Saturday, December 29, 2007

The Prevention of Coerced and Unsafe Abortions Act: The “write for lifers” (and the Holy Innocents) fight back

Yesterday on the Feast of the Holy Innocents, I noticed the Chicago Tribune ran an article about the Missouri Right to Lifers' fight to put a proposal restricting the killing of the unborn on next November's ballot. This proposed law would force abortion providers to inform women of all the potential consequences of abortion including "higher rates of suicide, psychiatric hospitalization, substance abuse and depression."

"It is my belief that the vast majority of Missouri citizens, even those who believe that abortions should be readily available to women, would agree ... that no abortion should ever be the result of coercion," said David Reardon, director of the pro-life Elliot Institute and key backer of the initiative, who then cited statistics that 64 percent of women that have had abortions felt pressured by partners, family members, poverty or Planned Parenthood's propaganda into having them. Meanwhile, Missouri's pro-choice factions are furious, claiming that the law would not merely cut Missouri's abortions in half, as its backers claim, but almost wholly, for it would not only discourage patients but their doctors, who would then fear lawsuits from women who did have abortions but later suffered psychological effects.

Just as in South Dakota or Aurora, IL, the pro-death camp, here headed by Pamela Sumners, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri, went on the warpath early and often. Calling the Missouri's task force study on the effects of abortion on women "junk science" and its members a "sham group" whose goal is really political gain, Sumners has worked hand-in-hand with Robin Carnahan, Missouri's Democratic secretary of state to release official sounding statements through Robin's Missouri state office that turned out to be nothing but Planned Parenthood's usual pulp fiction. But most Missourians are not buying it, and the 90,000 signatures that are needed to put the initiative on the ballot, which at one time looked daunting, even Planned Parenthood concedes is a done deal.

"The times," as Bob Dylan once sang, "are a changin'," and perhaps one of the main reasons they are is Al Gore's ol' invention, the Internet.

While pro-choicers still control the mainstream media, the Net remains unbiased, and now anyone can Google "abortion" and find the startling statistics (not to mention graphic pictures) of the procedure's ill effects, information which was long hidden from public view. The reason such proposals are popping up in every state is not because of "junk science" as Sumners and her legions of destruction claim, but because people are finally seeing—and believing—the cold hard facts. While the Internet's harmful side (such as the easy access to pornography) remains, the pro-choicers now realize they are fighting a losing battle in hiding the dark side of Planned Parenthood's death camps, and as Hitler did toward the end of World War II, are using desperate measures—including smears on the character of electable pro-life politicians like Michael Huckabee—or, in this case, Missouri's Republican governor, Matt Blunt. "I'm hoping my story will really speak to people as they consider how to vote on this," said Paula Talley, a mother of two who, in 1980, was forced into an abortion by her family's abandonment and threat of economic hardship.

"But [this law] would essentially amount to an all-out ban!" moans Sumners. "Because of the multiple factors that would have to be present for a woman to qualify for an abortion ... what doctor would be willing to take that risk [of lawsuit]?"

Maybe so, Ms. Sumners, maybe so. You know that it's better to attack politicians now than to see a law passed which would inform consumers of potential risk (as they are presently informed on almost every other medical procedure or drug) and have to defend your Planned Parenthood doctors in bitter case-by-case court battles. For still in your favor is a Democratic Party almost completely infiltrated by your members, while many Republicans remain wishy-washy on the pro-life subject. So as impressive as the pro-life grassroots movements have been, you realize that unless we elect true pro-life representatives and presidents (who in turn pass laws and elect judges), our new Internet knowledge will go for naught.

If only the Holy Innocents (and their aborted compatriots) could vote ...


JimAroo said...

Let's give a word of praise to the great state of Missouri. They have done much to discourage and limit abortions. Republican Gov. Matt Blunt has led many efforts to limit access to abortions. He backs this bill as well. He backed a proposal 2 years ago to require higher standards for doctors at ALL medical sites. This put a real dent in the abortion industry in Missouri.

As of today there are only 2 abortion sites (sites, not clinics please) in the state. California has 6 times the population but 12 times the number of abortuaries.

This disclosure act will dampen demand for abortions. Wherever we live, lets give thanks for the creative and brave citizens of Missouri. Let's also keep them in our prayers.

Anonymous said...

Trying to get past the Google-Blogger nonsense - Pristinus Sapienter is now 'anonymous' -

And also grateful to God for turning the tables on our culture of death.

The Holy Innocents will not forget the courageous faithful of Missouri - at the finest 'leading edge' we've had for years.