
The legislation, which passed easily in a state Legislature where Republicans outnumber Democrats by more than 3 to 1, also establishes the nation’s longest waiting period — three days — after an initial visit with an abortion provider before the procedure can be done. It makes exceptions for medical emergencies, but not for rape or incest.
I could point out how offensive it is to force women—especially non-Christian women and rape victims—to sit through sanctimonious lectures and trumped up lies about abortion before making a private, personal medical decision.
- Courtesy of the Alpha Center
- Leslee Unruh in all her Glory.
But this argument doesn’t work. People like Leslee Unruh, the founder of a South Dakota pregnancy center called Alpha Center, don’t care about women’s right to medical privacy. This is a war over values. Logic doesn’t apply. “What are [pro-choicers] so afraid of?” Ms. Unruh rhetorically gloats in the NYTimes article. “That women might change their minds?”
And since it seems that the only way to get laws passed in South Dakota is to be batshit crazy, I have an alternate proposal to reduce abortions in SD: Mandate that every heterosexual couple engaging in sexual intercourse stare at this picture of Leslee Unruh for five minutes just prior to coitus.
Take a hard look at this headshot of Unruh. Notice how the tint of her skin perfectly compliments her red leather jacket. Check out the weird vein pulsing in her right cheek. The strange light emanating from her beautifully batshit eyes. The delicate hint of her arguably forked tongue.
This headshot of Unruh was provided by the Alpha Center. Undoubtedly they thought it a flattering one—who knows, maybe this is a hot look for conservative Christians. But all I see is a 300-pound demon stuffed into a lady suit, tunneling its demon gaze straight into my uterus in search of treasure. And I’m sure I’m not alone here. This is the face women will be staring at, in person, if their birth control fails them or if they are raped. This is the face of a woman (?) gleefully inserting herself and her values into the private lives of strangers. Staring at this picture for five minutes would make any healthy heterosexual couple’s sex drive wither and die.
And fewer heterosexual couples engaging in sex means fewer unplanned pregnancies means fewer abortions. Which means South Dakota wins, right? (Except for rape and incest victims. They’re still SOL.)
What the flying fuck is going on? South Dakotan women are going to need to get a ‘sign-off” from someone other than their doctor, and who isn’t required to keep such information confidential, to have a legal medical procedure? Are they going to institute the same requirements for men seeking vasectomies?
Why does an abortion procedure require a waiting period and ‘counselling’ beyond the explanation of the procedure, what to expect afterward, that there are other options if the patient is unsure of her decision, future contraception issues and gynecological health, and discussing concerns and questions that the patient has? When I had my abortion this discussion was required before I was allowed to consent, so that my consent would be INFORMED, right before the procedure. It was some of the best medical care I’ve ever received, and one of the most positive gynecological treatment experiences I’ve ever had.
I fear it won’t be too long before charitable organizations will have to be set up here in Canada to bring American women across the border to get abortion services that are free of violence, threats of damnation, unreasonable intrusions of privacy, and being detained without warrant.
The last face I saw like that was sucking blood out of a goat.
Imagine the number of lives saved from oppression if just one South Dakotan would have mustered up enough courage to take one for the team, chug as much beer and meth as it takes, and just fuck the shit out of that she-beast. C’mon guys… do it for your sister.
@51 if it makes you feel any better, the men are unattractive as well. Leslee Unruh, for instance.
@Calpete: Leslee has had abortions. That’s right: abortionS, as in more than one, which just makes her stance on the issue all the more infuriating.
George Carlin said it best: “Why is it that all these people who are against abortion are people you wouldn’t want to fuck in the first place?”
@51, I make it pretty clear that her lack of sex appeal is due to one unflattering photograph and the gleeful, aggressive way she’s inserting her ideology into the private lives of women.
She has made herself a political figure by lobbying to force her Christian values on people who don’t ascribe to them. Stare at her face for a moment and consider finding yourself unexpectedly pregnant and told that if you get an abortion, you risk breast cancer, sterility, and death. Imagine her telling you that if you do have children in the future, you might never be able to emotionally bond with them or your partner. Imagine her telling a rape victim that.
Now then, do you feel like having sex?
I hope someone from South Dakota takes this to court. It wouldn’t last long. Aside from the 1st Amendment violation it probably runs afoul of HIPAA and other federal privacy laws.
I’m all for vilifying this woman because she is a hypocrite and a zealot. But I’m not at all down with mocking the way she looks. Way to give the anti-choice crowd just a little more ammo in their “libruls are so mean!” fight.
@60, I regret nothing.
Congratulations, South Dakota–you found a way to up the ante after earning your “State with the Highest Instance of Forcible Rape” award. Never stop outdoing yourself!
http://pleated-jeans.com/2011/01/24/the-…
(Just kidding. Please stop outdoing yourself.)
I eagerly await the day that one of these religious wingnuts confronts me or my wife on this issue.
“What if your mother had had an abortion?!”
“She did. Then she had me, when she was ready.”
Cienna, I agree. People like this woman are nothing but pure evil.
