Anti RU486 group loses god
A few days ago I heard about an organisation that has been set up to mobilise churches and anti-abortion groups against RU486.
“Australian Against RU486 is a coalition of concerned groups and individuals including pro-choice people campaigning on medical, ethical or moral grounds to keep ban on RU486. The coalition includes eminent doctors, physicians, academics, and community leaders from all over Australia. AA RU486 supports positive outcomes for Australian Women and believes that advocates of RU486 are endangering the lives of Australian women in the name of choice. AA RU486 is a trust established specifically and solely to campaign to keep the ban on RU486.” – Australians Against RU486 (aaRU486)
Simone Holzapfel, a former media adviser to Tony Abbott (before he became the Health Minister) heads the organisation.
Upon reading the group’s website, I see quotes that use guilt and fear to make the assertion that RU486 does not “offer a positive view of women.” Some quotes assume US law will one day become Australian law and whilst current trends would support that claim, it has not happened yet.
“RU486 causes severe malformations to babies that survive including fused limbs, brain malformations, kidney problems and genital malformations.”
“Many states have laws which require that the physician examine the fetal remains whatever is passed. Now the question is how is a young girl of 17 going to go plowing through a toilet bowl full of blood clots and other nasty things to try to find this tiny little fetus and bring it to the doctor?” Dr. Bernhard Nathanson
Curiously, whilst many church groups are involved in, and supportive of, RU486 their web presence places no reference to religious opposition to abortion.
Impressively, RU486 has done it’s research and concluded that Australia is far too secular to be a society for god to hold sway.
Image from here
January 18th, 2006 at 10:45 am
Good post, Suki. However, I don’t see why they’re taking the shock-and-gore route. Abortion is not technically legal in most Australian states and territories. I want to see the anti-choice, god-bothering nosy-Nellies go all the way and try to enforce the law. It’s this sort of an overplay of their hand which they quite correctly assess would be rejected out-of-hand by secular Australia. If they pushed that line, we’d very quickly see legislation tabled legalising choice.
Women have every right in the world to control their bodies- and that includes their reproductive bits. As long as these organs are connected to her circulatory system, they’re as much a part of her body as her pancreas- and you don’t see any laws on the books demanding anti-choicers have control over pancreaii.
The law must stop at your skin, no matter what reproductive equipment you have, or there is a slippery slope into a nearly bottomless chasm of authoritarianism. The notion that women must preserve their sloughed skin cells for perusal and estimation of anti-choice authoritarians is about two-thirds of the way down that slope.
Never will anyone, by virtue of their belief in faerie tales or other fallacious lines of logic, somehow gain the right to instruct all women on how to manage their bits. If some folk disagree with abortion, the answer is for them simply not to have one!
Australia does not have a Religious Police force (yet)- but that is exactly what will be required to enforce the views of anti-choice authoritarians on Australian women.
January 18th, 2006 at 11:13 am
…speaking of a Religious Police force – the US state of Mississippi seems to have the most.
January 18th, 2006 at 12:27 pm
But golly those prolific-prolifers can photocopy (from ABC Nooz):
‘The committee considering a proposed legislative change to remove the Health Minister’s veto over the abortion drug has received about 4,000 submissions. Just over 100 support the proposal to give the Therapeutic Goods Administration the final say on RU-486; about half of the 2,000 opposing the change are pro-forma letters.’
January 18th, 2006 at 12:29 pm
It’s a classic clash of the reality and evidence based community with the belief-based mob.
Just because some people believe what is written in some old book, which may or may not be a reliable, cross-checkable historical document, does not obligate those who do not similarly subscribe to the proscribed behaviours.
Anyone should be able to live in their bodies in a manner they see fit. If you are not doing anything which harms yourself through misinformation or harms others, people don’t need interference from religion which is abusing government to enforce their will by proxy. Dogma has no place in laws which affect all citizens regardless of their religious views.
Further to that, humans are known, through various evidence, to behave in certain ways. When humans can interact upon a situation which is affecting them negatively, they usually will. If a woman doesn’t want to be pregnant, she will do something about it. That something should at very least be the most harmless.
You’re quite right- abortion happens- and it is a normal human response to an unwanted pregnancy. It’s a choice of coathangers and Vera Drake’s special soap or safe, sterile termination services.
In a way, Marcel is an advocate of choice; the choice to force the most harmful retaliation possible on women who won’t act in the way he wants. His authoritarianism, without any basis whatsoever for his perceived power of control over women, is absolutely breathtaking.
While it is not without side effects nor does it obviate contact with medical personnel, thus not being any sort of instant magic ‘un-pregnant’ pill, RU486 may be the very best solution in cases where a woman becomes pregnant as a result of rape. The wounds of being sexually violated could very realistically be compounded by the invasive nature of a surgical termination. RU486 could be a very useful option in harm minimisation.
January 18th, 2006 at 12:30 pm
Suki,
Thanks for another interesting post on this issue. I notice “non-participatory” members of the Senate Committee (notably Joyce and Slipper) seem to be spending all their time giving interviews about the Committee’s work at the moment.
Suki/Weezil…don’t know if you’ve seen Julie’s post at http://www.alittlepregnant.typepad.com which offers that a Virginia lawmaker was attempting to ensure that all women who miscarried would have to present the tissue at the local law enforcement agency.
