The Mexican Government Considers Legalizing Abortion
I didn't know there were plans to legalize abortion in Mexico:
MEXICO CITY - The Vatican's top anti-abortion campaigner kicked off the Roman Catholic Church's aggressive campaign against plans to legalize abortion in Mexico Friday.
...
Lawmakers from the main opposition Democratic Revolution Party, who proposed the bills to legalize abortion in the first three months of pregnancy, have asked the church to stay out of the matter.
...
The bill to legalize abortion is expected to easily pass in Mexico City, a leftist bastion where Democratic Revolution holds the mayorship and the majority of seats in the city legislature. Democratic Revolution lawmakers have filed a similar bill in the national Senate, but it is expected to face a tough battle there.
Most Latin American countries, including Mexico, allow abortion if the woman's life is in danger or in cases of rape or incest. In November, Nicaragua passed a law banning abortion in all cases. Cuba permits abortions within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, as does the United States.
Wealthier Mexican women often travel to the United States for abortions, while thousands of poor women risk drinking potent herbal teas, taking pills or using other risky measures to abort illegally.
"It's very easy to get an illegal abortion," said Cecilia Garcia, a street seller who hawks cosmetics in the poor city of Ecatepec on the capital's outskirts. "You can go to the Sonora market (a popular market selling home and witchcraft remedies), look on the Internet for ways, or go to certain doctors who will do it."
Note the last two paragraphs. Once again, when it comes to a government banning abortion, the universal rule holds true. No matter the country, the continent, the form of government, or dominant religion (or lack thereof), abortion bans never ever apply to all women equally, and safe (legal) abortions are simply replaced by illegal procedures.
Labels: Abortion
posted by ema @ 7:21 PM
2 comments
![[logo]](http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:me2GMPeOIa_I_M:http://tcoyp.com/images/squares.gif){kind=small}
Books
2 Comments:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/literature/literature_927hh.asp
also:
Revealing statements made by former abortion industry personnel.
These are direct quotes from men and women who worked in abortion facilities.
http://heavensdaydreamer.blogspot.com/2007/03/end-abortion.html
The second link, first. It's rude to drop a link to hock your wares [Heritage House] on a stranger's blog.
As for the first link, please don't waste my time with puerile nonsense like that (e.g. Life Issues Institute's Dr. and Mrs. J.C. Willke propaganda attempts.)
[http://www.lifeissues.org/whoweare.html]
Like this:
Husband’s consent...Not needed [for abortion]...Expected [for "ethical" surgery]
...
Surgical training...Not required [-"-]...Absolutely required [-"-]
...
Cash "kick-backs"...common [-"-]...forbidden [-"-]
[http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_17.asp#how%20many]
Are you kidding me with this? Either take the time to familiarize yourself with my blog and figure out that I've actually, you know, consented people and set foot in the OR and performed surgeries, or don't bother.
Or this. From the top of the page:
There is an ominous relationship between the abortion of your first pregnancy and later development of breast cancer.
Is this proven?
No, but there is a very close correlation that has been demonstrated in a large number of scientific studies.
[http://www.abortionfacts.com/online_books/love_them_both/why_cant_we_love_them_both_23.asp]
So the ominous relationship (if you want to give the appearance of a scientific discussion, omit poetic terms) IS NOT PROVEN, BUT A VERY CLOSE CORRELATION HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED.
From the middle of the *same* page (caps mine):
There are, in addition, many competent studies done in the last 20 years which also CONFIRM this linkage.
Either Dr. and Mrs. Willke aren't familiar with scientific terms and methodology, or they are, but they hope that by the time readers get to the middle of the page they'd have forgotten what was written at the top.
Also [randomly selected study off the same page], A statistically significant increased risk of 23% of breast cancer was shown to be attributable to induced abortion. For women over 60 years, the risk was 80%. P. Newcomb et al., Preg. Termination & Risk of Breast Cancer, JAMA 1/24/96, Vol. 275, No. 4, pg. 283
Here's the study's actual conclusion:
CONCLUSIONS--A weak positive association was observed between abortion--whether induced or spontaneous--and risk of breast cancer. The increase in risk of breast cancer was somewhat greater among women with a history of induced terminations. However, this association may be due to reporting bias and was not significantly different than the slight risk for spontaneous terminations.
According to Newcomb, from "A record-based evaluation of induced abortion and breast cancer risk (United States)", Cancer Causes Control. 2000 Oct;11(9):777-81:
RESULTS: Compared to all women who had never had an induced abortion, the multivariate adjusted relative risk of breast cancer in women with an induced abortion was 0.9 (95% confidence interval 0.5-1.6). This risk was similar in parous women, and nulliparous women. There was no association between spontaneous abortion and breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support a relation between induced abortion and breast cancer incidence.
And this:
Has anyone compared all the studies [on abx and breast ca]?
Yes, happily a comprehensive metaanalysis examined 61 published studies and subjected them to critical comparative analysis....J. Brind et al., "Induced abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis," Hershey Med. Center, J. Epidemol. Community Health, 1996
Briefly, this is a study from Baruch College. [Links here.] But wait, that's not even it. From the methodology:
INCLUDED STUDIES: The meta-analysis includes all 28 published reports which include specific data on induced abortion and breast cancer incidence. Since some study data are presented in more than one report, the 28 reports were determined to constitute 23 independent studies....EXCLUDED STUDIES: All 33 published reports including data on abortion and breast cancer incidence but either pertaining only to spontaneous abortion or to abortion without specification as to whether it was induced or spontaneous.
That's 23 studies the meta-analysis examined, not 61.
Bottom line: Although I detest propaganda, any propaganda, with a passion, I can appreciate the merits of a competent effort. The stuff you linked to is kindergarten-grade propaganda.
Post a Comment
<< Home