First, it was the labor unions. Now, it’s the pro-choice masses that want Scott Walker recalled. Last week, the governor of Wisconsin signed a bill that would require women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound, as well as ban doctors without admitting privileges at nearby hospitals from performing the procedures. On Monday, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining for the latter part of the bill, but did not challenge the ultrasound requirement. In response to the new law in Wisconsin, Planned Parenthood has already been forced to shut down a clinic.
Abortion rights advocates wasted no time in expressing their displeasure with the ultrasound bill, not just because of the alleged invasiveness of the procedure, but the timing of the bill and how the governor signed it. Instead of making it a public affair, Walker chose to send out a statement declaring that the bill was now law during the middle of the Fourth of July weekend. Left-leaning publications chose adjectives such as “stealthy” or “quietly” to define the governor’s move, while the pro-abortion organizations Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin and Affiliated Medical Services immediately filed a lawsuit. As for pro-choice celebrities, they just offered charming tweets like this:
I'd very much like to anally probe @govwalker each time he needs to make an "informed decision" http://t.co/oAcUsGd3eb
— Sarah Silverman (@SarahKSilverman) July 5, 2013
In the midst of such tasteless backlash, some common assertions are arising.
Here are a few of the claims Walker’s opponents are making against ultrasounds:
1.They are not medically necessary
Actually, ultrasounds offer a number of significant health benefits. For instance, they can detect if a pregnancy is tubal or ectopic. As LifeNews explains, a woman may test positive for pregnancy, but in reality the unborn baby could be developing in the fallopian tubes and not in the womb. If gone unnoticed, the tube can rupture and could potentially be fatal. Several women have suffered a burst ectopic pregnancy over the past several decades after going to abortion clinics.
Recommended
2. Most clinics provide ultrasounds already
That may be so, but they don’t all give women the option to view the image. In a 2013 report from the Guttmacher Institute, it shows that although almost half of the states have some sort of ultrasound requirements prior to an abortion procedure, not all have to show the patients the resulting image – voiding any real impact it could have on the woman’s decision to abort or carry her child to term. Here in Virginia, for example, the law allows the woman to look away from the ultrasound image. Other rules state the provider can describe the ultrasound, but in states such as Louisiana and Texas she may decline to listen under certain circumstances.
3. It’s purely “political”
It may be hard for pro-choice feminists to believe, but Gov. Walker and other GOP politicians actually care about women’s livelihood. Walker released a statement saying the bill "improves a woman's ability to make an informed choice that will protect her physical and mental health now and in the future." Indeed, seeing her ultrasound gives a mother the chance to realize there is an actual baby growing inside her and not just a “mass of cells.” In addition, keeping her baby can save her from potentially painful emotional costs.
It’s no surprise pro-choicers want to defeat this bill, since 78 percent of women who look at their ultrasound end up keeping their babies. Is it any surprise that once a mother can actually see her child’s organs and features that she becomes more attached to him or her?
Gov. Walker is used to adversity – I’m sure he can handle a few nasty tweets and lawsuits. As to the complaint about Walker’s timing, I say what better occasion than Independence Day to sign a bill that can lead to more freedoms for our unborn children?
Join the conversation as a VIP Member