“Lazy slander� my butt

[Burris]

Some fundies claim they are trying to build and defend a Culture of Life (COL). They generally don't define it, except to say it has something to do with outlawing abortion.

I believe people who see themselves as part of a COL should be recognizable not only for what they oppose, however, but also – and especially – for what they support; for the positive contributions they make in service to their belief.

People like Jennie Chancey believe Crisis Pregnancy Centers are examples of positive and proactive activity in service to a Culture of Life.

In a February, 2011 article called, Pro-Life People Care for Women and Children After Birth, Too, Chancey offered CPCs as proof pro-lifers care about more than just the fetus. She sees the claim that 'pro-lifers care about babies from conception 'til birth' as nothing more than 'lazy slander.'

No, says Chancey: CPCs help everyone without prejudice, including post-partum women.

Pfft. Maybe she even believes that.

Rather than existing to serve all women with unplanned pregnancies, however, CPCs tend to focus their efforts on influencing “abortion-minded†women.

One of the most striking admissions of this fact can be found on the The Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR) site. 'The Pastoral Arm' of this site is dedicated to discussing CPCs and their influence, lauding their work at preventing abortion.

The author is concerned, however, that too many CPC resources are being spent on women with crisis pregnancies who are not “abortion minded.â€

These questions are vital because it is abortion-minded women whose babies are most vulnerable to being killed. [Pregnancy Care Centres] hope that, through their existence, women will choose life—not abortion—for their babies. But in order to ensure this is happening, we need to face the reality of who is coming to these centres.

In Canada, almost 100,000 abortion-minded women go a clinic or hospital to end their pregnancies. In contrast, what kind of women, in large numbers, go to PCCs? Women who are seriously considering abortion or women who are unlikely to abort anyway and are looking for help with their pregnancy?

By their own admission, PCCs generally reach very few of their target audience: women contemplating abortion. In most cases, these women aren’t even coming through the door. Rather, these women enter the doors of abortion providers.

In fact, in 2002, Focus on the Family’s newsletter HeartLink reported that "less than 10 percent of the clients darkening the doors of pregnancy care centers [across the United States] were abortion-minded." That is, fewer than 1 in 10 women making use of their pregnancy-support services were seriously considering abortion.

(Retrieved October 29, 2011, from the following location: http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca/strategy/ ... s/pastoral)

The above is an unsettling look into how some CPCs view their role in relation to the lives of women who come to them for help.

CPCs have been accused of dishonesty for, among other things, advertising a range of services they are not equipped to provide, using sonograms on-site without properly trained staff to operate the equipment, offering a dishonest opinion about gestational age, providing dishonest information about the nature and risks of abortion, using the private information of clients in an unprofessional manner, and other questionable activities.

Several major reports have been released over the last ten years that catalog and deconstruct the unprofessional behavior of certain CPCs:

In 2010, The National Institute for Reproductive Health, in conjunction with NARAL, released a report called, 'The Lies, Manipulations, and Privacy Violations of Crisis Pregnancy Centers in New York City.'

In Jul6 2006, State Representative Henry Waxman commissioned an investigation into the operational practices of certain Crisis pregnancy Centers. The resulting report, 'False and Misleading Health Information Provided by Federally Funded Pregnancy Resources Centers,' cataloged cases of deception and unprofessional behavior by CPC staff.

I suspect many of the people who staff and volunteer at CPCs either believe the information they're handing out is true or at least think the ends justify the means. They see themselves as representing a Culture of Life, where individual life is valued and protected.

Yet even within their own literature is the admission some life is valued over other life: Women in distress who are nonetheless not “abortion minded†- in other words, who are facing hard times even while carrying wanted pregnancies - are seen as taking up space and resources better spent on convincing someone else to bear a child she doesn't want.

When a CPC ad says, “Pregnant? Scared? We can help,†that CPC is hoping especially to reach someone who is pregnant, scared, and wanting an abortion rather than someone who needs additional resources and help with carrying to term a wanted pregnancy.

The primary goal is not to help women but to change minds.

In other words, the old saw “They care about life from conception to birth†is not “lazy slander,†as Jennie Chancey suggests, but merely fact - and even worse when coupled to the idea that pretty much all care given at the average CPC is substandard and agenda-driven anyway.

These facts wouldn't fit well within a genuine Culture of Life.

As I pointed out in another thread, an effective CPC would offer care without prejudice (and would probably end up netting more “abortion minded†women as the CPC become better known for its trustworthiness).

Such a CPC would have medical personal on-site, or access to such personal who would provide free services to women in need. Such a CPC would have a robust referral program, assigning each client a knowledgeable case-worker who can link the mother up with necessary services such as food stamps and housing, and walk her through the application process. A good CPC would treat client information as strictly confidential. (Also: Can there be an ethical CPC?

A pervasive, unfeigned Culture of Life, demonstrated through thr work of a good CPC, would be concerned with all those people and their welfare.

