Chuck Winder, Idaho Lawmaker, Suggests Women Use Rape As Excuse For Abortions

The sponsor of an Idaho mandatory ultrasound bill, state Sen. Chuck Winder, made some highly controversial comments Monday during his closing arguments, suggesting women might falsely use rape as an excuse to obtain an abortion.

Just before the Idaho's Senate passed the bill, which requires woman to have an ultrasound prior to obtaining an abortion, opponents of the bill pointed out that it makes no exception for rape victims, incest victims or women in medical emergencies.

Winder, a Republican from Boise, responded to those concerns by raising the question of whether women understand when they have been raped.

“Rape and incest was used as a reason to oppose this," Winder said on the Senate floor. "I would hope that when a woman goes in to a physician with a rape issue, that physician will indeed ask her about perhaps her marriage, was this pregnancy caused by normal relations in a marriage or was it truly caused by a rape. I assume that's part of the counseling that goes on.”

Women reported 84,767 "forcible rapes" in the United States in 2010, according to the FBI's most recent Uniform Crime Report; the figure does not include statutory rape, incest or any other kind of rape that falls outside the FBI's narrow definition of the crime.

If Winder's mandatory ultrasound bill becomes law, a victim of rape or incest or a woman with a medical emergency who is seeking an abortion must obtain an ultrasound first and the state will provide a list of providers. Nearly every provider of free ultrasounds in Idaho is a "crisis pregnancy center," which aims to dissuade women from having an abortion. The woman would also have to obtain from a doctor a second ultrasound, which would involve an invasive transvaginal procedure if she is in her first trimester of pregnancy. Even if she averts her eyes from the ultrasound image and refuses to listen to the fetal heartbeat, she would have to hear the doctor describe the fetus in detail.

Proponents of the bill describe it as one more way to protect "unborn children," with the assumption that the ultrasound procedure and anti-abortion counseling might sway women against having an abortion. Opponents argue that it forces doctors to perform medically unnecessary procedures and contributes to the emotional anguish of women who have already made a very difficult decision.

One woman wrote last week about her painful experience with Texas' new mandatory ultrasound law in the Texas Observer, in which she had to listen to a doctor describe the gravely ill fetus that she had sought to abort to protect her own health.

The state Senate voted 23 to 12 to pass the controversial ultrasound bill on Monday, with all seven Democrats and five Republicans against it. The Republican-controlled House is also expected to pass the measure.

“Fellow senators, as a woman and as a person of faith, this bill makes me want to cry," said state Sen. Diane Bilyeu, a Democrat. "I want an end to abortion as well as all of you do, and I am totally opposed to abortion except in the case of rape, incest or the life of the mother. But I find this bill to be intrusive into my faith, and it is punitive as a woman.”

Comments

[Gary Lange]

10:11 PM on 08/23/2012

Let's make a bill that all males should have an invasive transvaginal ultrasound procedure once a year to test for prostate cancer. Guess where the probe goes.

[yoduhhh]

03:23 PM on 08/21/2012

maybe some of these guys should spend a fact finding weekend in some of those prisons they build, and then they can find out for themselves what it means to be truly raped.

[Kevin Grindler]

09:39 PM on 08/20/2012

Women might not be sure if they've been raped? I have a solution. Put them in dunk tank. If they survive they've not been raped. If they drown, well...................... It worked for witches, might work here. As long as we're doing away with womens rights, lets really do it up right

[Monrdhil]

10:47 AM on 08/24/2012

In court, a man :
"Mr Judge, I undestand what rape is. It means when one refuses. But I can swear, I really wanted to."
-- Coluche, dead french joker.

[gledoux686]

07:04 PM on 08/20/2012

i guess i've never understood the democrats... since roe v. wade, many have argued that the underlying case (griswold), although it protected "privacy", did not specifically address abortion rights...but in the intervening years, through democratically controlled Houses, Senates and Executives, no codifying statute has been passed and signed...so we are where we are. It seems that if it is "constitutional", laws and restrictions such as those in Idaho and Arizona would be "unconstitutional"... but, like Missouri Senate canditate Todd Akin, there appears to be no penalty for restricting constitutional activity.

[kateslate]

01:20 AM on 12/15/2012

What are you even talking about? And why do politicians put themselves between my doctor and me? Smaller government, remember?

