Cathrynn Brown

Punishing rapists vs. protecting abortion? No contest.

Cathrynn Brown2
Cathrynn Brown

New Mexico State Representative Cathrynn Brown caused a left-wing firestorm of controversy when she introduced a bill intended to punish rapists who force their victims to have abortions in order to cover up their crimes. Pro-aborts immediately began attacking Brown, accusing her of wanting to put rape victims who get abortions in jail.

Of course, this was a deliberate misrepresentation of the bill. But that didn’t matter. Abortion advocates can’t let anything stand in the way of more women getting abortions, not even a woman being forced into one by a rapist or abuser. The bill does nothing more than prohibit someone from forcing a woman to get an abortion against her will. This should be seemingly commonsense, a way to protect women. But not in the fantasy land of abortion advocates.

One perspective in particular deserves to be recognized: Mary Elizabeth Williams, who seemingly would rather protect abortion than allow rapists to be punished for and prohibited from forcing a woman to get an abortion against her will.

But Brown’s clever ruse to redefine a woman’s constitutional right as criminal tampering didn’t go over very well, and as the bill made national headlines Thursday, Brown not so coincidentally removed her contact information from her legislature page. But her personal Web page, which greets visitors with a photo from the governor’s prayer breakfast, tells a tale of somebody who’s been trying to tweak the narrative. There’s a record of two now-deleted posts entered on Thursday evening, followed by a statement from Brown that reads, “This is the bill that I will introduce that protects women and girls from incest and other sex crimes: It makes it clear that the mother of the fetus would never be charged. This bill ensures the prosecution of the offender and protection of the victim.”

In the bill’s newly gussied up language, it specifies that “a person who commits sexual penetration or incest and who procures an abortion of a fetus resulting from the crime with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime is guilty of tampering with evidence, prohibiting prosecution of the mother of the fetus … In no circumstance shall the mother of the fetus be charged.” So if you’re a rapist and you try to get your victim to have an abortion, you’re in trouble. Because that happens every day. Brown’s apparent interest in protecting women should be taken within the context of her other pursuits, however, like serving on the board of Carlsbad’s Right to Life chapter, and posting images from the Life Issues Institute on her Facebook page. The Institute describes its mission as “assuring … equal protection under the law for all living humans from the beginning of their biological life at fertilization.”

… “Horrified” is exactly how one should feel about Brown’s sneaky, cruel and desperately punitive-to-victims bill. Too bad she’s horrified at being exposed for such a dumb, callous attempt to criminalize reproductive rights instead of at the idiotic obstacles continually thrown in the path of women seeking safe, legal abortions. But if you’re looking for proof of the callousness of the antiabortion movement and the extreme lengths to which they’ll go, you can at least give credit to Brown for providing the one thing she seems to care so very much about. Evidence.

After the controversy, Brown even made sure to add language clarifying that under no circumstances would a woman be charged for having an abortion. But the abortion fanatics still weren’t pacified. That’s no surprise, because, of course, any law that could decrease the number of abortions performed is a bad, bad thing which punishes women…because being forced into an abortion against your will after being raped is better than not having an abortion at all! Am I right, ladies, or am I right?

One of the things that troubled me most, though, was this little gem from Williams:

So if you’re a rapist and you try to get your victim to have an abortion, you’re in trouble. Because that happens every day.

Who knows if it actually happens every day, but it absolutely does happen. And abortion clinics go along with it willingly, happy to cover up sexual abuse crimes if it means they get their forty pieces of silver in the process. Live Action’s Mona Lisa Project showed that abortion clinics would willingly look the other way if it meant they got their abortions.

But what about real-world examples?

In June of 2006, 40 year-old Adam Gault abducted teenager Danielle Cramer and held her captive for over a year. After he impregnated her, Gault brought Cramer to a Planned Parenthood abortion facility in West Hartford, Conneticut. Planned Parenthood performed the abortion and then turned her back over to Gault. In 2002, Planned Parenthood referred a thirteen-year-old California girl for an abortion after she had been raped by her step-father, not bothering to report the crime. In 1999 an 11 year-old California girl was given an abortion after she was raped by her 17 year-old boyfriend–with Planned Parenthood again doing nothing to report what happened. Two similar cases are known to have in occurred in Ohio as well.

Those are just examples that Live Action has uncovered. How many more exist?

So yes, Ms. Williams. While you sneer at the thought, the truth is, it does happen. And Cathrynn Brown volunteering with pro-life organizations doesn’t change that fact, as much as you’d like it to. The despicable men who do this to women deserve to be punished for it. There should be no argument over this. Forcing a woman to having an abortion against her will, after raping her, is abhorrent. It is literally sickening that abortion advocates would protest against that.