[Patsy]

Not much to add, but the 'culture of life' were pretty fucking slow to jumping onto 'let's actually help women so they can make a choice!'

I went to a pro-life rally a few years ago where an asshole I know (who has never done a thing for women in crisis; a women's service I've been a little bit involved with even asked him for help with something and he declined) saying 'And we need to help women, so they don't feel the need for it'. OH! WHAT AMAZING NEWS! PLEASE, TELL ME MORE! It's not like the eeeeebil pro-choicers have been doing that for fucking DECADES. And does he put his money where his mouth is? Hell no. Just stands up in front of smug assholes and says 'mm, and ps side note women are people' and they go 'hmm that's interesting', but as far as I can tell NONE of the people there were major players for actually helping women in poverty.

[Witsec1]

Women in distress who are nonetheless not “abortion minded†- in other words, who are facing hard times even while carrying wanted pregnancies - are seen as taking up space and resources better spent on convincing someone else to bear a child she doesn't want.

You do have a way of saying a lot with a few words.

[fundiefan]

What's 'lazy' is hiding behind your religion to promote your values. No defense or explanation necessary. No need to discuss a point or see another perspective. Your bible/god/preacher/cult SAYS and, well, that's that.

Lazy.

[hoipolloi]

Thank you, Burris. A well-deserved take-down and taking-apart of Mrs. Chancey's lazy, ignorant, and arrogant article.

In other words, a good CPC might actually function the way Planned Parenthood does, where women (and men!!!!) can get basic medical care (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health ... -32720.htm) as well as treatment for specific conditions of the reproductive system.

[Brainsample]

Burris,

My first thought is that you should get some kind of benefit for reading at LAF. I can't read that stuff there.

I worked at Birthright years ago, and we did none of the proselytizing stuff. I was offended that some women put extra developer on the test to make it look extra dark so that the women thought that they were "extra pregnant." Pregnant is pregnant, but some counselors used this to unfairly manipulate the women and girls. But then, I didn't work at a Protestant group either. We just wanted to encourage women to have their babies, and we did have lots of services and supplies for women who did have their babies. (I was not involved in that part of the system, though.)

This is just one step away from Doug Wilson's comments that no one should bother trying to save the unborn of the non-elect, and we should rejoice with the psalmist who says that God wants their heads to be dashed upon the rocks.

Jesus didn't say to be kind and care for only those who Christians thought were deserving of it. It just said to give to those in need and to love fellow Christians, too. This is just more of VF style elitism and cruel, cold, calculated pragmatism.

[Guest Anonymous]

Burris,

My first thought is that you should get some kind of benefit for reading at LAF. I can't read that stuff there.

I personally nominate Burris for hazard pay

[ridethekick]

I used to volunteer at a CPC, specifically because I wanted to support women who wanted to continue their pregnancies but needed some support getting access to the services that would benefit them. Ultimately I quit, because in the year that I was there, the one pregnant woman we saw was a non-english speaking woman who was seeking an abortion and had misunderstood what the centre was about.

I can't speak with any authority about the American situation (you folks seem to be going backwards in terms of abortion rights), but here in Australia there is the sense that the battle is over. Abortion is freely available and government subsidised (contingent on geography, people in rural areas have a harder time getting access), the morning after pill is dispensed from chemists, including for minors, and the sex ed program seems to be pretty comprehensive (when I did it 7 years ago we put condoms on bananas, discussed all the various types of birth control available then, and we also were shown how to use dental dams and the like)

I say this because I hope and believe that as people become more sexually educated, places like the CPCs described in the article will die off, simply because of lack of need for their services. In Australia, people don't need to go to a CPC to get information on their options when pregnant. The CPC I used to volunteer at is winding down from lack of use, it services a major metropolitan city and its phones lie silent; we could go an entire shift without getting one call. But in America, it seems that there is a bit more of an information vacuum, due to the politicisation of abortion and sex education. It seems that there are a lot of vulnerable people out there who can't get access to the information they need, which leaves these peddlers of misinformation able to step into the gap and further their agenda.

I can't offer a solution, but it seems education is the key. But given that your elected representatives struggled to reach a consensus on something as fundamental as your budget, I hold little hope that they'd be able to implement reforms on something as morally fraught as teen sex education.

Keep fighting the good fight!

[koolmom]

I actually turned to and gotten help from a CPC when I was expecting my second child when my marriage was falling apart and we all wound up homeless back in the 80's. Even though I'd been thinking abortion, I wanted to test the waters to see if these places really delivered on their promises, so I checked out several, found one, and proceeded to follow through with their premise. I fibbed to them, telling them my husband and I were already separated (would eventually), and that I was pregnant and needed assistance.

