Doonesbury 3

March 14, 2012 • 3:34 am

In today’s Doonesbury, the abortion-seeking woman in Texas gets information about her “transvaginal exam”.

In statements published by the Daily News, artist Garry Trudeau defends the strip:

Since compulsory sonograms are in the news — and because battles over women’s health are being waged in several states — the “Doonesbury” creator said he had no choice but to address the issue in his comic strip.

“For some reason, the GOP has chosen 2012 to re-litigate reproductive freedom, an issue that was resolved decades ago,” Trudeau told the Washington Post.

“Why Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh, et al thought this would be a good time to declare war on half the electorate, I cannot say. But to ignore it would have been comedy malpractice.”

(Be sure to click on the link to give the artist “view credit”)

12 thoughts on “Doonesbury 3

  1. Trudeau is doing a great thing with this strip.

    In that pregnancy can and does *kill* women, how dare anyone try to force it on them. That they do only serves to show that the theocrats want to control women and don’t care about their lives at all.

  2. The American Taliban is alive and well and living in Austin, TX. These hypocrites denounce Sharia law for the Muslims and then pass this crap here. Compartmentalize much??

  3. I keep waiting for the “controversial” stuff in these strips. The stuff that has some newspaper editors covering their readers’ eyes.

    Cause so far there hasn’t been anything that I haven’t seen in papers under other circumstances.

    We get 4 newspapers at home. The Washington Post and three local papers (my small city and 2 others, each about 40 miles away. My wife needs them for her job.) One of the local papers isn’t running the strips; one is; one doesn’t run Doonesbury anyway. The local papers aren’t shy about other “controversial” issues.

  4. Why Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh, et al thought this would be a good time …

    Recent employment figures are looking better, maybe?

  5. Same as we need to identify creationists wherever they pop up (evolutionary creationism, say), we need to identify insane religious language when it is used.

    A fetus is not independent “life”, biologically. (I dare say on a biology blog, while not being a biologist.) A parasite at best.

    Nor is a fetus “innocent”. It could be threatening the life of its mother, for example. Or it could be the execrable gift of a rapist.

    1. “Or it could be the execrable gift of a rapist.”

      No, no, no. Pregnancies conceived through rape are a gift from God. Just ask Frothy Santorum.

    1. I was just gonna post that. Hot on the heels of their “doctors can lie to women [about risks to their health from certain pregnancies] to prevent abortion” bill.

  6. I’m with the Ohio legislator who introduced a bill that would make men justify their use of viagra — if men don’t get horny, there’s no need for any form of birth control, is there?

Leave a Reply to Mr ClawCancel reply