Amanda’s concluding her series on Feminists for Life with a post summarizing that the organization’s feminist or otherwise pro-woman credentials don’t extend beyond its name. She quotes from the final email in a series of anti-choice mass mailings,
That may sound ridiculous in an age where sassy put-downs make someone the media darling of the moment. Sure, that can make anyone feel smug and satisfied in the short run.
But does it help create the solutions women need?
I suppose the answer to the question depends on what “women” means. If the interests of women are narrowly defined as what advances the political interests of FFL, then it’s true by definition that outlawing abortion will help women. It won’t be the first time an activist organization deliberately confuses its members’ politics with what helps people.
Judging by the fact that Amanda doesn’t bring up things like maternal mortality statistics in its series, I suppose FFL’s emails don’t, either. There’s a good reason they don’t; a graph of Romania’s maternal mortality statistics proves the opposite of what the organization fights for.
Now, you might say that Romania’s maternal mortality dropped like Bush’s post-Katrina approval rates only because Romania has enjoyed fast economic growth and poverty reduction since the fall of communism. But actually, Romania’s economy has had one of the most sluggish growth rates in Europe, and still its maternal mortality has dropped the fastest in (Eastern) Europe.
The experience of Romania makes it pretty clear. Abortion kills exactly zero sentient human beings. Criminalizing abortion increases both the birth rate and the maternal mortality ratio, killing far more than 60 additional women per 100,000 births.
And FFL still thinks caring about 7-week-old fetuses’ rights more than about adult women’s is pro-woman.