If I were a female (I’m a gay male) and ended up pregnant because of incest or rape, I’d take a fucking butcher knife and ram it up my vag before being force to carry something like that to full-term pregnancy. “An act of God, and part of His Plan.” Not-fucking-harldy.
Yet, I’d be the “evil” one, in their eyes.
Un-fucking-believable.
I decided she was a disgusting pig before I saw her picture.
58
you are very stupid.
plus, you are uglier than this lady.
if you have any decent pictures please share them, all the pictures of your cuntface slog has posted were unflattering.
opposition to Murder is a “Christian” value.
must we legalize Murder lest we force her Christian values on people who don’t ascribe to them?
did we mention you are very stupid?
The true evil I see on this website are the comments people are making about Leslie Unruh. She is motivated by personal experience and a desire to spare women the pain she lives with every day of her life.
You’re gonna leave South Dakota, encourage others to so so too, AND wish economic ruin on the state – all because you have to be informed and wait 3 days before having an abortion?? BOO HOO.
@66, you are proof that conservative Christians are terrible at ripping on people–although I did enjoy the “do you shove tampons up your nose?” bit. It caused my “cuntface” to laugh a merry laugh.
Keep on trying,
Cienna
@66: “opposition to Murder is a ‘Christian’ value.”
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
@66 So you want her to post pictures of herself, yet you’re too chickenshit to register a screenname? That’s fucking rich.
@68: regarding 66: Oh me too Cienna! I snorted my scotch when I read that screen name, and said aloud” Why I don’t know little troll! Doyou shove tampons up your nose?” Seriously, that was just sad on so many levels.
Acts of war are premeditated murder.
Rape and incest victims have suffered enough.
What boggles my mind, maybe because I am not an American Christian, is why federal and state governments punish its female population by introducing such legislation and enacting such laws. The Christians must be reminded that in their theology, a human incarnation of the Supreme Being was delivered by a woman. An omnipotent deity could theoretically create a human from earth (cf. Genesis, Old Testament) instead. Women deserve at least equal treatment, and practically all of them are not carrying a human incarnation of the Supreme Being. If there were a woman impregnated by the seed of the Lord, chances are the woman already knows about it, and statistically is more likely to be in China or India. Do these Christians also protest against the wars Congress and the President start: why is it okay for foreigners/enemies to decide what and when and how mothers’ adult children die, but a woman can’t decide when to stop a pregnancy?
#66: ascribe means to credit or assign, as to a cause or source; attribute.
we force her Christian values on people who don’t ascribe to them = we force her Christian values on people who don’t credit or assign to them.
God doesn’t condone rape nor incest nor war. Leave it to an addled, mouthy and hypocritical populace to ASCRIBE (see what I did there?) to a deity beyond human comprehension approval of despicable acts. Sounds kinda Al-Qaeda to me.
Yeah, women should leave South Dakota and every other state that treats them as if they are incapable of making their own decisions. They didn’t choose for failing birth control methods, rape, incest nor ectopic pregnancies. Abandoning these underpopulated, unenlightened places would show indeed that women are capable of making their own decisions.
And just for good measure…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inq…
@67: I do not need this woman’s “help” in taking care of myself. I am a big girl, I’m pretty sure I can make reasonable choices on my own. Whether or not my choices include bringing a child into this world are none of her, or anyone’s, business. Long story short, in trying to serve her own needs, she is hurting every other woman. And that is unacceptable.
Cienna Madrid scores 2 out of a possible 10 for accuracy yet again!
The SD law requres counselling and a 3 day wait. The counselling is not specified to be faith based. (Here’s a tip; read the text of the law, not the Huff Po opinion piece on it.)
A 3 day wait is not a bar to a right. Were I to develop a craving for a .38 handgun I would have to wait to buy it. This has never been considered a bar to my 2nd Amendment rights.
At any rate Webster v. Reproductive Health Services in a 1989 decision ruled on very similar language in a Missouri statute, finding the Missouri law constitutional. Presumably this is why the SD governner is comfortable with the constitutionality of the new law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_v._…
These words from the new SD law are rare common sense in legislation- “The Legislature accepts and concurs with the conclusion of the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion, based upon written materials, scientific studies, and testimony of witnesses presented to the task force, that life begins at the time of conception, a conclusion confirmed by scientific advances since the 1973 decision of Roe v. Wade,”
http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/abo…
So- Here’s the score, Ms. Madrid, you did get the 3 day waiting period right so got 2 points, but sadly nothing else so you’re overall score is pretty poor I’m afraid. Better luck next time. Try some research next time, it might save you looking foolish.
@59
If I go from a doctors office with a presumption of privacy to a consellors office with the same presumption, how are my privacy rights being violated exactly?
1st Amendment? Though that amendment has been stretched to near breaking point, I hardly think this statute will test its’ remaining elasticity. No viable 1st Amendment issues are raised here.
In a state with such an overwhelming demand for abortions that doctors are flown in once a week to one location to provide them, who exactly are you libs protecting? South Dakota voted for the legislators who penned this and other pro-life bills. Elections have consequences, and vox populi, vox dei. Or does that only apply when you agree with the electoral results?