You want an abortion? We’d rather you go blind

Here’s how compulsory pregnancy plays out in Poland. In 2000 a woman named Alicja Tysiac was pregnant for the third time. She had severe myopia. She worried that continued pregnancy would affect her sight. She was right.

She consulted three ophthalmologists, who each concluded her eyesight would be further damaged if she carried the pregnancy to term. But they refused to issue a certificate for the pregnancy to be terminated on medical grounds, despite Tysiac’s requests. . . . After the delivery, her eyesight deteriorated considerably as a result of what was diagnosed as a retinal hemorrhage.

So, she sued the government and yesterday was awarded about $33,250 in damages by the European Court of Human Rights. The court ‘ruled that Poland has no effective legal framework for pregnant women to assert their right to abortion on medical grounds’.

Poland is an odd place. It is very Catholic, but formerly Communist. As Ms Tysiac’s case shows, abortion is prohibited except in very, very rare cases. At the moment Poland has a coalition government, including the ultraconservative League of Polish Families, which is campaigning to ban abortion in absolutely all cases, including rape and incest.

Mere blindness? Pah!

The League of Polish Families thinks blind mothers, traumatized mothers, handicapped and sick mothers are good mothers.

The League of Polish Families is also proposing to ban ‘homosexual propaganda’ in schools. Teachers who promote ‘homosexual culture’ would be fired. The European Parliament will examine this looney-tune proposal to determine whether it is compatible with the EU’s anti-discrimination rules. (Ya think?)

Thank the goddess for the EU. As benighted countries line up to join what is perceived as the EU gravy train, they’ll soon find out that fetus-fetishizing and gay-bashing are not allowed among progressive nations.

Save lives! Save eyesight! Regulate pregnancy.

 

Comments

  1. deBeauxOs says

    The one-note refrain that anti-choice criminalizers chant over and over again when confronted with the cruelty of their political interventions is that “God will provide” for women forced to stay pregnant and for children born into appalling circumstances.

    Anti-choice criminalizers use modern medecine and its attendant technology to support their cause, when they act in the name of their religious interests. Yet they make it impossible for women to have safe and accessible abortions provided by doctors and nurses.

    The plight of this specific woman, and of all others in Poland clearly demonstrates the cruelty of special interest groups who use their religiosity to act as false gods.

    The criminalizers act in the name of their god to prevent abortion, and once their evil work is done, it is no longer a concern of theirs. This hypocritical religiosity is an abomination.

  2. says

    The anti-choice crowd would not hesitate to point out that this particular story is one-in-a-million, and couldn’t possibly happen often enough to justify abortion as a choice. They don’t see any conflict in their attitude about pointing out any one-in-a-million times that an abortion procedure failed, and resulted in a live birth, however.