My Conversation with AbortionNO.org

So a while ago I took a look at abortionNO.org, an anti-abortion site that uses shock tactics such as pictures of aborted fetuses and genocide imagery (body parts of blown-up dead kids, photos from the Holocaust, etc). Frankly when I look at an aborted fetus I just think it's gross looking, I don't think it looks human. However even people who see aborted fetuses/embryos in the same way that I do will probably be upset by the imagery of dead children, etc, so I do NOT recommend anyone looks at that site. It's completely useless and full of misinformation, anyway.

But here's the funny thing.

After I explored the site for a while, I filled in their survey, and in the comment section, said something like, "I'm disgusted with the amount of balant misinformation given on this site." Something like that.

And what the hell? A couple days later, I get a one-liner from their main address: "Name one misstatement of fact."

Daaaamn. Someone's a little demanding

Personally I find it pretty disgusting that they respond to my optional response to their survey. Do they usually do that or do they only harrass people who are pro-choice? Do they send snippy little notes to women who've had abortions telling them they are murderers? Is the survey a sneaky way to get them to convert those who haven't been converted by their ridiculous site?

I fired off an email in return. We shall see if they reply. I thought though, perhaps, that those who get their "facts" from biased, anti-abortion shock sites, might be interested in seeing my reply, which named several of their misstatements of facts:

"You claim that "viability generally begins at 21 weeks... when the baby has a 15% chance of survival." Incorrect. It is EXTREMELY rare for babies born at 21 weeks to survive. In fact, only two in medical history have, and they were both born towards the end of the 21st week (James Gill, born at 21 weeks and five days, and Amillia Taylor, born at 21 weeks and six days.) Babies born during the 22nd week have slightly less than a 15% of survival, and about half those babies are brain-damaged. Generally because the chances of survival without serious disability is rare, babies born at 22 weeks are not resuscitated. Most neonatologists believe no infant born before 22 weeks will be viable, because the lungs aren't developed enough until at least halfway through the 22nd week, when it has a miniscule chance of living.

I have some issues with you defining an unborn xygote/embryo/fetus as a "person", since generally a person is assumed to be sentient. But that's more misleading your audience than actually lying to them. Same with calling it a baby before it has reached that point of development.

You claim that getting an abortion increases a woman's chance of getting breast cancer by 30%. It is a twisting of facts - a completed pregnancy adds a certain amount of protection against breast cancer. However, a childless woman who does not have an abortion has the same likelihood of getting breast cancer than a childless woman her age who did have an abortion. It's a matter of whether or not they have had a child, not whether or not they had an abortion.

Regarding the other risks of abortion, such as future complications with pregnancy - again you give incorrect information. Most abortions are performed before eight weeks, when vaccuum aspiration can still be used. That causes no damage to the uterine wall. There has been no conclusive link found between later pregnancy complications and previous abortions and many doctors assert that abortion does NOT cause any infertility, heightened chance of miscarriage, etc. Your "sources" are from over 20 years ago.

The section claiming women don't die from illegal abortions is entirely false. According to the World Health Organization, botched abortions account for 13% of pregnancy-related deaths worldwide (65,000 girls and women per year). In Latin America, the percentage jumps to 21%. In Mexico, it's 31%. In Egypt, abortion-related problems are responsible for about one-fifth of all obstetric and gynecologic admissions. In some countries, women suffering from complications from botched abortions make up two thirds of patients in maternity wards.

It is also incorrect that making abortion illegal causes abortion rates to rise. Abortion rates are lowest in European countries where abortion is legal and accessible, higher in developing countries where it is illegal."

I'll be going into more detail on these subjects in my series "A Step-by-Step Argument for Abortion", but I thought people might be interested in some examples of how anti-abortion sites are full of shit. Perhaps soon you will also get some examples of how they harrass those who disagree with them.

If you enjoyed this post, please give it a high rating!

"A Step-by-Step Argument for Abortion: Teen Sex & Pregnancy"
http://www.progressiveu.org/061328-step-step-argument-abortion-teen-sex-...

Bookmark/Search this post with:

 •    •    •    •    •    •    •