Abortion as "safe, legal, and RARE" was a lie all along
Last month, Planned Parenthood tweeted an article belying their old abortion mantra of “safe, legal, and rare.” These days, the abortion behemoth eschews “rare,” but continues marketing the “safe and legal” soundbite. A December 9 piece from Fusion, Life in a magical land where abortions and birth control are free and plentiful,echoes the abortion business’s love for abortion (on-demand and without apology).
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Imagine "life in a magical land where abortions and birth control are free and plentiful" This place exists. <a href="https://t.co/zdEYnLF0oT">https://t.co/zdEYnLF0oT</a></p>— Planned Parenthood (@PPact) <a href="https://twitter.com/PPact/status/676091765913464832">December 13, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
That “magical land,” by the way, is England (Federalist columnist Mollie Hemmingway posited communist China – an educated guess). Says author Rosie J. Spinks: “As a feminist and an American citizen, I’ve always been infuriated by conservative lawmakers’ fixation on legislating my vagina. Now, as a British citizen who has spent the last five years getting acquainted with this nation’s government-funded National Health Service (NHS), I’m baffled by it, too. Having lived in a country where reproductive health care—including abortions—is free, accessible, and far less politicized, it’s never been clearer to me just how regressive the U.S really is.”
To be clear: The NHS does not provide “free” healthcare; rather, care is paid for by working taxpayers. Spinks’ remarks about human anatomy are also misleading (Pro-Life laws have nothing whatsoever to do with ‘legislating vaginas’). This wouldn’t be as egregious a misnomer if preborn human lives were not being overlooked by the generalization. As for the U.S. being “regressive,” we’re actually one of only seven nations worldwide – including communist China, Vietnam, and North Korea, and not including England – which permit abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. Indeed, we are regressive; but not in the way Spinks would like to believe. But she persists, going so far as to describe America as living in “reproductive dark ages.”
Spinks repeatedly characterizes Pro-Life Americans as “religious minorities.” Perhaps she has not consulted any polls. If she did, she would notice that even the pollsters, most of whom are biased against Life, find that consistently at least half of Americans identify as Pro-Life. Also worth mentioning is the vast disparity in momentum between the anti- and Pro-Life movements. Over half a million Americans– most of them young – attend the March for Life in the dead of winter every January on the somber anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Not one remotely similar demonstration can be found among abortion sympathizers. In fact, their side is more distinguished for their no-show events, languishing enthusiasm, and having to pay people to demonstrate on their behalf.
America’s real problem is not that our laws are more Pro-Life than those of other developed nations (because they’re not). Our real problem is that our elected officials can hardly keep pace with the rate at which their electorate is becoming Pro-Life. In other words, American laws are no longer representative of America’s gravitation toward Life; our laws are indicative of a bygone, abortion-crazed blip on the American radar. Spinks misses the mark by insinuating that Americans at-large are more anti-Life than the law reflects.
Tags: culture, legislation, media, planned parenthood