They sent me home with a big bag of food, both fresh and non-perishables, a clutch of extra clothes for myself and my 5-year-old son, and promised they'd get on finding me a living arrangement as soon as possible. They were more accustomed to dealing with younger, teen moms were expecting their first babies, not a married woman in her 30s with a kindergartener-aged son. Nonetheless, they referred me to our city's Catholic hospital, where I wound up delivering my daughter, and eventually found me housing rooming with a married fundie-lite couple who were about my same age.

At this rate, I would say they truly helped me, but I didn't convert to their religion, nor did I waver in changing from pro-choice.

I chose pro-life because I just couldn't deal with going through with an abortion, even though I consulted a doctor early on who advised me to go home and think it over, as I still had enough time to allow to decide. I went with my heart (NOT fundie influence), and made the choice that was right for me. I even wrote to Ms. Magazine at the time saying there should be MORE arenas like this that feminists need to address, but got zero response.

The church who funded this program set me up rather nicely; a couple offered their neat, tidy home in a decent neighborhood, close to a school for my son, had another female church member in charge of taking me to errands and doctor appointments, later taking me to the hospital when my labor started, and putting aside a portion of my rent to the couple I stayed with as a nest egg to get my own place which I eventually did. Their rules were that I would be allowed to remain in the "sheltering home" for six weeks following delivery, but I wanted my OWN home as soon as possible to take my new baby home to, so I worked hard to find an apt. and move in before I delivered.

Oddly enough, when I had the baby, the couple seemed kind of stand-offish and distant compared to how they acted when I was still in their home. The woman and her 12-year-old daughter came over only ONCE for a brief visit, and didn't seem all that interested in continuing a relationship after the fact. The church,however, loaded us up with a clutch of Christmas presents later that year, and we truly enjoyed a special holiday season that year. I still remained on welfare, and did so for the duration of my children's lives.

Even though I had a good experience with a CPC, I still don't see it possible (then OR now) for these places to service ALL women in difficult situations like what I went through...there are simply NOT enough funds to cover them all. I was already on a track of just getting out of homelessness, never mind anything further, at least as far as I could see then, but that wasn't so important, just to get a roof over my pregnant self and my son was all that mattered.

This same couple had just ended a roomie situation with a young teen mom who'd delivered her child shortly before the church referred them to me. I can say at least they put their money where their mouths were, unlike so many of the fundies we see and read about here.

[Brainsample]

I can't speak with any authority about the American situation (you folks seem to be going backwards in terms of abortion rights), but here in Australia there is the sense that the battle is over.

Keep in mind who wrote the article that Burris critiqued. Chancey's circle teaches that slavery is the fix to the world's economic woes because it's Biblical, though I don't know whether that means reversing emancipation or not. She was the primary advocate of the one household vote/no women voting concept promoted by Vision Forum, though Lady Lydia tells us that Jennie never followed the concept herself. (It didn't apply to her, I guess, even though she thought it was best for everyone else.) And presumably, she's against accepting anything along the lines of welfare, just because she thinks its politically and morally wrong.

The battle for the Confederacy was waged and her side lost circa 1865, yet it seems that she's failed to acknowledge that that battle's literally been over for quite some time! She's still fighting.

[Patsy]

I can't speak with any authority about the American situation (you folks seem to be going backwards in terms of abortion rights), but here in Australia there is the sense that the battle is over.

We're not about to get rid of abortion, but we're also not about to have it fully legalised. It's still illegal in some states.

And we did have that pro-life phone line - the government set up a pregnancy phone line to give out general info on pregnancy, and advertised it as such, but they gave it incorrect info on abortion, or refused to, can't remember which. Can't find anything on it with google-fu but I do remember it was misleading about its pro-life-ness AND got government money. I think they pretty quickly changed who was in charge and how it was run... wish I could remember details.

[ridethekick]

We're not about to get rid of abortion, but we're also not about to have it fully legalised. It's still illegal in some states.

And we did have that pro-life phone line - the government set up a pregnancy phone line to give out general info on pregnancy, and advertised it as such, but they gave it incorrect info on abortion, or refused to, can't remember which. Can't find anything on it with google-fu but I do remember it was misleading about its pro-life-ness AND got government money. I think they pretty quickly changed who was in charge and how it was run... wish I could remember details.

You're right. While it may be pretty much legal all the way through here in Vic (*I know the law says it's legal until 24 weeks, but it's not too hard to access late term abortions after that) the situation is a lot more murky in other states. Did you follow that QLD case where the girl was being prosecuted for using RU-486? Scary stuff.

And I think I do recall that bit about the Pregnancy Hotline, set up by the previous government / the Mad Monk. I thought that it was disbanded / substantially changed by now. Please tell me it isn't still in existence lol.

[Patsy]

From my murky memory, I have the impression that they changed it after people were like "seriously?" and then it died a quiet death. And yeah, I did think Abbott had something to do with it.

Thanks for sharing your story, koolmom. It was interesting and I'm very glad to have read it.

[koolmom]

You're very welcome, Patsy!