Pro-Abortion Doonesbury Cartoon Calls Ultrasound Rape

[floresco]

The parts in quotes refer to the exact words Trudeau used. That is correct, right? The rest is not in quotes and relates what he said in the writers own terms. Is that dishonest?

When you compare what he actually said with the way the writer portrayed what he said, the meaning has been changed. It was dishonest.

I am completely committed to pro-life, so I am not saying this because I want to make our side look bad. Respect for the truth demands admitting that this article has done this. I have noticed before that LifeSite sometimes distorts things. This really bothers me because I am convinced that the pro-life position is correct and therefore is best served by the truth.

 

[fix]

This is the the other link:

In an email exchange with the Guardian, Trudeau expressed dismay over the papers’ decision but was unrepentant, describing as “appalling” and “insane” Republican state moves on women’s healthcare.

That sentence does not contain exact quotes either. The writer is relating what was in the email. Did they post the email? If so I did not see it.

To assert that the lifenews piece is dishonest I guess it means that the word healthcare does not equal abortion, but in this case it certainly does mean that.

My point is that the lifenews piece is not dishonest but maintaining that abortion is authentic healthcare is dishonest.

 

[Quarles47]

Pro-Abortion Doonesbury Cartoon Calls Ultrasound Rape

Washington, DC – Doonesbury cartoonist Garry Trudeau is under fire from conservatives again, this time because he is running a cartoon that some newspaper already plan not to run because it compares ultrasound to rape.

lifenews.com/2012/03/12/pro-abortion-doonesbury-cartoon-calls-ultrasound-rape/

Hey, give poor ol’ Garry Trudeau a break. You should know that he is not mentally stable from willing to marry Jane Pauley

And stay married to her for going on 32 years

 

[Hokomai]

Thanks Floresco for considering what others, and I, have said. I agree with your comments about Lifenews, and the damage this sort of thing can do. There are similar misrepresentations made by some on the other side, especially about the Catholic Church. My own views on abortion are not fixed and I see many “grey areas” (or “gray areas” if you are in the US), and I am often frustrated by approach taken by some on each side of the argument. I apologise if anything I had said in this thread led others to consider that you were yourself misquoting anyone - you were not, and you considered responses are an example to us all.

 

[fix]

Thanks Floresco for considering what others, and I, have said. I agree with your comments about Lifenews, and the damage this sort of thing can do.

I am sorry but I fail to see any damage. The Lifenews piece seems to relate what Trudeau said. What is the substantial difference between the two quotes? I mean you are accusing the writer of dishonesty and I think you should back up that assertion.

 

[Hokomai]

I am sorry but I fail to see any damage. The Lifenews piece seems to relate what Trudeau said. What is the substantial difference between the two quotes? I mean you are accusing the writer of dishonesty and I think you should back up that assertion.

This has been done earlier in the thread. It is very clear, if words mean anything, that the Lifenews statement is wrong. Trudeau did not use the expression clearly attributed to him. That is a substantial difference. I did not accuse the writer of dishonesty. For all I know it was an honest misstatement. Either way, it undermines the cause the writer supports.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

“Trudeau described it as “appalling” and “insane” that Republicans would allow women to see their baby on the ultrasound screen before an abortion.” How dare these horrible people expose women to the truth!

That’s not what the law actually does.

 

[Hokomai]

That’s not what the law actually does.

see Floresco’s response early in the thread. This is now common ground.

 

[Dale_M]

The parts in quotes refer to the exact words Trudeau used. That is correct, right? The rest is not in quotes and relates what he said in the writers own terms. Is that dishonest?

Trudeau was referring to the actions of state legislatures in multiple states, and he was talking primarily about contraception. So yes, it was dishonest of LifeNews to put words into his mouth. They claimed he was speaking about something which he wasn’t.

From what I understand, Trudeau crosses the line of decency in this week’s strip. I have only seen the first two days, but have heard that it gets much worse. So I am not defending his comic or his views. But I object to false reporting, too.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

**The more and more I hear about this, the more I am inclined to think this was actually a sophisticated philosophical move on the part of some pro-life politician. **Not as an end in itself (that would obviously be deranged) but as a kind of “send-a-message” move. Of my liberal friends who have complained about this, I have already gotten one to admit that it’s because rights exist objectively and transcend the state’s say-so (i.e., thus the state can’t invent a “right” to abortion). Trudeau’s complaint likewise exposes the fact that crimes are crimes even when the state doesn’t say so – i.e., rape is still rape even if the state says it isn’t. And murder is still murder no matter how many times the Supreme Court says otherwise. Brilliant move.

I think you’re overestimating them.

 

[fix]

This has been done earlier in the thread. It is very clear, if words mean anything, that the Lifenews statement is wrong. Trudeau did not use the expression clearly attributed to him. That is a substantial difference. I did not accuse the writer of dishonesty. For all I know it was an honest misstatement. Either way, it undermines the cause the writer supports.

They did not say it was an exact quote nor is the piece from the UK an exact quote.

 

[fix]

Trudeau was referring to the actions of state legislatures in multiple states, and he was talking primarily about contraception. So yes, it was dishonest of LifeNews to put words into his mouth. They claimed he was speaking about something which he wasn’t.

From what I understand, Trudeau crosses the line of decency in this week’s strip. I have only seen the first two days, but have heard that it gets much worse. So I am not defending his comic or his views. But I object to false reporting, too.

