- India diplomat who touts women’s rights busted for $3 wage to nanny
- MSNBC host Ed Schultz paid $252K by unions in 2012-2013
- Korean War memorial ordered to take down Christian cross
- Billy Graham near death, ‘close to going home to be with the Lord’
- SeaTac, Wash.: City’s new $15 minimum wage heads to court
- Obama mulls support for Islamists in Syria, with conditions
- Obama ‘birther’ theories float, as Hawaii health director killed in crash
- U.S. drone faulted for killing 14 ‘innocent civilians’ at Yemen wedding
- GOP hopes taking shutdown off the table with budget deal will pay dividends
- Chinese Death Star: The moon cited as the perfect launch pad for ballistic missiles
DIAZ: Planned Parenthood tries to freshen up a label
Like ‘liberal,’ ‘choice’ is a bad word
Someone please call Piers Morgan. There is a weapon that kills more children in an hour (about 159) than died at Columbine, Aurora and Sandy Hook combined (55). That’s an average for every hour of every day since 1973, or more than 55 million lives in 40 years.
This weapon is called “choice.” That is, it used to be. After loudly wearing the “pro-choice” label for years, pro-abortion advocates are finally and quietly admitting that the game is up.
Americans do not want to identify themselves as “pro-choice.” Gallup records the number of people identifying themselves as “pro-choice” is at an all-time low. “Americans now tilt ‘pro-life’ by [a] nine-point margin” (50 percent to 41 percent). The trend is nothing new, but Planned Parenthood’s admission is.
At a recent news conference, Planned Parenthood Executive Vice President Dawn Laguens said, ” ‘Choice’ as [a] word sounds frivolous.” After 40 years, with more than 55 million aborted babies and countless women scarred by believing in their lies, now it is “frivolous,” and they just want to move on.
What Planned Parenthood refuses to acknowledge is that we are witnessing a strong pro-life trend. Ultrasound technology gives us a window into the womb, exposing how ridiculous Planned Parenthood’s lies were about a “blob of tissue.” The countless women hurt by abortions who are now speaking out, like those at Silent No More, are also having an impact.
Even the Supreme Court in Gonzalez v. Carhart, a partial-birth abortion case, recognized the pain the abortion deception can cause women: “It is self-evident that a mother who comes to regret her choice to abort must struggle with grief more anguished and sorrow more profound when she learns, only after the event, what she once did not know: that she allowed a doctor to pierce the skull and vacuum the fast-developing brain of her unborn child.”
Yet that’s nothing, according to “pro-choice” advocates. The problem is their label. They came to that conclusion after — in their panic to stop the pro-life trend — they found many women confused. As one woman in a Planned Parenthood-commissioned focus group said, “I’m neither pro-choice nor pro-life. I’m pro-whatever-the-situation is.”
They can label themselves however they want. The one thing we know for a fact is they are not pro-woman.
A recent Time magazine cover article titled, “What Choice?” chronicled how abortion advocates have been losing significant ground, especially at the state level, on this issue. Even more revealing than author Kate Pickert’s ultimate pronouncement were her observations at abortion clinics. The stories are heartbreaking.
“Eye contact can be hard to come by. Many patients walk the halls with their heads down and their arms crossed. In journals scattered throughout the clinic in which women are invited to express their feelings, patients write about nonsupportive husbands and boyfriends and ask God for forgiveness. They write about how they can’t afford to support another child.”
These women are confused; they need help and support. Planned Parenthood’s idea of support is limited to signs along the walls that, according to the story, read, “You are beautiful. We trust women. Well-behaved women rarely make history.” Apparently, that’s Planned Parenthood’s idea of good messages for women in such distress.
Once in the abortion room, the story continues:
“‘Are you confident in your decision to have an abortion today?’ If the woman says yes, the abortion begins; the whirring of the vacuum aspirator used to extract the fetus can be heard in the hallway.”
It is interesting that the author noticed the sound. Post-abortive women frequently recount how that sound still haunts them years after their “choice.”
The Time article recounts the experience in the recovery room, where a young woman declined offers of birth control after an abortion. The doctor “runs through a few ancillary health benefits of birth control anyway, hands the woman some condoms and pats her shoulder.”
By Mangosuthu Buthelezi
Memories of a long brotherhood tempered in common struggle
Get Breaking Alerts
- U.S. Navy-China showdown: Chinese try to halt U.S. cruiser in international waters
- House budget bargain faces Senate filibuster; Republicans line up to oppose
- PRUDEN: The last living witnesses; they wore the yellow star and remember the Nazi terror
- Obama's Afghanistan experts stumped on U.S. death toll, war costs during hearing
- NAPOLITANO: A conspiracy so vast
- Billy Graham near death, close to going home to be with the Lord
- Obama birther theories float, as Hawaii health director killed in crash
- KEENE: James Clapper should resign for lying to Congress
- Kim Jong-un consolidating power or losing grip on North Korea's military
- STEVENS: Resisting the seduction of housing speculation