Posted on 05/11/2014 3:24:57 PM PDT by IChing
Now, I could be wrong about this. I am not saying that I am 100% certain that Emily Letts did not film a surgical abortion being done on herself – but there are just too many things that don’t seem to make sense about her video and her follow-up story published on Cosmopolitan.
This is purely my own speculation and opinion, but I really cannot convince myself that the video is real, and I have watched it several times. Here are some of my reasons:
I do not believe that Emily Letts was pregnant to begin with. She shows no proof in the video of a positive pregnancy test or even gives a date that confirms her last menstrual period. She does not even show an ultrasound picture, which she claims that she will forever hold onto. She tells Cosmo that she was “only two to three weeks” pregnant. What does that mean? Two to three weeks from conception or two to three weeks from her last menstrual period? Also, it is very unrealistic that someone who is sexually active and NOT on birth control is not monitoring their period to know if they skip one. She even said that she didn’t want to use birth control pills, so she would keep track of her ovulation to know when not to have sex. Someone who monitors their ovulation would know if they skipped a period and purposefully take a pregnancy test, not on a whim. Yes, I understand that some people have a period while they are pregnant, but it is not likely. Emily said that she happened to take a pregnancy test at the clinic just for the heck of it, and then schedules her abortion then next day after telling her manager. Emily finds out that she is “pregnant” at work, has an abortion the next day, and decides within those [few days] [CORRECTION: Emily did not state that she had the abortion the day after finding out, within 24 hours] that she thinks it would be a great idea to film it to show her “positive abortion experience”. What a coincidence that all of this happens right before there is a video contest out by the Abortion Care Network, for women to make video under 3 minutes to show their positive abortion experience, in order to remove the stigma about abortion that they claim society has made. The contest had a cash prize for the winners and a $100 donation to an abortion charity of the winner’s choice. And, yes – she was one of the winners. Emily tells Cosmo that she has been a “professional actress for years”, and after not liking acting because of the way she saw herself, she decided to become a trained “abortion doula”. When I watched the video the first time, from the very beginning when she states that she is pregnant, I honestly thought that she was acting. Maybe it is just the way she talks – but it honestly just seems to be acting and it looks like she is lying. (Again, my personal opinion). Where is the father of the baby? The only thing that Emily says about the potential father is that he was not involved in her decision. I would like to see this man come forward and give his thoughts on her decision to abort his child. I would think that after the video becoming so popular that there would be speculation about the father’s thoughts on it. UPDATE (5/8/2014) – Here are a few other reasons others have brought up that may also raise some eyebrows about the truth in Emily Letts’ claims and video:
From Tim Young: “Being able to film with only a 24-hour turnaround in conjunction with privacy laws, etc. and waivers they would have to go through is the real teller here.”
Also, after speaking to a nurse sonographer, here is some information I found out about ultrasounds early in the pregnancy and gestational stages:
Emily never confirmed if she was “two to three” weeks from her last menstrual period, which is the universal way to measure a pregnancy since you can never truly know based on conception. She should know this especially if she works at an abortion clinic, because it is how the abortion clinics also measure how far along a pregnancy is. If she was 3 weeks from her last menstrual period, she would not be able to see the yolk sac on an ultrasound, even with a transvaginal scan. According to Baby2See.com:
Transabdominal ultrasound cannot reliably diagnose pregnancies that are less than 6 weeks gestation. Transvaginal ultrasound, by contrast, can detect pregnancies earlier, at approximately 4 ½ to 5 weeks gestation. Prompt diagnosis made possible by transvaginal ultrasound can, therefore, result in earlier treatment.
…
While a gestational sac is sometimes seen as early as during the 4th week of gestation, it may not be seen until the end of the 5th week, when the serum hCG levels have risen to 2500 – 3500 mIU/mL.
At this early stage of pregnancy, the gestational sac already contains the yolk sac, embryonic disk, and amnion, but these structures are too small to be visualized by sonography.
I don’t believe she would have even been able to confirm a viable pregnancy at this stage through an ultrasound, viable meaning that there is a heartbeat. Even if it was 3 weeks after conception, that would also be 5 weeks after the last menstrual period.
These are just a few reasons why I think the video is a farce. In my opinion, I think that the idea for this video was fabricated by the staff at The Cherry Hill Women’s Center when they found out about this abortion video contest.
I think that they chose to use Emily because she is young and pretty and has experience in acting. I think it was meant to attract pro-choice donors for their clinic and for propaganda to deceive women into thinking that guilt for abortion comes from society.
