I am one of the tiny percentage of women who was blessed to receive a late-term abortion when I needed it. “Blessed” is a strange word to use about a procedure I literally cried throughout, but the truth is, that D&C freed me from my own private hell. Other women, mostly invisible to the public, are not so blessed. Heartbroken and grieving, they are forced by law to face additional torments.

Why is Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic nominee, deviating from the Democratic platform on the issue of abortion? Compromising with forced-birthers on late-term abortion regulations is not consistent with her promise to “Defend women’s health and reproductive rights against attacks,” and leaves innocent women vulnerable to barbaric treatment. Those who care about women and protecting our reproductive rights, need to speak up and speak out on this issue.

What does the 2012 Democratic National Platform say about abortion?

Note the following words:

Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way.

Are you surprised? No? These words convey the essence of what the “pro-choice” movement has historically been about. The decision, the choice, about whether or not to have an abortion belongs to a woman and her doctor alone — politicians should not be meddling in this decision.

I took a screenshot of the current platform, for I fear it will change when it is reviewed and revised later this summer. Hillary Clinton has publicly stated that she is essentially open to meddling by politicians when it comes to late term abortion regulations. Her views are not consistent with the existing platform, which creates a bit of awkwardness, don’t you think? A tweak here and there might help … so pay attention kids! You may glimpse the Democratic Party in the act of shifting even farther to the right in real time!

HILLARY IS OPEN TO TAKING CHOICE AWAY. BERNIE IS NOT.

Both candidates were asked questions about abortion at the Fox News Democratic Presidential Town Hall event held on March 7th. Bernie Sanders responded with classic pro-choice answers, including “I happen to believe that it is wrong for the government to be telling a woman what to do with her own body.” When pressed on the subject of exceptions for late-term abortions, he remained steadfast:

I am very strongly pro-choice. that is a decision to be made by the woman, her physician and her family. That's my view. — Bernie Sanders

Hillary Clinton’s first answer was also classic pro-choice: “Under Roe v. Wade, which is rooted in the Constitution, women have this right to make this highly personal decision with their family in accordance with their faith, with their doctor”; she also expressed support for Planned Parenthood. But when pressed by Bret Baier (“without any exceptions?”), Clinton gave an answer that should have set off alarms for all feminists:

I have been on record in favor of a late pregnancy regulation that would have exceptions for the life and health of the mother. — Hillary Clinton

Frankly, both this answer and the lack of screams about it from women’s rights activists have shocked me. Clinton has now publicly stated that not only is she is open to letting the proverbial camel’s nose into the tent, she has apparently held this view for quite some time: she is in favor of forcing women [like me], in some situations, to continue pregnancies against their will and/or against the medical advice they have been given by their doctors.

If that wasn’t awful enough, Clinton’s exceedingly slick criticism of moderators in Brooklyn for failing to ask questions about women’s reproductive rights, was not called out for being the premeditated political ploy that it actually was.

And I want to say something about this since we're talking about the Supreme Court and what's at stake. We've had eight debates before, this is our ninth. We've not had one question about a woman's right to make her own decisions about reproductive health care, not one question.

Her admirers were thrilled with Clinton’s comments, but they apparently failed to notice:

1. Clinton twisted an unrelated question about President Obama's nomination of Merrick Gaarland to the Supreme Court into an opportunity to make a surprise attack on the moderators about abortion, which indicates that her remarks were prepared in advance, and she had been looking for a good opportunity to say them.
2. Clinton’s words were not true: questions on the topic had in fact been raised at the Fox News townhall event; [Daily Kos] videos and transcripts are provided in another diary.
   • When interviewed after the broadcast, Bret Baier told the NYT, “Neither of them has taken a question in the debate or town halls about life, so I figured this was an opportunity.”

     Notice the similarity of Baier’s words, published on March 8, to those spoken by Clinton at the debate on April 14. One might even suspect that the fantastic idea for Clinton to “slam moderators” (as Vox described it) in Brooklyn may have come from reading a certain article in the NYT. Adding the precise number of previous debates was a nice flair.

3. By feigning indignation to the moderators on this topic when another topic was being discussed (i.e. Merrick Gaarland’s nomination), Clinton managed to imply that she was a greater champion of women’s rights than Sanders, without having to answer even a single question about how her views deviate from those in the Democratic National Platform.
4. Clinton’s and Sanders positions on women’s reproductive rights are highly similar, with the exception of her stance on late term abortion. Thus, Clinton’s outrage at the moderators, for not giving her an opportunity to articulate and differentiate her positions in comparison to Sanders, appears to be merely an oration trick known as an appeal to sympathy.

Clinton is performing amazing acts of magic here: she is managing to convince her loyal supporters that she can be trusted to fight for their reproductive rights, while simultaneously laying the foundation to take those same rights away — and doing so in front of their very own eyes!

