Last Friday, with a speaker, a microphone and two signs, four men echoed across the quad a surprising and somewhat appalling issue: “Students’ medical fees fund the distribution of abortion pills at McKinley.”

However, these men have manipulated language for a political agenda. McKinley does not distribute RU486 – the only medical abortion pill available.

Emergency contraception is NOT an abortion. Actually, it cannot terminate or affect an existing pregnancy. Emergency contraception prevents pregnancy. However, most people are unaware of how it actually does this. Since sperm can live in the fallopian tubes for up to seven days, emergency contraception can actually prevent fertilization. The hormones in the drug inhibit a woman’s ovary from releasing an egg, not allowing the sperm to fertilize.

However, if the drug does inhibit fertilization then it achieves its main objective: preventing pregnancy. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists defines pregnancy as the implantation of a fertilized egg into the lining of a woman’s uterus. Emergency contraception inhibits an egg from moving down the fallopian tubes into the uterus or alters the lining of the uterus to prevent implantation.

Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy, not a fertilized egg. Therefore, when referring to emergency contraception, these men were wrong to label the pills as abortion pills.

The discrepancy seems to be in our language, and ironically, our legal system is founded upon language. Consider the following:

In 2003, President Bush signed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. When pro-life supporters were celebrating, they should have been disappointed with the bill’s language. This was not progress in banning abortions; it was an illusion of that progress.

In 2000, the Supreme Court ruled that a Nebraska law banning partial birth abortions was unconstitutional because it did not include an exception for the mother’s health. Two federal appeals courts declared last Tuesday that the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act is unconstitutional because it does not include that significant clause.

Now I would like to think that our representatives are intelligent people. Therefore, I cannot believe that they passed this act simply forgetting to attach the clause. Did the act really make as much progress as the supporters said? No, it didn’t. If they really wanted to make progress, they should have included the clause.

However, maybe President Bush is making more progress than we see on the surface. By passing the Act in 2003, he gained huge support from pro-lifers and his popularity level soars – convenient, considering election year was just around the corner. By concentrating on moral values, including the “progressive” strides he has taken against abortion, George W. Bush was reelected – convenient, considering in this term he appoints two Supreme Court justices.

The appeals of the Ban Act are expected to reach the Supreme Court this year and with the new justices, the Act may be upheld. Of course, the decision will be based on the language.

Like the protesting males on the Quad, any mention of abortion conveniently polarizes people into opposing political agendas. Abortion is the political hot topic and with the right language, you can transform citizens’ feelings into votes. Thousands of voters are one issue voters and abortion seems to be that issue.

But here are my questions: Why didn’t the Ban include the clause? Since the Republicans have political control in this country, why don’t they ban all abortions?

Think about this: If the Republicans successfully banned abortions (making a terrible mistake) most of their voters would concentrate on other issues, possibly switching over to the other side. The Republicans know this. The promise to ban abortions is the constant tease to draw in voters. Will it be replaced with the issue of gay marriage? Without foundational “moral” issues, easily manipulated with language, voters are forced to realize the true problems of this country.

Renee Thessing is a junior in LAS. Her column appears on a rotating schedule. She can be reached at [email protected].