I was trolling the Fox News Website this week, even though I know better. They should really post a warning on their site: You are now entering through the looking glass, prepare to suspend logic and reason.
My old pal Elizabeth Hasselbeck is over there now, a move I consider to be an extremely good thing. With Elizabeth gone, Jenny McCarthy has joined the ladies on The View, and I can now watch that program without having my thumb poised over the skip ahead button, which I actually used to call my “Hasselbeck Button”.
(Lately it’s been my Ted Cruz Button.)
Foxy Elizabeth was touting the story of Molly Anne Dutton, (right) this year’s homecoming queen from Alabama’s Auburn University. Molly was adopted by Christian anti-choice advocates after her mother chose not to abort a pregnancy that resulted from a sexual assault. According to Elizabeth, the message of the Molly Dutton story is that women should never abort a pregnancy because the baby may grow up to be a nice person.
Let’s set aside the fact that no one makes the decision to end a pregnancy out of fear the baby they are carrying will grow up to be an amoral psychopath, although I do concede the mother of the Menendez brothers and Ira Levin’s Rosemary would have done well to consider it. Foxy Elizabeth thinks the message of Molly’s personal story is: Don’t have an abortion because your baby might turn out to be homecoming queen. By that logic, it now becomes fair game for pro-choice advocates to track down the mothers of the nation’s worst criminals and ask if they ever considered aborting their baby. We could start a website. Mothers Who Regret Giving Birth To Their Degenerate Children. (I’ll work on that title.)
No, I’m not serious, because pro-choice doesn’t mean talking women into having abortions. It means supporting whatever decision a woman makes, like I support Molly Anne Dutton’s mother’s decision to give her baby up for adoption. I also would have supported her if she had gone another way.
And Elizabeth’s fanciful logic that homecoming queen Molly Dutton is proof that opting for birth is always the right choice? We’ll just chalk that up to a yet another Republican psyops battle.
An overstatement? I don’t think so. The war on women is filled with psychological warfare operations worthy of the CIA. In fact, just scoffing at the idea that there is a war on women is a psychological operation aimed at making women question themselves. Oh, you silly girls! A war on women? That’s crazy. You’re imagining things. Is it your time of the month?
How is requiring a woman to view a sonogram before she can terminate her pregnancy anything but a psy0ps campaign? That is a law designed specifically to disrupt a woman’s internal decision making process. Let us help you think the right way.
In Arizona and Oklahoma a doctor is allowed to lie to his pregnant patient if he suspects telling her the truth about a pregnancy might cause her to terminate it. He doesn’t have to tell a woman that her fetus is defective, or that her own health could be endangered by continuing a pregnancy. How is that anything but government encouraging a psyops campaign of deliberate misinformation?
In Virginia, our old pal Ken Cuccinelli first pushed through a law to make pre-abortion ultrasounds necessary, then cut a deal that allows anti-choice advocates to lure women into their clinics with a promise of a free ultrasound. Once there, they are subjected to a shaming session. That’s nothing but a psyops campaign operating right out in the open with brainwashing candidates supplied by the government of Virginia.
Now Nebraska has gone one step further, no longer just trying to influence women in their personal decisions, but forcing one unfortunate young woman to have a baby against her will.
To tell you the truth, I always thought this would happen in Iowa, where Governor Branstad (right) has been given the power to personally render a thumbs up or thumbs down on the abortion request of every woman on Medicaid, but the last time I checked, he had approved the termination of one pregnancy, and the University of Iowa had absorbed the cost of two others so the young women would not be forced to throw themselves on the mercy of the governor. So surprisingly, it is not Iowa, but Nebraska that is the battlefield in this latest escalation of the War On Women. The courts there have gone beyond trying to trick women into keeping their babies, and have turned one helpless teenage girl into an unwilling incubator.
Government hostage? Prisoner of war? I am not sure exactly how to refer to her. Court documents call her as Anonymous 5. She is sixteen years old, and in Nebraska, anyone under seventeen needs a parent’s consent to end an unwanted pregnancy. Unfortunately, Anonymous 5 has no parents who can sign for her. She is a ward of the state because her parents were abusive, so the decision of whether she would be allowed to end her pregnancy and get a fresh start in her very difficult life, came down to a judge, Judge Peter C. Bataillon, a man Raw Story reports once served on the executive committee for an Omaha anti-abortion group.
Anonymous 5 told the judge she wan’t ready to be a mother yet. She made a cogent argument, saying she didn’t have the financial means to be the mom she someday wants to be. Judge Battaillon asked her if she realized “When you have the abortion, it’s going to kill the child inside of you.” When she answered in the affirmative, the judge decided she was not mature enough to realize the import of her decision, and refused her permission to make her own choice and end her pregnancy.
The Supreme Court of Nebraska, with its six white men and one woman, voted 5-2 to uphold Judge Bataillon. Their written opinion scolds the legislature for putting the young woman in a “legal limbo” but spends little time reflecting on the personal situation of Anonymous 5. There was no mention at all about the judge’s bizarre logic, worthy of Foxy Elizabeth Hasselbeck herself:
How is a girl who is too immature to decide if she wants to have a baby, in any way mature enough to be a mother?
I sincerely hope Anonymous 5 found the means to visit a more enlightened state where she was able to reclaim control over her body and her future. However, just the fact that she is sixteen and in foster care, weighs heavily against that possibility.
So today we take notice of Anonymous 5 in Nebraska, POW in the War On Women, and the men in black robes who abused her as surely as her parents ever did, by turning her into an unwilling incubator. If that is what can happen to a woman in an imaginary war, imagine what could happen if the War On Women were real.
Jean Ann Esselink is a straight friend to the gay community. Proud and loud Liberal. Closet writer of political fiction. Black sheep agnostic Democrat from a conservative Catholic family. Living in Northern Oakland County Michigan with Puck the Wonder Beagle.