Exploiting Exploitation

The Virginia legislature recently considered a bill that would require women seeking an abortion to receive an ultrasound.  Grasping for arguments against the bill, various abortion advocates have stated that requiring an ultrasound, in the words of Virginia Del. Charniele Herring, is “akin to rape.”

The absurdity of this claim has already been eloquently debunked by writers for Live ActionLifeNewsLifeSiteNews, and other organizations, so I won’t spend time reiterating their points.  Equating an ultrasound to rape is ridiculous, but if the pro-choice movement wishes, two can play this game.  Let’s look at a much more valid comparison: rape and abortion.

Rape and abortion both stem out of a disrespect for human life.  Just as in rape, a victim of abortion is viewed as a commodity rather than a person with inherent value.  Victims of rape don’t consent to this abuse, nor do victims of abortion.  In a painful invasion, the unborn are stripped of all privacy and denied all freedoms.  In contrast to rape however, few abortion victims live to recover.

The flaws with the “ultrasound = rape” comparison have already been discussed at length.  What I would like to focus on is a broader problem: the pro-choice movement’s exploitation of rape.

The political world is filled with manipulative, loaded language — especially when discussing abortion.  By calling ultrasounds a form of rape, abortion advocates are stealing emotions from one issue and tacking them onto something that is completely unrelated.  They are trying to take the sense of outrage that you (rightly) feel toward rape and have you feel the same way about an ultrasound.  This is not only deceptive, but wrong.

How dare abortion advocates exploit a tragic incident to further their agenda?  How dare they use one human rights abuse to promote another?  This ridiculous argument is disrespectful to actual rape victims, making trite their painful experience.  Rape should be viewed as the tragedy that it is, not used as a political playing card.

This isn’t an isolated incident.  The pro-choice movement seems to have an obsession with rape.  Understanding the emotion released when discussing rape, the supposedly “pro-women” movement has commodified victims, using them to further their agenda.  “What about victims of rape?” is constantly asked when regulations on abortion are proposed, despite the fact that only 1% of abortions are received by rape victims. In a society that currently adores being a part of the 99%, I find it strange that pro-choice groups often demand that decisions be made on behalf of the [less than] 1%.

Abortion and rape are both human rights abuses, and the pro-abortion movement does little to stop either of them.  (In fact, the abortion movement’s poster-child, Planned Parenthood, has been caught repeatedly failing to report cases of statutory rape of minors.)  The abortion movement must stop abusing the abuse argument to further their cause.  If the case for abortion can not stand on its own merit, then it deserves to crumble.

4 thoughts on “Exploiting Exploitation

  1. Thank you for writing this article, Lucy. It always greatly upsets me when rape or assault survivors are used for a political agenda, when no one asked them to. I was never raped, but I am an assault survivor. Like you said, exploiting rape survivors makes a cliché of their trauma, and that makes the trauma of assault survivors cliché, as well. It sometimes makes it hurt worse, because I don’t see the abuse and assault I went through the way others do.

    I was abused and assaulted in Catholic school. It is a very long story, but, basically, I don’t blame the Church or the Pope for what I went through. I blame the abusers and those who turned their backs. Yes, I left the Church for a little while, but I came back when I realized that the Church hierarchy had nothing to do with it, and had no real power to stop it, other than the priest who laughed and let it happen. I went to a different parish, and found people who were there for me, and were willing to help. I know that there are those who don’t agree, but I don’t want what happened to me to be used for another person’s argument against the Church. Being that I’m a part of the Church, victimizing the Church also further victimizes me.

    In the case of rape and abortion, the Ad Hoc Committee of Women Pregnant by Sexual Assault have specifically asked for those who are for abortion to not use them to keep abortion legal.

    These women never asked for others to argue to keep abortion legal on their behalf. Many who aborted have even said they were further hurt by the abortion. Some called it a “medical rape”. One woman who kept her child, Kathleen DeZeeuw, was quoted as saying,

    I having lived through rape, and also having raised a child “conceived
    in rape,” feel personally assaulted and insulted every time I hear that
    abortion should be legal because of rape and incest. I feel that we’re
    being used to further the abortion issue, even though we’ve not been
    asked to tell our side of the story.

    Everyone, please stop using rape and assault survivors for your political games when you have been not been asked to, and especially when you have been asked not to.


  2. Jeez louise. First of all, at least in Georgia, ultrasounds are required anyway, so the doctor knows where to put the aspirator (a thin suction tube, for the uneducated, used to remove a fetus from the womb). And the woman is capable of making the decision to view the ultrasound or not. Secondly, forcing a woman to view the ultrasound is where I as well begin to have a problem. Forcing a woman to view the fetus, after the decision has been made to receive an abortion, is cruel and unusual punishment. It would be akin to showing a human a calf, just before eating a steak. “But are you SURE you want to do this? Look how cute they are when they’re little!” Those women already made their decision. Forcing them to view the ultrasound is cruel and unusual punishment, exploiting women’s emotions in favor of you Pro-Lifers, to hopefully force the woman and the world to accept an unnecessary person. So, ultrasounds for safety’s sake, yes. Taking away the woman’s right to choose, absolutely not.


    1. Well typically when one is about to commit murder, a normal person would like to show that selfish individual what they are doing and try to prevent them from it.


    2. The law doesn’t force women to view the ultrasound. It forces the physician to allow the women to view the ultrasound. There’s a big difference. We hear from women all the time that they were not allowed to view the ultrasound, or were surprised by the ultrasound during a later pregnancy, since they were never offered to see the one for the abortion. The truth is, doctors already have to show you the x-rays, cat-scans, and the like that you receive for other procedures. You can look away from those if you choose to. Therefore, it follows that a woman should at least be offered to see her ultrasound.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *