Posted on 05/16/2014 5:08:50 AM PDT by Kaslin
Congratulations to pro-abortion advocates for understanding the power of language and employing the art of propaganda to dupe much of the American public into believing that their motivation is "choice" and that abortion is "reproductive care." No mean feat.
Pro-abortionists are fit to be tied over the Missouri Legislature's approval of a bill that requires women to wait 72 hours after first seeing a doctor before having an abortion. Gov. Jay Nixon has not yet indicated whether he'll sign the bill.
The bill's supporters argued that women need more time to digest information they receive from a doctor about abortion.
But opponents of the bill, in keeping with the practice of pro-abortionists never to find any argument too preposterous to assert, said the longer waiting period would push women further into pregnancy before an abortion, which could increase their risk. Just two more days (the law already requires a 24-hour waiting period)? Come on! The current law and the bill contain an exemption in instances deemed by a doctor to be a medical emergency.
One opponent said, "The idea that a woman would not have taken this time already is insulting." Is that right? Considering how much leftists sanitize abortion, it's not as though balanced information is readily available to every pregnant woman considering an abortion.
I ask you, wouldn't those truly interested in promoting "choice" want to ensure that women make fully informed choices? If they had the best interests of women at heart, wouldn't they want women considering an abortion to be apprised of all the possible ramifications, including emotional and psychological consequences that many studies say could ensue?
How about the possible link between abortion and breast cancer? Pro-abortionists savage anyone who raises that question, but bullying is no substitute for science, and until the issue is finally resolved, you would think they would err on the side of protecting women. But you would be wrong because their politics compel them to ignore such studies.
Pro-abortionists also said the waiting period would constitute an emotional and financial burden and would force women to go to abortion facilities in neighboring states. We are talking about human life here, folks, and they're telling us they want to discourage women even from having to ponder, much less agonize over, the decision? Truly pro-choice people would not be so adamant about removing all obstacles and inconveniences to a procedure that terminates human life.
Listen to the tenor and substance of the pro-abortionists' arguments. It is clear that they want to dehumanize not only the unborn but also the women facing this very traumatic decision. These groups have certainly demonstrated the power of propaganda to effect political and judicial action on abortion, but they'll never be successful in using it to transform the human soul, conscience or spirit.
No matter how hard the pro-abortionists work to lull women (and men) into believing abortion is purely a mechanical medical procedure, they'll never be able to convince most women to the depth of their souls that they are not carrying their own flesh and blood in the womb. They may help pregnant women rationalize and suppress their awareness, but they'll never be able to eliminate it, and I dare say this is the reason so many studies demonstrate that women who have had abortions end up experiencing emotional and psychological problems at some point after an abortion. Ultimately, most people pay a price for trying to outrun their consciences.
I am not moralizing here against the women who decide to get an abortion. That's a very complex matter. But I am critical of those who, in the name of choice, treat abortion as if it were nothing and labor to remove all impediments to it.
Before you conclude that I'm overstating the case, please listen to former abortion clinic owner Carol Everett, who says the abortion industry actively promotes abortions to make money. "I sold abortions," she said, describing her abortion clinics as a "cash cow." "We had a goal of three to five abortions from every girl between the ages of 13 and 18 because we all work on a straight commission inside the abortion industry."
More chillingly, Everett revealed that in order to reach their financial goal, they first had to create a "market for abortions," which meant persuading young people, through "sex education," to see sexuality in an entirely different way than previous generations. From the abortion industry's point of view, she said, the earlier sex education is started the greater the profits.
Also, when pregnant girls call an abortion clinic and reach a counselor, said Everett, they only hear about abortion, not adoption. The counselors, she explained, are actually telemarketers trained to "overcome objections" and close the deal by making an appointment for an abortion. They reassure the girls by saying such things as "we can take care of the problem" and "no one needs to know."
Here we have evidence from inside the belly of the beast that abortion clinics hold themselves out as pro-choice when they are actually promoting abortions.
Kudos to the Missouri Legislature for passing this bill and attempting to restore value to human life.
I often claim to be pro-choice, as long as all three parties to the abortion have a say in the choice. It infuriates liberals, which is so much fun to do.
I often claim to be pro-choice, as long as all three parties to the abortion have a say in the choice. It infuriates liberals, which is so much fun to do.
Now that I think of it, we have courts where there are advocates who represent the interests of minor children. Why not have an abortion hearing before each proposed abortion, with an advocate for the fetus arguing the interest of the fetus against the interest of the mother.
I think most Americans would agree that it’s important to weigh the interests of each party, so why not have a ruling made by an impartial arbiter (constrained by the standards established by the voters of that state)?
Yes, I know the system would often be corrupt, but even this hurdle to get a rubber stamp might cut half of abortions, and in states where there was a meaningful weighing of the life of the unborn a 90% reduction is plausible.
Haven’t they changed it to reproductive rights? Just like global warming has changed from climate change to now climate disruption.
Don't worry; none are...
It’s hard to hit a moving target.
Yeah, they love euphemisms, like women’s health clinics.
George Orwell warned us in the 1940's about people who habitually practice to do this. Such people -- Stalinists, in his experience -- are precisely the ones who like to pile up millions of corpses in their drive to total power.
Orwell saw the Stalinists in the Spanish Republican movement during the Spanish Civil War seize control, prosecute the French labor syndicalists (union advocates) on capital charges for "deviation", execute them -- and then come after Orwell himself on similar charges. Orwell had to flee across rooftops, literally, and maimed his foot in the process (he was refused for service in WW II by all the British services and ended up in the Home Guard, home of the frail, infirm, and elderly).
Stalinists are murderers. If they haven't killed anybody yet, take no comfort in that -- they're looking at you. And then they'll lie about it (and you) afterward, rest assured.
Notice everything the left is “pro-choice” on is destructive to the traditional family?
bump!!
Also notice the way they use “The people” - somehow they never actually mean people.
Oh yeah, They mean the unionRATs, bureaucRATs, and all other welfare people.
“climate disruption.”
Is that new? I haven’t heard it before.
Abortuaries practice hard sell tactics. If a girl walks into the clinic, they will provide a pregnancy test and pressure her into agreeing to an abortion on the spot. That is the real reason the abortion industry balks at waiting periods.
Once, in my young and naive days, I actually went into a PP “clinic” thinking I might be pregnant. They immediately sent me in to talk to a “counselor”, who spent something like half an hour trying to get me to agree that I would have an abortion if a test came back positive. When I kept saying that abortion was not an option (no matter how she tried to phrase it—like a lawyer, she kept changing her phraseology), she finally just said, “Well, you’re probably not pregnant” and sent me away without a test.
As it turns out, I wasn’t... but I have often wondered if I had indicated willingness to abort, they wouldn’t have provided a test, which they would have then informed me was positive, in order to get me to undergo a procedure. It is not unheard of for abortuaries to lie about pregnancy test results in order to procure more business.
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.