newjerseynewsroom.com

Tuesday
Aug 30th

What do you mean it’s not rape?

friedmanJEANETTE_optSoul or Pocketbook? You Decide.

BY JEANETTE FRIEDMAN
NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
COMMENTARY

Thirty-seven years ago, this very week, there was a snowstorm swirling outside my kitchen window, but my sixth floor apartment was so hot and dry I cracked the window facing the fire escape before I went to bed. It was about 3 a.m., and I had just fallen asleep when I woke up to find a man cutting the wires to the phone on my bedside table. Next thing I knew, I was blindfolded with my bathrobe, and could feel the point of a knife pushing into the top of my scalp. I kept thinking that what was happening couldn't be happening, and remembered what my cop friends had taught me. "Don't fight back, give them what they want or they won't think twice about hurting or killing you."

So I did as I was told, and about half-an-hour later, wrapped in a blanket, I went pounding on my neighbors' doors, begging them to call the cops. One of my big kitchen knives was laying on the third step of the staircase.

I was not bruised or battered physically, but I demanded to be taken to a hospital for a rape kit. (I was the editor of my college paper and had access to information most women didn't have. It was 1973 and women were starting to learn how to take care of themselves because, generally, men proved unequal to the task. Mostly I wanted a massive dose of penicillin, just in case I'd caught something disgusting.)

The first question these police officers asked me was what I had done to encourage my attacker. I thought that only happened in movies! I was so furious, I shot back that at 3 a.m., as the snowstorm raged across the city, I had climbed out on the fire escape, and while swinging my panties in the air, had yelled "Here ‘tis, come and get it."

They finally believed me when they heard the names of my cop friends and saw the evidence: the broken screen in the kitchen window, the knife on the stairs in the hall and the cut phone wires. A few weeks later the rapist got his just desserts. His face was plastered all over the NY Daily News, and more women came forward to identify him. He was a serial rapist who didn't have to beat his victims black and blue because he carried a weapon.

I wasn't battered because I had done what the cops taught me to do. And now, thirty-seven years later, Chris Smith, a Republican congressman in my home state of New Jersey, is pushing the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" that invalidates the terrible experiences of millions of American women who were raped. His law basically says that only bruises prove rape and that it isn't incest if the victim is over 18. By his lights, because we weren't beaten to a pulp, we weren't raped. And that means victims of date rapes or designer drug rapes haven't been raped either. Never mind marital rape. It doesn't exist. He is saying it's no longer rape even if there is a knife to the victim's head — and it isn't incest because she's over 18, and she's not bleeding.

So far there are 173 Congressmen rallying behind this bill — one Smith claims will cut the deficit dramatically by eliminating abortions. What this law really does is pull the rug out from beneath women's bitterly won rights to do what they want with their own bodies. And that's precisely the point. They are creating a ruse to stop legal abortions.

I never went back to my apartment after that terrible night, except to move out. I stayed with a friend when I was released from the hospital and spent the rest of the night trying to scrub myself clean. For weeks afterward I held my breath until I got my period. Thank God, Roe V. Wade was passed just two weeks before I was raped. Had I gotten pregnant, I have no doubt I would have gotten an abortion — by hook or by crook. Such a pregnancy would have been life-threatening to me, since I wanted to marry and have children with someone I loved — and not have to commit suicide in despair. (A victim of rape is four times more likely to commit suicide.)

Maybe I believe that women have the right to choose because I am a Jew, and in Judaism, abortion is permitted even during full-term delivery if the life of the mother is at stake. The differences of opinion among the Jews lay not in the act of abortion, which is clearly permitted; they lay in the definition of the word "life." There are those rabbis who say that a woman's emotional and mental state matters — especially when it comes to raising children. For some women forced to give birth to a child of rape or a severely damaged child with no hope of recovery, the situation becomes life-threatening — not only to the mother, but to the mental and emotional health of her other children. On the other hand, there are rabbis who say a mother's life needs to be literally physically threatened by conditions of pregnancy and birth before an abortion can take place. In all cases, the final decision is between a woman, her rabbi and her doctor — and together they face God, come what may.

What is happening right now is that Smith and his cronies have wrapped their religious beliefs in the deficit and are attempting to coerce the rest of us to adhere to those beliefs by abusing the separation of Church and State. True, the separation of Church and State is not explicit in the Constitution. Neither is the right to privacy. Yet both of these principles are considered basic American human rights. They reinforce democratic ideals and allow American women to choose what they want to do, without having someone else's beliefs jammed down their throats.