I also think that Emily Letts is just using this sensitive issue to advance herself and get on a “Sandra Fluke” level for “women’s rights”. What do you think? Should Emily show us proof of her pregnancy to begin with? I think so. Sure, I could be wrong, but I don’t think I have anything to lose.
Drudge is busy showing pictures that ought not to be shown (pervs). I’m not going there until I know it’s down.
Yep, it’s quite disgusting.
I caught a glimpse of it on ESPN and refuse to watch their channel. All Sat during the draft it was homo this and homo that - celebrating the perverse lifestyle.
I am by no means an expert BUT I was always under the impression that a pregnancy under 6 or 7 weeks did not get the standard surgical abortion, that a large syringe was used instead to manually “evacuate” the uterus. I looked in my local yellow pages and the abortion clinics where I live don’t even do abortions prior to 7 weeks. I think it’s entirely feasible that this was concocted. People in the abortion industry aren’t exactly trustworthy and known for their honesty.
Ugh, you’re right.
Should never have looked, need a shower now.
I have also wondered if this was for real.
Women, especially those who have gone through childbirth, will know all manner of questions to ask her. If this girl is lying, I suspect it will soon be known. Someone like me, a man, could easily be fooled, but not these women who have lived it and compared notes with others for years. How must her family feel, you have to wonder. Although, there are some families where everybody from junior to Greatgrandma are radical in their thinking. One example, Sandra Fluke, her family and her new ‘husband’ (the husband who has been known to wear dresses, so-as to be ‘ironic’). Or that chubby girl with frumpy clothes and the bare arms with tattoos scribbled on. This one ‘Dunham(?) is the writer of ‘Girls’ TV show and has been brainwashed by her own press agent to believe she is this season’s Belle of The Ball. (NOT!)
I don’t buy it either. Her timeline of events doesn’t work.
Sarah Silverman has repeatedly made claims of having had a recent abortion in a desperate attempt to get attention.
If you can't trust the person you pay to murder your baby, who can you trust?
The writer has some very valid point and is most likely correct in her analysis.
However, the more important factor she may have unknowingly addressed is the right for us to know if a woman has killed her baby by abortion.
The question of if a woman has had an abortion should be answered by every woman running for political office and every woman applying for a job.
Could you imagine hiring a woman for a job to only later find out that she had an abortion?
Could you vote for a woman who had an abortion?
Will Hillary Clinton ever show us all her medical records, including those which would show if and how many abortions Hillary has had?
I think she was pregnant. Her idea of “fertility awareness” was probably based on the timing of her period rather than actual knowledge of ovulation, which is a good way to get pregnant. She says she took pregnancy tests all the time, rather neurotically.
She works in an abortion clinic, positive pregnancy strips are to be found in the trash, so showing one would not be proof.
She says she decided to film a surgical abortion, rather than a medical, so she had to wait a couple weeks, which allowed the embryo to develop to the point where it would be visible on ultrasound.
There is a great sadness in her face in the parts video made after the abortion, an emptiness, that is at odds with her words, that she seems to be not even aware of, but it is the slack face of grief.
In fact, I think it’s possible she became pregnant intentionally/semi-intentionally, in order to undergo this experience (emotional experience to draw on - she’s an actress), in order to have something in common with the women she works with, in order to make this video, both for the propaganda value and the celebrity.
She may even have felt some guilt that she was talking women into something she herself had never done.
Even if she wasn’t pregnant, the very concept that she would portray herself as such and go through the motions of having an abortion is itself depraved.
The plot thickens...you make good points, actually.
You have no idea. Not only is this woman likely to not have been pregnant, she is very likely to have participated in selling abortions to other women who were not even pregnant. A scared young woman comes in, not knowing what the deal is, says she is afraid she might be pregnant. They do a "test," show her a "positive" strip, and schedule her right away, cash on the barrel head btw.
This was a common practice prior to the advent of high definition sonograms and their required use. It is probably the main reason why abortionists fought them so fiercely. A sonogram with nothing on it is not going to convince or reassure some one that abortion is called for.
Positive abortion experience.... WOW!!!!
The women j know who had abortions would never describe the experience as positive..... Ever.... Ever ever ever. I’m speechless that even in an abortion legal society some could make light of this. It sounds like the work of eugenicists trying to convince a population that what they know is wrong, is right.
Sure… but the fear that I have is that since these questions have been raised, she just might go through with it again and next time prove that she did it for real.
I can’t stand Sarah Silverman. Puke on her.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.