Skip to comments.Why Pro-Aborts Oppose Free Speech
Posted on 01/20/2014 4:52:25 AM PST by Servant of the Cross
Its no surprise why pro-abortion forces in America dont want free speech when it comes to raising awareness about this issue of, literally, life and death.
The more people understand the reality of abortion, the more they dont want it as a legal, easily accessible part of American life.
Now, as 650,000 plus pro-life demonstrators are about to arrive in Washington, DC for this years March for Life on January 22, noting in protest the 41st anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court has just heard arguments on a critical case involving freedom of speech on this issue.
Seventy-seven year old Eleanor McCullens challenge to a 2007 Massachusetts law, which forbids anyone other than patients and employees to stand within a 35 foot radius of the entrance to an abortion clinic, has made its way to the nations highest court.
Arguments that this prohibition is about the physical safety of women entering these clinics are absurd. There already are federal and state laws that prohibit physical interference or intimidation of clinic patrons.
This law is aimed solely to abridge the free speech of pro-life activists and prevent them from communicating with women arriving to these clinics. This abridgement of speech is a clear and flagrant violation of freedom of speech guaranteed in the constitutions first amendment.
What a distortion it is that the pro-abortion contingent has managed to get itself labeled pro-choice. Choice is about light not darkness, about knowledge not ignorance.
Why do those who claim to favor choice fight so hard against efforts to assure that women who are considering the horrible decision to extinguish life they are carrying make as informed a decision as possible?
Unfortunately, this is often driven by elitism and racism.
Abortion clinic clientele are disproportionately poor and disproportionately black.
Across the board, poor communities and black communities have been devastated over many years by policies designed by liberal elitists convinced that they know what is best for these unfortunate souls.
The abortion clinic is often the last stop in a chain of bad information delivered into low-income communities that creates the government-dependent culture that fosters the never-ending cycle of poverty.
But good information at any stage of the cycle can change things forever. That good information can be a pro-life Christian standing at an abortion clinic.
I wrote a number of years ago about a young black woman named Ebony. When she became pregnant her boyfriend encouraged her to abort the child. She found little problem in arranging an appointment at a clinic, where they assured her she was making the right decision because abortion would be cheaper than having the child.
But Ebony was uneasy. Sitting up late, she called into a Christian radio talk show where she was referred to a crisis pregnancy center. At the center, she saw her baby via ultrasound and changed her mind. At the center they helped her birth and provided clothes, food, and counseling.
When I wrote about Ebony her son was four years ago and she had no doubt about the correctness of her decision. A decision made because she had the good fortune to get information.
In 1995, 56 percent of Americans polled by Gallup self- identified as pro-choice compared to 33 percent as pro-life. The last Gallup poll in 2013 showed 48 percent identifying as pro-life and 45 percent as pro-choice.
As I tour the country to speak at crisis pregnancy centers I hear the stories of sorrow, regret, and guilt from those who went down the one way street of destroying the child with which they were blessed.
America cannot be a free country without free speech.
Free speech leads us to a deeper realization that we cannot be a free country without proper respect for life.
(Cackle) when he got into the WH----Boobamba yelled "olly, olly, octen free---come out, come out wherever you are."
Every weirdo, and his mentally challenged cousin, tripped over themselves to come out of their little liberal man caves.
Cuomo's just another Loony Tune that found his inner moron, thanks to Boobamba.
The stunted growth of these "political (cough) visionaries" extends from A all the way to B.
Great article, but I’d like to know why Ebony’s race is pertinent to the story.
The thief is uncomfortable with the cop holding the flashlight for him.
Abortions are performed disproportionately on black babies. Blacks in turn vote over 90% for their democratic killers. What’s the logic in this?
Imagine the psychological disconnect created by having to maintain that capital punishment for criminals is morally wrong while simultaneously believing that killing a just-born baby has no moral dimension at all.
This is why liberals need constant confirmation to keep their sanity, and why free speech is a survival issue for them.
I know that, but the story wasn’t about that.
“Abortions are performed disproportionately on black babies. Blacks in turn vote over 90% for their democratic killers. Whats the logic in this?”
Also the rate of murders by firearms is disproportionately high among blacks whose victims are black and disarmed by big city gun control democrat created law, yet these same blacks vote for the democrats that disarm them.
I do believe that blacks are starting to see, with the help of some good conservative black leadership, that they don’t need to be beholden to the democrats that have been their enemies since forever. It’s going to be a long process, but it can be a success.
This is almost three years old, but is spot on:
Just like Charlton Hesten’s character in “Soylent Green”, we need to shout it out about this genocide. And it requires blacks in the black community to do this, latinos in the latino communities, etc.
And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
This is a question which might be asked of every community in America.
The National Prayer Breakfast, Washington, D.C, February 5, 1994. Before the President and Mrs. Clinton, Vice President and Mrs. Gore, and a room packed with 4,000 others, Mother Theresa dared to say what no one there dared to say.
At this particular point America's history, the liberty and personal freedom of every citizen, including minority citizens, clearly are threatened by the reigning Administration's interpretations of the Constitution and resulting policies.
Under the Founders' Constitution, the "freedom of speech" protection was understood to apply to political speech. They made it clear in their writings, their speeches, and their lives, that freedom of conscience, and the freedom to express contesting ideas was uppermost in their minds when they drafted and adopted the Constitution and its Amendments.
Out of the philosophy clearly stated in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution was framed; and the foundation of that document was based on the idea most concisely stated by Thomas Jefferson:
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." - Thomas Jefferson
Parker observes: "Its no surprise why pro-abortion forces in America dont want free speech when it comes to raising awareness about this issue of, literally, life and death"
Her next sentence, " The more people understand the reality of abortion, the more they dont want it as a legal, easily accessible part of American life." incorporates two concepts:
1. The reality of abortion which relates to providing what might be described as "full disclosure" to the person (shall we call that person the "mother"?) as to the physical attributes of that which is to be "aborted" at the time of the procedure, and of the exact description of the procedure which is involved by way of an ultra-sound and other materials. For instance, the current stories and pictures of the lovely and well-formed little "child" delivered at 18 weeks and lovingly cared for by his "mother," "father," and "siblings," until his death, might destroy their carefully-constructed indefinite "fetus" argument.
2. The reality of abortion as to its relationship to America's Constitutional protections, as "intended by those who framed it and to those who adopted it." (Jefferson)
An honest "free speech" setting for dealing with No. 2 certainly should include the core idea of America's philosophical foundations, as summarized by Jefferson's, "The God who gave us life" summary and the Judeo-Christian belief about the Creator from which it was derived.
Reading that statement again, the terms "life" and "liberty," along with the concluding words, take on new meaning, and might, if freely and openly debated in connection to the idea of "abortion," might tend to sway public opinion. Let's read them again:"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty also: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." - Thomas Jefferson
Is there any wonder why opposition to "free speech" about the abortion debate is so rampant among the pro-abortion forces? The same Creator acknowledged by the Founders (see Jefferson) to have endowed individuals with a "gift of reason" exists today, and though "progressives" may fail to acknowledge it, their fear of free and open debate on such an important subject may be telling.