Smith's bill is designed to demolish these long-established American freedoms as he and fellow Republican Mike Pence — whose companion bill aims to prohibit private insurance companies from covering legal abortions — attempt to bring the full force of Federal legislation to bear down on poor and middle class women. They are forcing American women to abide by the rules of Christian beliefs that differ even from those of other Christians. They use doublespeak to redefine rape and incest, words that have accepted meanings, legally and literally, that go back to biblical times. They manipulate the Constitution and lie about the costs of the havoc their bills will create.

If Smith's bill passes, you will have to suffer contusions, blunt force trauma or open wounds to prove rape, and if you are an incest victim over 18, it won't be incest. Any resulting pregnancies of these non-rapes will have to be carried to term because Chris Smith will make abortion impossible unless you are wealthy and pay for it "out of network." It's already awful to know that if you are a poor woman in America who relies on federal funds for health care, you can't get an abortion if your fetus was damaged by prescription drugs, a disease you contracted, or a genetic disorder. The government doesn't allow it.

If these Republicans have their way, women will be forced to go back to pre-1973 kitchen table abortions. These back-alley homemade procedures force women to risk their lives by using Betadyne and knitting needles or coat hangers to accomplish what the United States government will not allow them to do safely. The only women who will escape this desperate trap are the rich.

The rest of us will wonder what we can do for the women who develop complications from butchered abortions and how we will care for the damaged and unwanted children that will be the issue of this insane policy. Will the greater costs lie in our souls or our pocket books?

Call your congressman and tell him or her that you won't stand for this abuse of legislative power. This is still America — and we are still Americans — of different faiths and belief systems, and no one's religious agenda speaks for us all, not even to lower the deficit.

(America has more reported rapes, by a huge number, than any other country that gathers such statistics, and researchers note that as many as 60% of all rapes are never reported. Here are the facts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#United_States and here: http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims)

Jeanette Friedman is an award-winning journalist from New Jersey

ALSO BY JEANETTE FRIEDMAN

Even mourning of Arizona shooting victims wasn't enough to pause the political rhetoric

Facts not Fox: How News Corp. holds America hostage

CGI: How a global effort encourages local action

 
Comments (8)
8 Friday, 04 February 2011 15:25
Carol Moore
Any man who has difficulty understanding what "rape" is should be forced to watch the movie "Deliverance" again -- in particular the rape scene in the woods. That's what rape is -- it's not sexy, it's not titillating, and you can't just "relax and enjoy it." It's not different if the victim is a man and not a woman...
7 Friday, 04 February 2011 10:27
Jeanette Friedman
I would like to know how abortion is a budget buster when last year American taxpayers paid on average one-tenth of a penny for the 191 Federally-funded abortions that were done last year. One-tenth of one penny. Now our governor, Chris Christie is going after women again. No right to contraceptives, either. Who is zoomin' who?

Removing the word forcible from the bill did not reinstate the true meaning of the word incest, so children over 18 who have been victims of incest cease being such victims on their 18th birthdays. They did not take out the threat to private insurance carriers, and they certainly did not eliminate the privacy and church and state separation issues from the bill.

HR3 is a disgrace. The fact it got this far shows precisely how morally bankrupt the sponsors of this bill are. Perhaps if we banned vasectomies, men would notice and rally against this heinous bill.
6 Thursday, 03 February 2011 23:45
Suzy
Margaret Sanger? Fear mongering? Republican Tactics?? it sounds the same to me. I am speaking about incest. rape, and danger to the pregnant women's health, emotionally as well as physically, and so was this article. We are not speaking about "blanket abortions," and that was not mentioned in the article. Why, I wonder would you through that argument in the mix unless it is to confuse the issue. That 40% of Black pregnancy ending in abortions figure includes spontaneous abortions or miscarriages. But in any event the women who had the abortions by their own free will, had a choice And that's the right we want to maintain, to have a safe legal abortion Just tell me if you were a victim of rape and got pregnant would you or would you want your daughter to keep that child? Would you even want to be responsible for bring the Genetic makeup of a serial rapist into the world.
The deficit will not be saved, medicaid will have to pay for the complications of the botched home grown abortions or our taxes will have to pay for the years of therapy and care for these children who will no doubt be neglegted and abused or worse yet we will be paying thousands of dollars for incarcerating these people after they commit crimes either as children or adults.
5 Thursday, 03 February 2011 18:26
jkruofa
I will first say I am anti-abortion. I don't like it and I, personally, would never have one no matter the circumstances, but I do not agree with the way these politicians- who by the way are republican AND democrat- are trying to reduce the number of abortions. Changing the definition of rape to reduce abortions is not the way to go. This will hurt all women who are raped, not just the ones who become pregnant. It's just plain wrong.
4 Thursday, 03 February 2011 12:27
Kristine
Mitchell Adler, YOU should be ashamed of yourself! Margaret Sanger is the savior of women, whereas idiots like you are obviously clueless and uncaring as to the devastation of rape. Why would you even make such a ridiculous argument? Forty percent of all pregnancies end in SPONTANEOUS ABORTION (miscarriage), so education yourself, or shut up! You would agree with the cretins supporting this bill to be soft on rape? For what earthly reason, I wonder?

