The Texas Shame Act

The Texas sonogram law is having its fifteen minutes of fame in Doonesbury comic strips this week. Of course, this is causing proponents of the law a bit of anxiety as they never expected anyone but liberal, hairy-legged peace pipe players and baby killers to pay attention to the law or even hear about it.
I was asked to comment on the issue by KVUE's Mark Wiggins. It is ironic that newspapers are moving the strip to the opinion pages or offering a different series while women in Texas seeking an abortion have no alternative to undergoing this procedure.

Of course, there's always another view, as KVUE reports:
"I'm very sad that a Texas law is being made fun of in this manner, when all this is about is protecting the health of women," said Carol Everett, CEO of anti-abortion non-profit the Heidi Group. "...[W]e do not need to be putting it in the comic section, first of all, where families and children may see it, or even the editorial page. We need to give that woman the privacy that she deserves when she makes that decision, yet a fully-informed consent."



There's some flawed logic here. If all this law is about is simply "protecting the health of women," then what's the harm of it being brought up in the comic section where "families and children may see it"? If that's all this law is about, truly a plight to keep women safe, then why can't I read about it while I gulp down OJ and Cheerios? Comic strips like Zits prod at women's health and no one seems to get up in arms about that.


The difference is that the law is not about protecting women's health. It's not about giving a woman "the privacy that she deserves," as if the very basic right to privacy is something women still have to be deserving of, like a day at the spa or a pay raise. But this law isn't even about that. It's invasive, state-mandated shaming. So call it what it is: the Texas Shame Act.
Reactions: