Antichoicer takedowns: Southland Times letters column edition
ALRANZ have very helpfully been collating information on the ongoing struggle in Southland to allow pregnant people to get proper medical care. For the positive side of things, here’s a post dedicated to the prochoice side of things.
But we all know I have much more fun with the antis.
Contrary to pro-abortionists’ profound illogic, a woman does not have the right to do what she pleases with her own body. Neither does a man, for that matter. I am not permitted to use my body to murder or steal
Now, I’m not 100% sure, but I think that’s because when you murder or steal, you’re affecting another born, breathing person, who has a big shiny right to life which doesn’t involve hijacking my entire cardiovascular systems.
One of your recent correspondents wrote very disrespectfully about doctor Norman MacLean.
Because of course when you’re talking about forcing pregnant people into high-risk situations, it’s imperative you be polite. Especially to old white medical establishment dudes who want to control your body. That’s where I’ve been going wrong all these years!
At least giving life to her child is some consolation to the mother
Even if she dies in the process! Or has no capacity to feed and clothe her child! Oh, wait, that’s right, adoption is the magical solution to everything. Because the group of people who like to wax lyrical about the sanctity of life and the holiness of the traditional family unit are also the group who think pregnant people should just “wait” nine months (spot another argument put forward by dudes) and then just give away their child and forget it ever happened. I mean, their job is done, right? Incubation period over, go on with your life, you filthy slut.
From a letter which actually seems to think “but it’s not compulsory to provide abortions” is some kind of killer argument (you know, maybe Southern DHB thought about this and want to provide their community with needed medical services):
There are actually seven other DHBs in New Zealand whose communities don’t want abortions. Women seeking them are sent elsewhere.
Yes. And then they run a higher risk of complication due to delays, assuming the delays and travel required don’t prevent them getting an abortion which, just because this seems to be something antichoicers forget, forces a person to undergo a pregnancy they don’t want to, which will affect their health if not kill them.
And of course once again we get the childish fingers-in-ears “nanana I can’t hear you” attitude – you do get that those women are from your community, writer? That they clearly need that service and maybe that’s why Southern DHB are looking to provide it.
Sorry, no, I forgot, it’s all a vast feminist conspiracy to kill babies. Because we have that much power. *looks at continuing broadcasts of Two and a Half Men, cries into gin*
We believe the planned service is contrary to the first statutory purpose of the board to improve and protect the health of the population.
Protecting health … by enforcing delays in medical treatment which increase the risk and desperation of people who need it? I guess as they haemmhorage to death on hotel room floors in another province, no one in Southland can be held accountable …
[Abortion] has added up to more than 338,961 babies aborted in 30-plus years, or around the population of Christchurch wiped out.
These were potential taxpayers.
No, seriously, I’m not making it up: These were potential taxpayers. Fucking feminists, causing the recession with our babykilling ways. Next time someone mentions raising the superannuation age? You can blame us. If only we’d forced 339,000 people to remain pregnant when they didn’t want to be, we’d have flying fucking cars, people.
Is M Sparrow unaware that 877 women were admitted to hospital because of complications after their abortions between 2009 and 2011?
This represents 1047 bed days at the taxpayers’ expense.
“I am so concerned about the sanctity of life that I can only express it in that most sacred of units, the Taxpayer Dollar.”
Childbirth is a proven safer option than abortion.
“I care so much about the Taxpayer Dollar I can’t google basic statistics.” Or it might be that the statistics are inconvenient. And a bit fucking scary.
Abortion was an easy and quick option that would have saved her from all the above stress, but she withstood all the pressure and gave me the gift of life.
Wait a second – you mean she chose to keep you? Wow, you’re right, that’s amazing. I often consider how awesome it is that my mother chose to have me.
Wouldn’t be such a sweet little story if she’d been locked up in a “home” for wayward women and strapped down to the delivery table, now would it?
In 1939 Germany had evil laws that endorsed the mass gassing of God’s people the Jews. … In New Zealand we have several evil laws that oppose God’s ways.
You know what else the Nazis were really good at? Trying to control women’s fertility through forced sterilisation! (In my defence, it’s not a Godwin if they did it first.)
I do desperately want to know what the other “evil laws” are that “oppose God’s ways”. But I’m pretty sure we could make an accurate list.
It’s in their own words, people: if you don’t want to continue a pregnancy, you should just shut up and shut down your brain and just toss that baby into the arms of the nearest Loving Christian Family once it comes out. All babies are blessings, all pregnancies mere inconvenience, and if you must terminate a pregnancy, at least do it in one of those disgusting ungodly DHBs’ territories, would you? Also, Hitler.
Antichoicers: it’s hard to believe they try to sell themselves as the compassionate ones, isn’t it?
Ideologically Impure 
When I look at the tags beside this article, I cringe. I thought that your organisation was credible, but alas, I am proven wrong.
If you knew the amount of women that Dr. McLean has helped, then perhaps you wouldn’t be so quick to abuse him.
May I ask you how you have provided help to anybody, apart from protesting for womens’ rights?
Bligh … you do understand this is a personal blog, right? It’s just me here, little ol’ foul-mouthed Queen of Thorns. Mind you, if antichoicers can’t tell the difference between the ALRANZ official blog (it looks official and everything) and my sci-fi themed sweary masterpiece, I cannot be surprised you have no fucking clue about the difference between “helping” women and “taking their choices away from them”.
FYI: this may shock you, but plenty of people consider protesting for a good cause DOES help. Another of those complex notions antichoicers can’t grasp, perhaps?
Norman MacLean has helped a lot of Southland women over the years (my Mum is one of them). But the way some people take that to mean “we should revere him and agree with everything he says” is creepy. He’s trying to force his morality on everyone. He’s fighting to stop access to a legal procedure for Southland women, and pretending that if women have local access, well, we’ll just have abortions whenever we get bored or feel like a girls’ day out.
Feel free to disagree with abortion, but it’s not relevant to whether it’s provided at Invercargill or Dunedin. Don’t want an abortion? Don’t have one! Leave the rest of us alone.
Hells yeah! I’m super-glad that there are people out there who got decent medical treatment from Dr McLean. The *problem* is all those people, usually women, who didn’t because he’s a judgemental ass.