It is common knowledge in the pro-life movement that the “pro-choice” media is, for the most part, “pro-abortion.” This is not an attempt to demonize their motives, but simply the only rational conclusion that observation can produce. Consistently, the media and their abortion industry allies portray legislation that would give women more information—informed consent, information concerning the baby’s development in the womb, ultrasounds—as “anti-choice,” when in in fact these policies simply allow women to make their irreversible, permanent decision with more facts. That those facts often prove persuasive in swaying women to choose for life is evidence that providing them with these facts is not only useful, but should be, if “pro-choice” meant anything at all, imperative.
Depending on people’s backgrounds, some like to challenge the pro-life position on scientific grounds, others on philosophical grounds. A particular point of intersection of the two perspectives – and one that comes up often – is the topic of consciousness. The term carries with it a lot of interesting intellectual tradition. However, most either only consider a narrow portion of it, or make use of it simply to serve pre-established purposes.
Within a two hour “Choice” Chain, you can converse with a wide variety of people. Whenever I set up, taking my stack of literature and turning my sign depicting an abortion victim to face approaching pedestrians and onlookers, I never know what to expect. By the time we pack up, though, it’s sometimes hard to recall conversations in detail. That’s why I try to write down significant ones as soon as possible while they are still fresh in my mind.
Time and again, people tell pro-life activists that they dislike abortion victim photography because it is “graphic” and “disturbing,” and time and again, we respond that yes, it is—but that the real reason people want to cover up the reality of what is happening to pre-born children every day is that it makes them feel uncomfortable, and it makes them feel guilty. This is why pro-“choice” activists respond violently to all types of pro-life outreach, from sidewalk chalking to signs that simply read “Adoption: The Loving Option.” A culture that kills its children does not like to be reminded of this fact in any fashion.
As a rule, I’m happy when the folks over at Cosmopolitan are unhappy. And their post-Trump election headline was a pretty lovely one: “The Impact of this Election on Abortion Access will be Devastating.” The column was written by Robin Marty, who I’ve tangled with a few times on Twitter and is, in all fairness, one of the more reasonable members of the abortion cartel. But with the defeat of Hillary Clinton—a defeat that cost Planned Parenthood well over thirty million dollars in one swoop—Marty is not feeling very well: