HuffPo Blogger to Opponents of New Abortion Pill: 'Back Off'

Europe has a newer, “more effective” version of the morning-after contraceptive pill. And that's got pro-choice activists begging for FDA approval and liberal blogs like The Huffington Post advocating for it.

The drug, EllaOne, reportedly works for up to 120 hours after unprotected sex and prevents twice as many unwanted pregnancies as Plan B. But even though Ella is a new drug and requires further study, Dr. Christiane Northrup is hoping for a speedy seal of approval from the FDA.

Northrup, a HuffPo blogger and certified OB/GYN, said her main reason for supporting U.S. approval of Ella is women's empowerment. She equated a woman's education level and her control over her fertility. “The number one predictor of a woman's status worldwide is whether or not she has dominion over her fertility,” Northrup said.

Although the chemical makeup closely resembles that of the abortion pill RU-486, Northrup and other supporters of the Ella pill claim that Ella is not intended to be used as an abortion pill.

But others are more wary of the new drug. Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, told Fox that not enough research has been done to insure that Ella would not terminate a pregnancy already underway. “Women will buy it thinking it's a morning-after pill when in fact, it is an abortion pill,” Wright said.

Wright also pointed out the possible health risks of using Ella, including birth defects in children. "There have not been studies done to find out what happens to women who use it multiple times, or what happens to a baby that may survive the use of this drug," Wright told OneNewsNow.

Northrup's post never addressed Ella's known side effects, including minor headaches, nausea and fatigue. Nor did she mention the possibility that, similar to the results that the Culture and Media Institute found about using the Pill, using Ella could significantly increase the number of STDs in the U.S. and lead to an increased liberalization of sexuality.

Instead, Northrup attacked all opponents of the pro-choice movement by saying she wishes that “the government, the church and everyone else who would oppose the morning-after pill” would “back off” and let the woman and her healthcare provider decide the outcome of her pregnancy.

The doctrine of women's empowerment was clearly parroted throughout this piece. Northrup cited authors Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner who equated “forcing a woman to bear and raise a child against her will” with violence. Northrup pulled Levitt's and Dubner's quote from their book which hypothesized that crime reduction in America was linked to the legalization of abortion.

Also clearly evident in the article was Northrup's distrust of religious and political figures. Her post included an anecdote during her time working at a Catholic hospital about how she would receive phone calls from political “bigwigs” seeking abortions for family members. She said her eyes were opened to the hypocrisy of those who kept “a split between their public stance and their private behavior.”

Hypocrisy isn't exclusive to politics. Animosity toward hypocrites is justified and to be expected, regardless of social status. The community leaders Northrup mentioned refused to have their families face the consequences of their actions, which is both irresponsible and immature.

But Northrop neglected to recognize the underlying premise of the pro-choice agenda: women avoiding the result of doing what they want to do with their bodies. Northrup herself dismissed women from accepting the consequences of sex when she challenged women to “assume dominion over our bodies, without fear of repercussions.”