By Tom Quiner
It has got to be embarrassing.
Detractors to my recent essay in the Des Moines Register claim I “hate women” since I oppose webcam abortions:
“I’ve got to wonder at anyone who so hates females that he’d elevate the rights of a fetus over those of a woman.”
I oppose webcam abortions on the ground that they can hurt women, as it did to Holly Patterson, and kill her fetus, which compelling evidence reveals as being a human being.
The “hate women” claim is nonsense, of course, and is trotted out by those who are unable to muster a more persuasive argument.
On the other hand, some readers agreed with me:
“Nearly all gender selection abortions kill females for the sole reason that they are female. It is the ultimate misogyny.
The fetus you are referring to is a human fetus — a human being at a particular stage of development. The stage (embryo, fetus, toddler, teen, etc.) has no bearing on her value as a human being.
Your argument is also false because it pits the life of the unborn human being with the convenience — not the life — of the born human being.”
Unable to come up with a cogent response, the proponent of human abortion changed the subject:
“Forget all the inflamed rhetoric about poison … What Mr. Quiner fails to realize is, like any other drug, making this one illegal will not stop women from taking it. Google abortion pill and you can see that it is readily available, along with other illegal drugs. The choice is, whether you like it or not, do you want a medical professional to monitor the drug or do you want women to go it alone illegally?”
The thinking goes that even though something is immoral, it should be legalized because it’s going to take place anyway. Another reader neatly responded:
“That people are very committed to killing unwanted human beings does not obligate society to facilitate the process.”
The human abortion advocate stuck to his guns:
“No it doesn’t. The point is, it is going to happen anyway and there is nothing you can do about that. So why not let a doctor do it?”
Of course, that is part of the argument against “webcam human abortion,” a doctor isn’t even present.
An abortion opponent responded convincingly:
“Excellent points! It is illuminating when people try to deny the humanity of the unborn. Go to any embryology textbook and you’ll see the scientific fact that a new human being is created at conception (or just use common sense — what else would two human beings create?). Seehttp://tinyurl.com/yfje8lq for some samples.
The fact that there are other chemicals in society that can harm people misses the point. These are deliberately given to kill an innocent but unwanted human being.”
Holly Patterson’s father jumped into the discussion:
“I read the Opinion article today as it mentioned my daughter, Holly Patterson, and her fatal experience with RU-486/misoprostol medical abortion in 2003.
Medical abortion can be a very dangerous procedure. I know first hand, I held Holly’s hand as she fought for her life but eventually succumbed to a horrible and painful death.
My concern is not about the abortion debate but women’s health.
The health, safety and welfare of women should never be compromised, at all costs, in the name of women’s rights to access. Women need to completely understand the health consequences of this drug regimen to properly make an informed decision that is in their own best interest.
Based on what I know, the so-called “health care (abortion) providers” are doing a very poor job informing women of RU-486 medical abortion risks while they are already present in a clinic setting.
The medical abortion off-label process (non FDA-approved) is increasingly becoming a do-it-yourself procedure. This will create more injuries and fatalities that probably will go unreported.
Abortion providers don’t appear to take responsibility for handling their own patients complications and just simply direct them to an emergency hospital where doctors may not be familiar with their situation.
I can only imagine the information women may be getting from a web cam consultation, in a remote location, with minimal or no emergency hospital facilities to handle their life-threatening complications.
It is my hope that women and families, become educated with the facts about the real risks of these abortion drugs.
I created a website “Abortion Pill Risks – Just the Facts” http://abortionpillrisks.org/ and a YouTube video called “Abortion Pill – Health Risks and Facts” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtLe2PR5j54 as a educational resource for the international community.”
The response from the human abortion crowd? That Mr. Patterson’s letter was a fake:
“This is nothing more than a cut and paste job from an anti-choice web site.”
A pro lifer responded by stating the obvious:
” Are you omniscient? It appears from the link that the father is affiliated with the comment. So you don’t know if it was a lie, and even it it was (which would be wrong) it isn’t as bad as baby killing.”
Mr. Patterson made it clear that, indeed, these are his words:
“I originally posted my comment using my community Facebook page as “Abortion Pill Risks.” To set the record straight … the 18 year old teenager, Holly Patterson, discussed in the article was my daughter!
My comments ARE about “women’s health” and how women may potentially jeopardize their own health if they are not properly informed and monitored on the risk of complications of medical abortion. Especially, our young teenage daughters!
I am not focusing on political, religious, moral, or philosophical debates on abortion…Just the Facts.
The so-called “Medical professionals” are not always doing their job to “monitor the drug” and women already are “going at it alone” LEGALLY.
The Webcam abortion, in my opinion, is a dangerous procedure and compromises the quality of women’s reproductive health care.”
With the typical lack of compassion of the human abortion crowd, a reader fired back at Mr. Patterson:
“If you just use the facts, why are you blaming the pill for your daughters death? There’s a lot to this story that is missing and you’re using it to push your agenda.”
A man’s daughter is killed by RU-486 and a reader suggests it had nothing to do with her death, that the reader knows more about the story than the man who held his daughter’s hand while she died.
What a heartless mob.