This is from the UK piece:

In an email exchange with the Guardian, Trudeau expressed dismay over the papers’ decision but was unrepentant, describing as “appalling” and “insane” Republican state moves on women’s healthcare.

The strip deals specifically with a law introduced in Texas and other states requiring a woman who wants to have an abortion to have an ultrasound scan, or sonogram, which will show an image of the foetus and other details, in an attempt to make her reconsider.

It portrays a woman who turns up at an abortion clinic in Texas and is told to take a seat in “the shaming room”. A state legislator asks if she has been at the clinic before and, when she says she had been to get contraceptives, he replies: “Do your parents know you’re a slut?”

Later, she says she does not want an intrusive vaginal examination but is told by a nurse: “The male Republicans who run Texas require that all abortion seekers be examined with a 10-inch shaming wand.” The nurse adds: “By the authority invested in me by the GOP base, I thee rape.”

 

[Hokomai]

They did not say it was an exact quote nor is the piece from the UK an exact quote.

OK, let’s look at the quote: “Trudeau described it as “appalling” and “insane” that Republicans would allow women to see their baby on the ultrasound screen before an abortion.”

Now, first of all, the statement about the Republican proposal is false, whether it is attributed to Trudeau or not. It did not require a change in the law for women to be ‘allowed’ to see ‘their baby’.

The proximity of the phrase about the Republicans to the word "described’ and its two associated adjectives ‘appalling’ and ‘insane’ clearly links the verb ‘describe’ to the phrase. Were this not the case, you would be able to add any phrase at all, for example, ‘that elephants have a trunk’ and have the statement still carry meaning.You cannot.

Proximity in English is often what determines meaning, and this is a good example.

To take another example: if I were to say of you (and of course, I would not): ‘I think it appalling and insane that you have deserted the Church’ you would rightly take that as a (false) statement about what you had done. Likewise, Trudeau would see this statement as a (false) statement that he believes the Republican proposal to be to allow women to see scans. He would be right, becuse this is not how he descibes the proposal. He sees it as a violation akin to rape. Words mean something.

 

[Dale_M]

This is from the UK piece:

Later, she says she does not want an intrusive vaginal examination but is told by a nurse: “The male Republicans who run Texas require that all abortion seekers be examined with a 10-inch shaming wand.” The nurse adds: “By the authority invested in me by the GOP base, I thee rape.”

That strip is now viewable online (if where you live is already Thursday). I just saw it on the Doonesbury website and can understand why many newspapers decided to either not run the series or to move it to the editorial page. Its very strong stuff, even by editorial cartoon standards.

A minor quibble, though, with the UK newspaper’s description. The rape comment is uttered off-screen, but the last person holding the ultrasound probe was the doctor, so presumably he is the one who made the remark.

 

[fix]

OK, let’s look at the quote: “Trudeau described it as “appalling” and “insane” that Republicans would allow women to see their baby on the ultrasound screen before an abortion.”

Now, first of all, the statement about the Republican proposal is false, whether it is attributed to Trudeau or not. It did not require a change in the law for women to be ‘allowed’ to see ‘their baby’.

The proximity of the phrase about the Republicans to the word "described’ and its two associated adjectives ‘appalling’ and ‘insane’ clearly links the verb ‘describe’ to the phrase. Were this not the case, you would be able to add any phrase at all, for example, ‘that elephants have a trunk’ and have the statement still carry meaning.You cannot.

Proximity in English is often what determines meaning, and this is a good example.

To take another example: if I were to say of you (and of course, I would not): ‘I think it appalling and insane that you have deserted the Church’ you would rightly take that as a (false) statement about what you had done. Likewise, Trudeau would see this statement as a (false) statement that he believes the Republican proposal to be to allow women to see scans. He would be right, becuse this is not how he descibes the proposal. He sees it as a violation akin to rape. Words mean something.

If you want to argue go ahead, but when he used the word healthcare he is referring to abortion. That is the point of this entire excerise whether you admit it or not.

And if you want to parse the UK piece then we need to see the emails.

 

[timotheos]

That strip is now viewable online (if where you live is already Thursday). I just saw it on the Doonesbury website and can understand why many newspapers decided to either not run the series or to move it to the editorial page. Its very strong stuff, even by editorial cartoon standards.

A minor quibble, though, with the UK newspaper’s description. The rape comment is uttered off-screen, but the last person holding the ultrasound probe was the doctor, so presumably he is the one who made the remark.

The transvaginal ultrasound probe, the object of Trudeau’s “rape” comment in his comic strip, is a minor instrument compared to a speculum, which in turn is nothing compared to a dilatation and curettage procedure – a procedure which Trudeau apparently finds acceptable!

There is a certain deep sadness I feel when people like Mr. Trudeau in effect preach a gospel of despair and meaninglessness of life. His humor is often deeply cynical and angry. Unfortunately it resonates with so many.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

The transvaginal ultrasound probe, the object of Trudeau’s “rape” comment in his comic strip, is a minor instrument compared to a speculum, which in turn is nothing compared to a dilatation and curettage procedure – a procedure which Trudeau apparently finds acceptable!

There is a certain deep sadness I feel when people like Mr. Trudeau in effect preach a gospel of despair and meaninglessness of life. His humor is often deeply cynical and angry. Unfortunately it resonates with so many.

Cynicism has a valuable place in the media.
We need people who are always ready to tell us when the emperor (metaphorically) has no clothes.