[wagglebee]

How academia and media bias are used to sell infanticide.

Thread by rhema.

Selling abortion: Through academia, the press, and TV, pro-abortion forces peddled their cause

During the half-century from 1860 to 1910 in which America's rate of abortion declined sharply, The New York Times regularly reported on prominent physicians who did abortions. A story in 1884, "Two Physicians in Trouble," noted that two of the "best known physicians in Providence, R.I.," were on trial for abortion. A typical story in 1886, "DOCTOR INDICTED," detailed abortion charges against a highly regarded New Haven physician, Dr. Gallagher. A similar story about a well-connected doctor noted the abortion arrest of Philadelphia physician David Otway.

The Times often contrasted the power of abortionists with the powerlessness of unborn children and the vulnerability of their mothers. After the indictment of Newark physician Herman W. Gedicke in 1880, the Times noted that "the accused is wealthy and is a member of the board of Aldermen." Gedicke paid $2,000 to bribe the jury but ended up receiving a two-year sentence for criminal abortion in a verdict the judge called "a most signal triumph of the law over power and influence." Gedicke, though, later received a pardon...

[wagglebee]

Our Lord hears ALL prayers, especially those for the unborn.

Thread by GonzoII.

Commentary: The Truth about Life and Conversion of the Heart (Prayer Against the Culture of Death)

The “abortion rights” captain is a master of deception. He is the father of lies. He is the procurator of selfishness and fear.

CHESAPEAKE, Va. (Catholic Online) - I’ve been trying to figure out the how and why of the “abortion rights” mindset, now the mindset of our President-elect, because frankly, I just don’t get it. I can’t comprehend how they (he) can defend the indefensible.

HOW can they rationalize and justify the act of abortion as a perfectly acceptable and reasonable “right”?

WHY are they so defiant in the face of medical evidence proving the presence of life in the womb from conception, and why are they so adamant, so militant in their demand to be allowed to murder that small life?

HOW can they continue to insist that it is not murder? If the fetus is human, and not a plant or a rock, then how else do you describe the intentional cessation of that fetus at the hands of another who is more powerful?

WHY do they think that terms like “reproductive choice” can disguise the reality that one person has willfully caused the death of another?

. . .