Indeed, I wonder about men who support this bill - I wonder what their true motivations are!
3 Thursday, 03 February 2011 11:27
Christin Berger
I cannot believe this bill could actually pass, much less become law, but I am very upset that someone would actually introduce this. Then to see that almost 200 have signed on is astounding! This bill would just add more unwarranted guilt to those who are victims of rape. Trying to hide it behind deficit reduction is cowardly. I will be contacting my elected officials about it and anyone else who will listen.
2 Thursday, 03 February 2011 02:19
Carson Warring
Abortion is a choice. Whether it's legal or illegal, it is always a choice. It's always been a choice. There has always been methods of performing abortions. Primitive tools, mild poisons, etc. Preventing a rape-baby from being born is not "an attempt to eradicate the sub human races" unless you mean to infer that rape is the only way for these "sub human races" to procreate. Just because a woman doesn't want a constant reminder of a traumatic experience staring her in the face every day does not mean you have to babble on about how the Nazi party (not every German was a Nazi, you racist) treated the Jews. Your blind devotion to archaic propaganda makes you so paranoid that you fail to see what abortion CAN do. That rape victim won't have to drop out of college to support a child. That child won't grow up with it's mother resenting it for being a reminder of a heinous crime. That child wouldn't grow up to be maladjusted and more likely to commit crimes, including the same crime that it was produced from. This could lead to an infinity cycle of crime and sin. Dare we let the cycle end with one sin? How down-right righteous we must be to even entertain the thought of keeping the world from falling into a resentful sinful vortex into hell. Sanctity of human life? Are we to preserve the right of sinful men to give unwanted children to unprepared women? Giving the punishment for the man's crime on the woman? What fair and just religion would even entertain the idea of punishing the innocent? You speak of sophistry, yet you are guilty of the same act. You give examples of how radical groups would use abortion to wipe out the "sub human races", completely disregarding the actual utility of abortion. You want to ban something because if someone somehow gets into governing power, they can use it to commit atrocities? People where burned at the stake in centuries passed, we don't cry out to ban methods of starting fires.
1 Wednesday, 02 February 2011 23:43
Mitchell Adler
Margaret Sanger the racist, anti semetic, eugenicist should be very proud of herself. The eugenics society, in an attempt to eradicate the sub human races, eg. Jews, blacks and hispanics wanted to make abortion the law of the land. Boy did they succeed. Sanger, the founder of the Planned Parenthood organization, funded by the federal government, is responsible for the genocide against the black population. Forty percent of all minority pregnancies end in abortion, Sangers dream come true. It never ceases to amaze me that Sophistry can sway the common man into doing what his enemy desires. Pro abortion did not sell so it became pro choice. When I see liberals touting the line and black liberals championing the murder of their own children I fear for our survival as a civilization. When we as Jews support the murder of unborn children with out regard for the sanctity of human life we are doomed to suffer the same fate. There should be provisions for rape and incest but blanket abortion on demand is an unholy alliance with the very same forces of evil that murdered six million Jews. The Germans learned how to deal with "sub human jews" from the likes of Margaret Sanger and the American Eugenics Society.

Add your comment

Your name:
Subject:
Comment:


Ad Server -- Opinion Right 3 300x250

NVE-1134_NVE_300x250

Follow/join us

Twitter: njnewsroom Linked In Group: 2483509

Hot topics

 

NJNR Press Box

 

Join New Jersey Newsroom.com on Twitter

 

Be a Facebook fan of New Jersey Newsroom.com

 

New Jersey Newsroom has plenty of room


**V 2.0**