WHY WOULD A NICE GIRL EVER WANT TO HAVE A LATE TERM ABORTION?

Most people know little about late term abortions. Forced-birthers. whose true goal is to deny ALL choice to ALL women, try to exploit this situation by spreading propaganda to convince others that abortions are evil and the women who have them are monsters. Forced-birthers are actively working to chip away at choice; one method is via personhood and heartbeat bills that sound reasonable to those who do not understand the true consequences of such bills.

The number one [Daily Kos] reason that women get abortions past 24 weeks is due to fetal anomalies. I share my own story in [Daily Kos] All Democrats SHOULD be United - Late Term Abortion Restrictions Trap and Torture Innocent Women. As I understand Clinton’s position on late term abortion regulations, I would NOT have been eligible for an exception, and so would have been forced to continue with my doomed pregnancy until “nature took it’s course”. The key issue: Clinton has expressed support for exceptions in case of the life or health of the mother (based on Roe vs. Wade), but not exceptions for the life or health of the baby (where Roe is silent).

Another story is the tale of Taylor Mahaffey, which is described in [Daily Kos] Woman forced to give birth to stillborn in Texas because of 'Women's Health Laws' . A serious complication arose that doomed her pregnancy after 20 weeks, but because of late term regulations enacted in her state, the doctors were not legally able to give her an abortion. Texas law DOES provide exceptions for both the mother and the baby, but in Taylor’s case, mother and child were both healthy even though the pregnancy itself was doomed. Taylor did not qualify for an abortion under the law, so doctors had no choice but to withhold medical care until the fetus died or her labor progressed. What this woman was forced to endure is horrific.

When [she] started bleeding, they went back to the hospital, but with Fox’s heart still beating, doctors couldn’t legally interfere.
“Eventually she was just screaming at them to get the child out of her,” Daniel said.

The whole premise of late term abortion regulations is ridiculous: mentally healthy women who do not wish to be pregnant take necessary steps to end their pregnancy earlier in the process, when it is easier, cheaper, and much less risky to their own health. In contrast, women who need late term abortions primarily consist of women who truly want their babies, but tragedy has intervened.

The great Molly Ivins put it this way:

I submit to you that late term pregnancy regulations are not enacted because America needs to put an end to a huge flood of heartless women who are using third trimester abortions as a form of birth control. Such thoughts are indeed nightmarish, but most people wake from their sleep and realize that such dreams are not real. Women do not turn into heartless monsters after 20 weeks — where on earth does such a hateful idea come from?

I submit to you that late term pregnancy regulations are enacted because of a scandalous idea that polls well. Clever politicians have come to realize that embracing this idea and passing “feel-good” legislation to prevent mythical monster mothers from dismembering their innocent babies wins them cheap and easy political points. Forced-birther propaganda is purposely designed to inflame the passions of those who hear it, and goes unchecked and unchallenged in the mainstream media. Because mythical monster mothers do not exist, they make the perfect scapegoat: absolutely nobody will speak out on their behalf. Everybody is united in contempt for their mythical monster crimes.

I’ve come to realize that it is only when women like me speak out will the heinous myths about us be revealed for what they are: perverted lies spread by those who are willing to exploit others in the interest of political gain. Speaking out is painful for all women who have had these medical procedures, including me, especially on a website where I anticipate I will be judged negatively and even reviled for speaking out on this issue. I feel a moral obligation to “pay it forward” in gratitude for the humane treatment I received in my most desperate hour, because so few are able and willing to speak the truth on this issue. If not me, who? If not now, when?

Women who have late term abortions are not monsters who should be ashamed. We are victims of fate who have experienced tragedy. Our dreams, our lives have been shattered. The mama-bear inside me is full of rage and fury at the thought of any politician who would abuse our reputations and literally subject us to torture in order to advance their own careers.

Voters need to understand that late term abortion regulations do not save innocent babies. Instead, these “feel good” laws lead directly to hell by setting traps for hapless mothers cursed by fate. Those who lend support for these laws are directly culpable for the horrific experiences that women like Tayor Mahaffey are ultimately forced to endure. Please don’t cry empty tears for Tayor — instead make your feelings known to all politicians, both Republican and Democratic, that you oppose all forms of torture, including late-term pregnancy regulations. Such action will give meaning to her suffering, for the world will become a better place for others because of what she experienced and the actions her family has taken to enlighten others.

Taking choice away from grieving and desperate mothers is cruel, barbaric, and makes a mockery out of the entire pro-choice movement. If feminists decide to embrace Hillary Clinton’s stance on late term abortion, they are going to need to put on their thinking caps, because pro-choice will no longer be a fitting name.