Perhaps this is where Stephen Fielding is going with his relentless questioning of doctors about the disposal of “remains”
The same enlightened Virginian lawmaker tried to introduce massive restrictions on the type of contraception advice could be given to teenage college students.
Studies have shown again and again that the most effective way to reduce the number of pregnancy terminations is to ensure that a high level of informed, balanced contraceptive advice is provided to sexually active people, with a culture of responsible sexual and reproductive health being fostered and valued.
I’m not seeing the current crop of anti-abortion Senators (or MPs, or interest groups for that matter) going all out to ensure that unwanted pregnancies NEVER OCCUR IN THE FIRST PLACE…particularly when the “peak body” *shudder* of anti-abortion groups links to a group called “stop planned parenthood”
It’s a bit 70’s I know, but is it really so unreasonable to wish that “every child is a wanted child”?
January 18th, 2006 at 1:02 pm
All this stuff about the foetus as well…RU-486 is used at the very early stages, when it is about the size of your pinky toe.
It’s used in the stages before one usualy tells friends and family about a pregnancy because there’s such a great chance the pregnancy will fail, so this is already happening to many women through a miscarriage before three months.
There haven’t been any calls for them to go “plowing through a toilet bowl full of blood clots and other nasty things to try to find this tiny little fetus and bring it to the doctor”.
January 18th, 2006 at 2:02 pm
That’s why I think the Roe Vs. Wade decision over in the US is so important. Let’s face it, we’re pretty much a US satellite state already, so if Roe goes, the anti-choice debate is going to heat up over here.
January 18th, 2006 at 2:43 pm
I’m waiting for more publicicty for the aaRU486 mob.
Has anyone seen or heard anything other their online presence?
Please let me know if you do. I haven’t bought a paper in years, use adblocking everywhere I go and don’t watch much free to air TV.
January 19th, 2006 at 6:39 am
‘The committee considering a proposed legislative change to remove the Health Minister’s veto over the abortion drug has received about 4,000 submissions. Just over 100 support the proposal to give the Therapeutic Goods Administration the final say on RU-486; about half of the 2,000 opposing the change are pro-forma letters.’
The 2000 pro-forma letters doesn’t sound good.
At some level, politics is about numbers (stupid democracy), so I’d rather have the numbers on the side which I support.
Is there somewhere I can print off and send off my pro-forma?
(Have I left it too late?)
January 19th, 2006 at 7:01 am
David, the submissions closed on Monday (16th January 2006).
Lyn Allison is on top of the submissions and is requesting that only the ones that meet the terms of reference be considered.
Writing to politicians who have a conscience to exercise can still be done as the vote is not until early February.
January 19th, 2006 at 8:31 am
David – The number of subs may have a bit of rhetorical value for the ‘true disbelievers’ on the Committee (like Banana-by). But, the Sen Committees usually give pro-forma subs very little space in their reports. Comparatively greater weight is likely to be given to those who put forward substantive arguments & give oral evidence before the C’tee.
January 19th, 2006 at 8:43 am
Hi All,
Suki – the 7:30 Report last night had a piece which included reps from aaRU486 looking very proper (and using the delightful phrase “human pesticide”).
As I understand it, the ABC is today reporting that almost half of the submissions have been immediately discounted for not meeting the terms of reference and a large number of those remaining are (as smellydeadjesus noted) photocopies and proformas.
The Committee itself WILL NOT MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS…it will just report back to the Senate summarising the evidence presented.
It’s time for those anti-choicers to push a case in the state jurisdictions if they’re serious about making abortion illegal…but they won’t do it because they know they can’t win.
January 19th, 2006 at 10:22 am
choiceplease – has the C’tee announced that it won’t be making any recs? This sounds a little unusual.
January 19th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
SDJ –
That’s my interp of the Hansard, partic Humphries opening address.
Could be wrong.
Either way it’s not the number of subs, it’s the QUALITY!
CP
January 19th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
[…] More here and here. […]
January 19th, 2006 at 2:14 pm
Suki Says:
“January 18th, 2006 at 2:43 pm
I’m waiting for more publicicty for the aaRU486 mob.
Has anyone seen or heard anything other their online presence?
Please let me know if you do. I haven’t bought a paper in years, use adblocking everywhere I go and don’t watch much free to air TV. ”
The 7.30 report last night featured an article on the whole sordid business. All of the creepy crawly anti-choicers were out in force.
January 19th, 2006 at 4:27 pm
Thanks choiceplease and Anonymous J for the information.
I’ll go check the transcript.
January 19th, 2006 at 8:53 pm
Yikes! I made that anonymous – sorry.
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:17 am
as Anna says above about ‘the pinky toe’ – let me bring to everybody’s attention that ‘passing’ it is sickeningly painful, similar to the kidney stone experience. no walk in the park.
I wonder about those pro-lifers and their ‘you are pregnant and you will stay that way you bad girl’ attitude. It is not about ‘life’ because they are not at anti-war demos, or caring for battered wives and children, just foetal tissue. very strange folks.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:06 pm
I wonder about those pro-lifers and their ‘you are pregnant and you will stay that way you bad girl’ attitude. It is not about ‘life’ because they are not at anti-war demos, or caring for battered wives and children, just foetal tissue. very strange folks.
Yes, they are, aren’t they. I see when it comes to domestic abuse, there is a similar attitude, which ultimately comes down to thinking in tautologies:
If you were abused, you must have done something to deserve it, therefore nobody should help you, and you deserve to be punished some more.