This is an interview with a political activist who last year lobbied the California legislature to mandate trans-vaginal ultrasounds as a regular part of every woman’s annual gynecological exam. How can they be inordinately invasive of privacy if feminists are working to mandate them?
Nearly every woman who aborts is going to get instruments much larger and more invasive than an ultrasound probe shoved into her uterus, as well as her vagina. Crying foul over a trans-vaginal ultrasound probe as a predicate to abortion is absurd when an aborting mother is moments away from having a large steel speculum inserted to expand her vaginal canal, and the sharp points of a tenaculum grasping the neck of her uterus and pulling it down into her vaginal opening so that stainless steel dilators can be forced into her cervix. When the cervix has been pried open to the requisite diameter, a suction cannula and or sharp curette and or crushing forceps are pushed into her uterus and the killing process begins.
The idea that a slender, trans-vaginal ultrasound is an unreasonable pre-condition to the far greater trauma and violence of a suction or sharp curettage abortion is dishonest in the extreme. Pro-aborts decry trans-vaginal ultrasounds as “unnecessary” but that characterization can only be correct if we assume that all mothers already know that their preborn baby really is a baby – even very early in pregnancy, when many abortions are committed. Our experience teaches that that is not true as a general proposition. Aborting mothers who have a functioning conscience will intuit that they are doing something wrong, but few understand how wrong. The more mothers are taught about who their baby really is and what abortion will really do to him/her, the less likely they will be to abort. We have confirmed this fact time and again. The abortion industry well understands this and that is the real reason they reflexively oppose any effort to mandate a full disclosure of all the facts.