So true, I am very cautious about who I share my abortion experience with. Even though I do not feel that it was a terrible thing to do, I prefer to avoid the judgement of others. But I will look more closely at this in the future. I do not need protection from judgement, and there may be others who are less certain of their decision to have an abortion and they need to hear more support from other women. Thank you Marcy!

from Dave Andrusko, Editor, Today's News and Views, NRLC.org

Thanks to the virtually limitless capacity of information to be sent/linked on the Internet, something that appears in one online setting may eventually make its way into your email box, having been forwarded any number of times. That's what happened today when I chanced up an unhappy skein titled, "The New Scarlet Letter," written by Marcy Bloom.

The reference is, of course, to Hawthorne's classic novel that we all read in high school, and is intended to link anyone who opposes the destruction of innocent unborn life with the small-minded townspeople who sought to make life unbearable for Hester Prynne and her child.

This makes for all too-easy comparisons: pro-lifers are "puritanical," their concern for both mother and child a reflection of "patriarchal assumptions," etc., etc. This pro-abortion parallelism is so threadworn, so long in the tooth, it seems as if it's older than the 1850 book. Please, Ms. Bloom et al., give it a rest.

But the primary purpose of her essay goes beyond moralizing against the alleged moralizers. The most important ideas are contained in the following paragraph:

"The cultural stigma of abortion that dictates the secrecy of the experience must change. Society must continue to examine the moral consequences that befall us when the choice of abortion is not honored. It is, after all, a choice that more than one million women make in the U.S. annually. Above all, abortion needs to be viewed as the most morally responsible and loving choice a woman can make when she believes that this is the best decision for herself. Stigma and secrecy all keep women locked in pain, guilt, and alienation. They serve only as barriers to health, self-knowledge, acceptance, and healing."

I could write about that for days, but let me just say a couple of things. The noisiest are those who insist that the rest of us must be silent. The most judgmental are those who judge pro-lifers.

Moreover, just because I--or you or anyone else--believe an action is best for me/you does not by itself make the action "morally responsible and loving."

Without offering a laundry list of the obvious, think of all the weaknesses we are all prone to even on our best days. On top of that we are adept at convincing ourselves that what we want to do is responsible/loving/best for everyone.

Why is that so? Because the human capacity for self-deception is unlimited and because most of us will choose the "easier" path, if given half a chance.

The one point Bloom has right is that a woman who has aborted her own child should not, cannot stay frozen "in pain, guilt, and alienation." There are many paths to coming to grips with this tragically wrong decision, but convincing herself that the decision ought to be "honored" is not one of them.

Contrary to Bloom, it's not "stigma" that wracks these poor women's consciences, any more than it is stigma that torments the man who realizes that his child was aborted because he coerced the mother into this "choice," or failed to support her when she needed him most.

Bloom tells us that we must "create a society of respect and openness so that it is safe to talk [about abortion]." Really?

The only respect she seeks is respect for the decision to abort, the only talk she wants is an affirmation of the decision for death, and the only openness she desires is gibberish such as the notion that abortion is a "transformational experience."

I am fully willing to grant that people like Bloom are sincere in their beliefs. I just wonder if they ever actual listen to what they say.

Dave Andrusko complains that the analogy between the stigma portrayed in Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter and the stigma of abortion "makes for too-easy comparisons." Probably because it's a near-perfect analogy! (Thanks Marcy for the great article :-)

If pointing out that anti-choicers are puritanical and operate on patriarchal assumptions is "threadworn and long in the tooth" that must be because it's become a self-evident truism. One that Andrusko is blind to, unfortunately, even as he validates that truism himself.

Without bothering to justify himself, he asserts that women who have abortions are wracked by guilt (not stigma) and that abortion is always a "tragically wrong" choice. Both assumptions are puritanical and patriarchal - as well as factually wrong. First, it's only in western societies with a Christian heritage that many women feel some guilt after abortion, likely induced by Christianity's deep-seated fear of sex. In other words, it's social stigma. Second, the abortion decision can be complex and difficult, but most women do not regret their abortion - in fact, they're grateful because it gives them their lives back, and ensures they can take care of their existing (or future) family. In other words, it's a moral, honorable, and just decision from the woman's perspective.

