Tuesday, April 25, 2006

AIW Patiently Explains it to Seattle PI Reporter

Susan Paynter's column in the April 24th edition of the Seattle PI is yet another trite, and sorry to say boring piece, from the abortion industry's reliable old defender -- the Seattle PI. From reading her misrepresented "facts" and outright errors I can only conclude that her article was pulled together from a publisher's press release and an old Karen Cooper interview.

Ms. Paynter's worship of contraceptives would be laughable if it were not completely based on falsehoods. Contraceptives permeate the society. Nothing, and I mean nothing, stands in the way of a woman getting contraceptives, condoms, you name it, in this state. They pass them out like M&Ms in the schools, clinics and doctor's offices. If you don't understand that the purpose of Plan B (the morning after pill) is to increase the number of first-time abortions then you are more gullible than I realized. Do you really think the abortion industry and lobby wants the abortion rate to go down? Do you know of any industry that wants to put itself out of business?

If Ms. Paynter knew anything about the pro-life movement she would never make such an ignorant and callous statement about pro-lifers believing that "women having abortions are a bunch of irresponsible singles having promiscuous sex." Many of the women in the pro-life movement are women who've had abortions or have family members who were victimized by abortion providers. They know better than anyone how women end up on the receiving end of a vacuum aspiration machine while the father drives away never to be seen again. They know about the coercion from parents, husbands, boyfriends, and the general influence of newspapers like the PI that continue to put a happy face, or P.R. as Ms. Paynter calls it, on abortion. How about interviewing a few real-life local pro-life leaders instead of holding up the usual strawmen?

Did you know that Advanced Nurse Practitioners are now allowed to administer chemical (RU-486) abortions in Washington state, despite provisions in Washington law prohibiting non-physicians from performing abortions, and that reported complications have increased since this drug was introduced to Washington? So much for safe abortion. Why don't you do an investigation into that? If you care so much about safe abortion why don't you do an investigative piece on the reliability of the state's abortion statistics, admittances to emergency rooms from botched abortions and infections, and follow-up by a woman's regular physician that don't get reported. Why won't you take an honest look at the link between breast cancer and abortion? One of the leading researchers in this field works at Fred Hutchinson. How about an article on some of the local abortion recovery programs? Ms. Paynter's problem is that she is stuck in 1969. She and the PI Editorial Board are the flat-earthers of the new millennium.

You are right -- let's move away from the "incendiary rhetoric." I challenge the Seattle PI to start publishing Washington state's abortion stats on a yearly basis. No commentary. Just the data. You won't do it because 25,000 abortions a year in this state is bad P.R. for the abortion industry. Isn't it about time the PI took an honest look into Washington's abortion industry instead of repeating the same old tired clich├ęs. There are too many women who've had abortions and know the truth. You aren't fooling them anymore.

I doubt you'll take on any of my challenges or even print this letter because you don't care about women or women's health. As Ms. Paynter admitted herself, you care about good P.R. for abortion.

Best regards,

p.s. Is Susan Paynter the abortion report for the PI? I'd like to send her a press release for the next Silent No More Awareness gathering in Seattle. Our events have never been covered by your paper.
p.p.s. The "abortions increased during the Bush administration" was thoroughly refuted by FactCheck.org. See: http://www.factcheck.org/article330.html
Would you please print a correction in your paper.

No comments: