Out of the Ashes: Gisella Perl and the reasons why abortion is NOT the 'new Holocaust'

New post.  To be updated in the near future.  In the meantime visit this link.

In the (perhaps not so) near future, I have come to the point where I feel I can finally do this woman some justice.

Gisella Perl performed abortions for Jewish women who would have otherwise been sent to the gas chambers if they had RETAINED THEIR PREGNANCIES.  Let me repeat, if they had RETAINED THEIR PREGNANCIES.  For many Jewish women these could have been otherwise wanted pregnancies, but they were forced, by circumstance, to have an abortion or leave any children they already, or other members of their families they, had, behind.

Hitler was AntiChoice for German AND Jewish women.  He forced all German women to carry pregnancies to term, while forcing Jewish women to terminate theirs or lose their own, and the fetal, lives.  NEITHER of those positions is ProChoice.  ProChoice, after all, as the name SHOULD imply, defines a movement that wants women to determine for themSELVES whether they will terminate or continue a pregnancy, via ongoing, informed and exPLIcit consent. 

Hitler was the very antiTHEsis of this.  He believed that women, especially Jewish women, were inferior and did not deserve the full right to autonomy that commonly rich, abled, white, heterosexual, cissexual, cisgender, German males did.  He denied ALL women the right to choose who uses their bodies and when and how they are used, with ongoing, explicit and informed consent.  He denied them this right that all German men had even where another's life was involved, simply because he thought they were 'superior'.

So, you tell me (if you want to Godwin), which side is promoting a 'newer version of the Holocaust'?

Nicaragua. A dangerous place to have a uterus.

This... this is just sickening.  A woman who lives in a Central American country is denied her own right to live because she is pregnant.  Make no mistake, this is what would happen in any country where abortion is made illegal.  This is what PLers willingly work towards,  A legal body having a say in a medical body's decisions sets a dangerous precedent.  If complications can arise in a relatively normal and healthy pregnancy and delivery without warning, often ending with disastrous results for BOTH the fetus and woman, even under the watch of a medical professional, having the government determine what constitutes life-threatening would be even MORE disastrous, for the reasons just stated.

The woman will die if she does not get treatment for the cancer.  And, most likely, the cancer will kill her before the fetus is viable.  So, now, two humans will be dead rather than just one.

Also, the woman has a 10-year old son.  So, if she dies, the boy is left an orphan.

Yes, I see how much PLers care for the born.  Not at all.  Yes, I see how much PLers care for the unborn.  The fetus, at least, gets a passing nod.  But, most of all, I see how much PLers really care about punishing a woman for daring to have non-procreative sex.  Absolutely.