[Veraguas]

02:44 PM on 08/20/2012

I cannot believe the year is 2012.

[mrshohn]

06:29 PM on 07/18/2012

I would hope that a female near and dear to him be raped so him might get a real look a hell, but I think any female related to him has already been punished enough.

[Warrior Girl]

12:54 PM on 07/01/2012

Where DO we get these people? One could logically come to the conclusion that intelligent life is on the decline in the Republican party!

[rosemaree124]

02:04 AM on 06/21/2012

I'm confused--isn't a first-trimester abortion done vaginally?

[Laken Shumate]

12:11 PM on 08/20/2012

No. Typically it's a chemically induced abortion during the first trimester.

[Hunter Stuart]

12:57 PM on 04/03/2012

I love the photo for this article - these two look like overgrown frat boys.

[Monrdhil]

10:49 AM on 08/24/2012

Who are just looking under the skirt of the recording secretary (30 years younger of course).

[aprilglaspie]

10:19 AM on 03/27/2012

The bill would codify an illegal search without benefit of evidence of a crime having been committed. That is amazing illogic.

[Sam Good]

07:55 PM on 03/29/2012

Outstanding point! I do wonder if anyone has considered arguing this on fourth amendment grounds.

Is there any greater invasion of privacy than a mandatory transvaginal? Seriously, what on earth has happened to the Bill of Rights?

[blahbleh]

12:23 PM on 08/21/2012

Excellent argument. But they would say they are not "searching", they are "helping" the woman understand the abortion. (Poor feeble-minded things-Congressmen can better understand what it is to carry a child of course!) I want your argument to work. Send it to the ALU, and NOW and see what they can do with it. Frankly, any invasive, totally unnecessary medical procedure, done against a person's will, is a violation of civil rights. There is no age stipulation on this either. A 10 yo incest victim will be held down, physically violated, again, re-traumatized, and made to feel like a villain, for not wanting to carry her abusers spawn in her tiny not-fully formed body. It's just disgusting. How about concern for the already born children?

[ageless]

04:02 AM on 03/27/2012

This bill is cruel and unusual punishment!!!

[Sol Rosenberg]

10:32 PM on 03/26/2012

As usual, more republican insanity.

[BenHurt]

09:27 PM on 03/26/2012

Keep it up, Republicans! You make it easy to show how generally stupid you are just by letting you be yourselves. My family had started looking at three cities we might move to, with Boise being one of them, until we saw what was taking place in the politics there. We live in the Babble Belt now and the last thing we want to do is to move to someplace that is just as antedeluvian as this backwater city in the South. I like educated people! So, forget Idaho.

[Rick Ayers]

07:00 PM on 03/26/2012

First of all, I want to be clear, I do not have any problem dealing with white people, who are willing to show me, the same respect that they would expect, from me. Now, having said that, I want everyone to really, I mean really, take a close look at the PUBLIC FACE, of the Republican legislators, throughout this country, who are at the forefront of conducting this war, against women, and women's healthcare rights. I have yet to see, one Black republican, coming to the forefront, on these issues. And, that's not to say, that there aren't any. But, if there are some, why aren't they out there, showing their support for their party, and it's political ideology. And, it is true, something that has been said, for a long time: " A man that does not get along well, with women, is a man that did not have a good relationship, with their own Mother!" As a retired mental health specialist, I have experienced many males (of all races) where this statement holds true. And, I will bet, that although many of these republican men are married, if you could really get their wives or significant others, to speak, openly, without fear of retribution, I believe that they would tell you: "that they sometimes wonder, about their male opposites."

[JohninFL]

05:05 AM on 03/29/2012

I agree with you, and I have a name for you, Rep. Allen West of Florida.

[Alan Lunn]

06:45 PM on 03/26/2012

These lawmakers are old-fashioned prohibitionists. And prohibition as a means to control a nation's morality does not work. Pass a law against something people will do anyway and criminals take over. Abortion is illegal in all of South America and they have something like 4 million abortions anyway. The War on Drugs is a demonstrable abject failure.Focusing on making things like this illegal actually exacerbates the problem being attacked. Prohibition is usually a theocratic gesture that comes back to bite the religionists in the seat of their religion.