And that's what society needs to learn - respect and trust for a woman's moral autonomy, including her sexual and reproductive decisions. Stigma and judgement are hurtful, counterproductive, and just plain wrong.

choice joyce baldly presents pro-abortion mythology as fact: "First, it's only in western societies with a Christian heritage that many women feel some guilt after abortion, likely induced by Christianity's deep-seated fear of sex." And this in keeping with the marketing maxim that if you repeat a self-serving and preposterous lie often enough, eventually people will start to believe it. It's also called bait-and-switch, standard operating procedure for pro-choice bigots. The truth of it is that Christianity's opposition to the shedding of innocent blood -a common theme in all of the world's great religions- is what galls choice joyce the most, and she is most keen to ignore and/or repudiate Christianity for this reason, but she fools no one by attempting to change the subject, not even the members of her own sex-obsessed "camp."

"Second, the abortion decision can be complex and difficult, but most women do not regret their abortion - in fact, they're grateful because it gives them their lives back, and ensures they can take care of their existing (or future) family. In other words, it's a moral, honorable, and just decision from the woman's perspective." Who would deny that the abortion decision can be complex and difficult? It SHOULD be, yet choice joyce fails to acknowledge the obvious, namely, that elective abortion is itself proof that a woman can't take care of her existing family. Why the calculated omission? Because she can't bring herself to see that the child who dies in the abortion process is PART OF THE EXISTING FAMILY ALREADY, as is the father, but hell, who needs that paternalistic puritan anyway, especially if he opposes the choice to abort?

No, choice joyce is the center of her own frightfully circumscribed and exclusive moral universe. As the measure of all truth, her decision to abort (and it's likely that she has had at least one elective abortion, as defensive as she is) will forever be depicted as "moral, honorable, and just." To see it for what it truly is, a surrender to wretched circumstance at best, and as an exercise in sheer selfishness at worst, could be psychically damaging, even crippling, and admitting THAT possibility is the very last thing that a champion of the supposedly liberating choice to kill a defenseless unborn human being would ever want to do!

For another considered opinion:

8 reasons why abortion is bad for women

by Georgette Forney

Dave - (lexcathedra) Your response is an attempt to push emotional buttons and hardly deserves an answer. Especially since you pretty much refute yourself. You make a bizarre little pro-choice rant about an abortion being proof that the woman can't take care of her existing family. So your point is...?

Christianity's main problem, period, is that it's anti-sex. Much more so than any other world religion, even perhaps Islam - since Christianity generally disapproves of sex for pleasure, even in the marriage bed. As for the "shedding of innocent blood," that's an irrationally fanatic phrase that has no basis in reason or fact. Early fetuses don't even HAVE blood, and furthermore no fetus is innocent - an unwanted fetus is co-opting the woman's body against her will and risking her life and health. So she has a right to defend herself with an abortion.

Sometimes, even pro-choice people fall into the trap of revering fetuses too much. I call that the "fetus focus fallacy." But women are ALWAYS far, FAR more important than fetuses, which, let's face it - are simply NOT very important in the scheme of things, and also are none of our business. It's up to the pregnant woman what value if any she wants to assign to her fetus. The rest of us need to butt out.

Your post "True Feminism is Pro-life" tries to mount a far more damaging case to abortion rights. You rely totally on stereotypes of women as passive helpless victims, with no will or autonomy of their own, completely controlled and exploited because.... well, because they're women. Apparently woman's nature is such that it's there to be exploited by others - which makes sense I guess, if women are hapless victims of fate with no mind or drive of their own.

Certainly, according to you, women are wholly incapable of deciding for themselves whether to have an abortion, let alone take responsibility for the decision as the best decision she could make at the time. You believe that woman's sacred role is motherhood, that all women should/must/want to be mothers, and that an abortion is a profound violation of her very nature. Did you sleep through the last century? Because the big news is that women are not defined by motherhood. Women can be greatly fulfilled by careers, education, and achievement the same as men. Many women don't even want to be mothers, and almost all women want the power to pick and choose when and how to do it.

Legal and available abortion and contraception give women true freedom and sexual autonomy, because they separate sex from procreation. This is wonderful progress that greatly increases human potential, dignity, liberty, and happiness. But I believe that sexual freedom for women is what really scares people the most. Fear of women and women's power is what really underlies the anti-choice position.