Ozzily Yours

Friday, November 10, 2006


So I'm all worked up about this Supreme Court partial-birth abortion thing, which I suspect is no surprise to anybody. Seriously, though, the thing that I really can't understand is, why are we still using the phrase "partial-birth abortion"? It's not a medically accepted term, it was simply made up by the anti-choice faction to describe various extremely rare dilation and extraction procedures (and, for the record, D&X itself isn't even considered "abortion" by the medical community, it is a completely separate procedure).

And that's part of what really confuses me: if these nutjobs were going to try to come up with a distasteful phrase that would win uneducated masses over to their way of thinking, why "partial-birth abortion"? Why not, I don't know, "baby skull crushing"?

Baby Skull Crushing is even more distasteful, and provides the anti-choicers the opportunity to jump right into their irritating habit of attempting to horrify the American public into condemning a medical procedure they know nothing about, even though it comprises less than 1% of all "abortions," and is nearly always performed due to health issues with the mother, the fetus, or both. Seriously, maybe they should hire me on as a consultant, I've got LOTS more ideas of how they could use the vividness bias to their advantage....

Grr. Argh.


  • The problem might be people like me. I would vote for anything, anywhere, called Baby Skull Crushing. I'd buy tickets.

    By Blogger I., at 11/10/2006 12:31 PM  

  • Well, truth be told, I got the giggles pretty badly when I first came up with this concept this morning (ask the husband, he was there). It was only when I actually sat down to write this post that I really got pensive and the angry tone came out....

    By Blogger mcm, at 11/10/2006 12:33 PM  

  • It's true, it was hilarious.

    "What? You can't support a ban on baby skull crushing? What do you have against baby skulls, you baby skull crusher???"

    That didn't come up at the time; I just wanted to write it. If that's the argument you're going to make, just make it. Don't be coy.

    By Blogger melz3000, at 11/10/2006 2:58 PM  

  • If everything is God's will and part of the big plan, doesn't that include abortion?

    By Anonymous Moth, at 11/13/2006 7:00 AM  

  • Ah, Moth, stop being so very logical. Logic has no place in this argument, clearly!

    By Blogger mcm, at 11/13/2006 11:06 AM  

  • How about instead of abortion we have a "pro-life" tax. It only applies to people and organizations that are pro-life and the money goes to the people who are prohibited from getting an abortion.

    The way it works is parents forced to have the child submit all bills for raising it to the government and they are reimbursed. The government then charges the pro-lifers the same amount, plus a 2% administrative fee. When the money runs out and nobody admits to being pro-life we go back to allowing abortions.

    By Anonymous Moth, at 11/14/2006 6:56 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home