A follow-up on Sarah's post from last evening, which highlighted comments from Georgia Democratic gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams, who is currently trailing Gov. Brian Kemp across multiple polls. Appearing at a forum, Abrams asserted that there's "no such thing" as a fetal heartbeat at six weeks -- the point after which a number of states have passed or implemented 'heartbeat law' limitations on most abortions. That notion, she said, is a myth based on a "manufactured sound" designed to allow men to "take control of" women's bodies. Watch:
Georgia Democrat Stacey Abrams: "There is no such thing as a heartbeat at six weeks. It is a manufactured sound designed to convince people that men have the right to take control of a woman's body."
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) September 22, 2022
REMINDER: Abrams supports NO LIMITS on abortion. pic.twitter.com/f7XxeqzfF6
Let's set aside the fact that substantial majorities of American women support significant abortion limitations, which undermines the supposed motivation behind her most recent bizarre conspiracy. Instead, let's discuss whether she's correct that fetal heartbeats aren't a real biological phenomenon six weeks into pregnancies, and that evidence to the contrary is a "manufactured sound." National Review's John McCormack points out that even abortion giant Planned Parenthood used to acknowledge this medical reality, but has scrubbed such mentions from their website, now that they've become politically problematic for the pro-abortion agenda (which I often hasten to differentiate from the pro-choice position):
Planned Parenthood edited its own website to conform to political messaging against heartbeat laws:
— John McCormack (@McCormackJohn) September 22, 2022
2/2 pic.twitter.com/9py7V6IFoX
Quite a few journalists -- an overwhelmingly and disproportionately pro-choice to pro-abortion group -- have leapt to defend and justify Abrams' comments. Their argument seems to be, actually, it's not truly a heartbeat until ten weeks or later. A few examples:
Recommended
FWIW, "fetal heartbeat" is a misnomer. The ultrasound picks up electrical activity generated by an embryo. The so-called "heartbeat" sound you hear is created by the ultrasound. Not until 10 weeks can the opening and closing of cardiac valves be detected by a Doppler machine. ... https://t.co/OODSeeFMas
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) September 22, 2022
"the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists (ACOG) defines the fluttering of cells in the embryonic heart tube as 'cardiac activity' rather than a heartbeat" https://t.co/wrfEi5OqoY https://t.co/uKZ2lStYF0
— Garance Franke-Ruta (@thegarance) September 22, 2022
Parsing "heartbeat" versus "cardiac activity" is an interesting choice. As a number of people have asked, how would you feel if you were told your cardiac activity was about to cease? As for the claim by Kessler, the Washington Post's fact-checker, here's a thread by a medical doctor refuting it:
The NPR link you cited is WRONG.
— Pradheep J. Shanker (@Neoavatara) September 22, 2022
I wrote extensively about it at the time.
Ultrasound only detects density and motion. It cannot detect any electrical activity at all. This is a scientific fact.
If the beat the same as a fully grown adult beat? Of course not. We're talking early and biological development. However, the cardiac tissue is contracting, which is literally what a beat is. To say otherwise is scientific misinformation, and cannot be treated otherwise.
— Pradheep J. Shanker (@Neoavatara) September 22, 2022
"I can't believe I have to report a fact checker to Twitter for misinformation, Shanker remarked in the same thread. "This is what we've come to." Kessler is also getting rightly criticized for another flawed "fact check" on this general subject:
Your fact-check is premised on the repeated claim that Republicans are implying late-term abortions happen frequently, yet that claim is not part of any of the quotes you provide.
— AG (@AGHamilton29) September 22, 2022
Also, some would argue 10K in 3rd trimester is significant. Close to # of annual gun homicides.
Nearly every elected Democrat in Washington opposes any limitation on third-term elective abortions. That's an appalling fact, no matter how it gets dressed up by sympathetic journalists. Another prominent physician, Dr. Nicole Saphier, flagged Abrams for medical misinformation regarding her "false statement" on fetal heartbeats. In my response to Abrams and her defenders, I wondered if they would agree to restrictions further along in pregnancy if we accepted their standard on when a proper fetal heartbeat begins:
…for the sake of argument, let’s accept that parsing for a moment. Can we then agree that there’s a separate human heartbeat at 10 weeks — and this it’s ethical and acceptable to restrict most elective abortions at that point? No? How about at 20 weeks? Still no…?
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) September 22, 2022
They'll labor and strain to deny the existence of a heartbeat at six weeks, then they'll find some other reason or euphemism to defend intentionally stopping that heartbeat, even after they concede it exists. Their stance requires a combination of systematic dehumanization, tortured rhetorical games, and outright denial of science. If you think a distinct human heartbeat doesn’t represent a person worthy of legal protection, make that case. Don’t deny that heartbeat’s existence. Apropos of nothing, I'll leave you with this scientific development about non-human clumps of cells, indistinguishable from 'pregnant people's' bodies:
These images from researchers show that babies in the womb can possibly react to flavor. pic.twitter.com/RVB7DsXNoc
— TODAY (@TODAYshow) September 22, 2022
Join the conversation as a VIP Member