Yesterday, on a conservative website,writer Jeannie DeAngelis decided it appropriate to compare Tashfeen Malik, the wife and co-conspirator in the deadly San Bernardino terrorist attack, to any woman who has had an abortion.
Hilariously (if anything can be found funny in her insanity), she starts her diatribe by saying that Obama wishes to “transport busloads of Syrian refugees into America.” I am not entirely sure how these buses will navigate the Atlantic Ocean, but I will let DeAngelis figure that one out. Her, somewhat illogical, reasoning behind discussing the refugees was to point out that women are capable of terrorism.
Her vitriol then turns to the topic of abortion. She begins by saying many women are “hateful, vicious, and self-centered” before citing a dubious statistic that 86% of abortions were done for a woman’s “convenience.”
I was unable to find her numbers via a reputable source, but did find a study from the Guttmacher Institute that stated, “[t]he reasons most frequently cited [for having an abortion] were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%) [or] that she could not afford a baby now (73%).”
I guess one could maybe consider the ability to afford providing for a child a “convenience,” but unlike the pro-birthers of this country, many women want to be able to give their children a strong and healthy foundation in life. Merely being able to be alive isn’t a gift, if it is a life filled with the inability to access their basic needs.
Furthermore, a study in October found that childcare now costs more than rent. So I guess it’s ok to bring a baby into this world, but don’t worry about finding affordable child care or someplace to live . . .
DeAngelis goes on to say that, “the obvious question that needs to be answered is whether Tashfeen’s murderous tirade is any different than the evil exhibited every day by 4,000 self-absorbed women who, rather than head toward a Christmas party with an AK-47, seek out an abortion clinic with the sole intent of ambushing a vulnerable child in the womb?”
That’s right. THAT is the question we should be answering right now. Not what we can do as a nation to provide better gun safety and national security, or how we can help those in need, but truly, the only important question is whether a terrorist is the same as a woman who seeks an abortion.
And let’s not forget, that DeAngelis and others of her ilk are the type that push abstinence-only education, which has been shown time and again to be ineffective. So not only will we refuse to arm people with the knowledge on how to prevent pregnancy, but then we will also prevent them from making the best choice for their individual circumstances.
Furthermore, DeAngelis makes no distinction between women who have abortions because of outside reasons, to women who have them due to rape, incest, or medical necessity. What about the large number of women who are forced to have an abortion due to medical reasons, when they wanted the child?
Regardless of their reasoning though, DeAngelis is not God, and she is not equipped to sit in judgement of women for the choices they make. Why don’t we start at the beginning and offer our teens and young adults comprehensive sex education. Then we can talk about the abortion rates after that. But until you start at the beginning of the situation, you will never fix the outcome, no matter what side of the abortion debate you are on.
And to Ms. DeAngelis, the next time you want to compare women you have never met, whose life stories and struggles and difficult decisions you do not know, who choose to have an abortion, to a woman who chose to commit mass murder, why don’t you just go have a seat instead.
Featured image via Flickr. This image is available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial license.