The truth of the matter seems to be that, when it comes to punishing rapists vs. protecting abortion, the choice for pro-aborts is clear. As usual, anything that could decrease the number of abortions performed is bad…even if it means protecting a rapist.

Remind me again which side is supposed to be pro-woman here?

  • Here’s an idea… how about a law that requires anyone who provides/performs an abortion for anyone under the age of consent, to report the name and age of the young woman, as well as the date of the abortion, and a DNA sample from the child to the police within 24 hours, or face charges of being an accessory to statutory rape, incest, obstruction of justice, obstruction of an investigation, destroying evidence, etc.

    • Bridget

      Planned Parenthood is suppose to report the age, but hey, people are blind to the truth that they don’t do anything for the girl.

  • Okay, so how do you know when the abortion being performed is the result of a rape? Doesn’t the victim have to REPORT the rape? Women don’t report rape often enough as it is because they are often scrutinized and often accused of lying. So how likely is it that a woman will be strong enough to report it, but easily coerced into having an abortion? All this bill does is scare the victim into keeping her mouth shut. And what about the women who don’t conceive from a rape, does this protect them at all? They don’t deserve as much protection as the pregnant ones do?

    And do you really think people that are providing abortions are just in it for the money? There are much less controversial ways for doctors to make money. You must think pro-choice means pro-abortion? I would say that almost no one wants to keep abortion numbers up. But we are realistic, abstinence-only education doesn’t work, but inexpensive, easy-access to contraceptives would make a difference. And we also look at the big picture, can she afford a baby, who will provide medical expenses for the pregnancy, time off work? How will she be able to provide the child with all it needs after it is born, because people certainly hate paying their taxes to support all those people who just mooch off the government. Maybe you don’t understand because you aren’t a single mother who has to do everything on your own. Even when you’re husband is deployed you have support on base, and plenty of financial support in your bank account.

    • Daniel P. Durham

      If nothing else, any form of sexual activity with girls under a certain age is automatically rape. Also, rapists are caught by other people on occasion, or reported years later. Finally, it’s possible that the woman will go ahead with the abortion because she knows the rapist will shoot her if she doesn’t, and then get a chance to call for help weeks or months later.
      And you’re right, I’m not a single mother:-). But I actually know someone who is, a teenage single mother right in my church, and she seems to be doing just fine. It can be done.

  • It’s just a stupid proposal for a law, the ideological blinders you have on apparently won’t allow you to see that. Or maybe you know it, but just can’t write it.

    The prosecution of rapists is at a dismally low percentage, compared to the actual scope of rapes. A gargantuan number of rapes aren’t even reported. So, even if we were to give Ms. Brown the benefit of the doubt in terms of her good faith on the matter, the real impacts would likely be zero. Not worth doubly victimizing rape victims just to satisfy an almost zero chance to assist a rape prosecution.

    • Hannah Mallery

      If it’s accurate, that infographic just shows what a failure our justice system is, and how intimidated women must be by their rapists. I’d be frightened to report a rape too, if I didn’t think he’d even get jail time. Shame on our courts.

  • Hannah Mallery

    You’d think that, since they wear the badge of “pro-choice,” they would support a law that would help reduce the number of coerced abortions. You know, since coercion takes away a woman’s choice and all. It’s instances like this that they aren’t pro-choice; they are pro-death.

    • How do you prosecute the rapist if no charges are filed?

      • Hannah Mallery

        You really can’t. That’s why women need to be encouraged to file charges.

    • That’s a very convoluted way to get … well, nowhere. This lady doesn’t want to help rape prosecutions. Most everyone knows that.

      Meanwhile, it’s 2013 and we’re still talking about Republicans and rape in the same sentence, almost on a weekly babsis. Hooray.

  • Violet

    I’m mostly upset at the idea that if I were raped and forced to lose my child in a second invasive act of violence, I WOULDN’T get to charge the rapist with the murder. Putting him in the hands of the law would be so much more merciful (godly?) than tracking down my Italian relatives and telling them who whacked my bambino.

  • Irishman

    Or how about a case where a woman wants a child but the father doesn’t. If the father does something to cause the death of the fetus, is that murder? I remember a case in Quebec where a man shot his pregnant girlfriend. Grandparents argued it was a double homicide as they had two coffins. Does a boyfriend have to right to punch a woman or cause damage that would kill the fetus and only be charged with assault? Does the question of whether a fetus is alive and deserving of protection just depend on whether the mother wants to have it or not?