NRL News

Pro-abortion writer’s bitter criticisms of pro-lifers say far more about her than about us

by | Aug 13, 2013

By Dave Andrusko

PoliticsofMotherhoodI received a boatload of responses to a piece we ran yesterday, “To abortion advocates pro-death=pro-family.”  My thesis was in the first paragraph:

There is an ironclad axiom that you can count on as surely as the sun rising in the east. Whenever they respond to a criticism of their movement, once a pro-abortion activist says “nothing could be further from the truth” the rebuttal that follows will inevitably invites the response “nothing could be further from the truth.”

I suppose I could write that about just about every pro-abortion article I read every day. But I don’t think any example could better prove my point than Amanda Marcotte’s “Political Battles Over Abortion Are About So Much More.”

We needn’t bother with the head-scratcher of a beginning (hint: it’s built around one of those metaphors that runs out of gas so fast you know there’s must be a gigantic hole in the tank). What’s worth discussing for a few minutes is the following.

Marcotte has just dismissed an important point made by someone who understands where the public is in order that Marcotte can offer up her own explanation:

“So why did she say such a foolish thing? It’s because while it is true that Republicans are attacking abortion rights at every turn, rhetorically, ‘abortion’ is a dog whistle word to stir up conservative anxieties about sexual freedom.” AWhat BORTION

Really? I mean, really? That’s your best shot? A slightly updated (but still essentially a recycling) of the argument Kristin Luker made in 1985 in her book, “Abortion & the Politics of Motherhood”? (By way of background, I’m re-running my review of the Luker book elsewhere today.)

 If you want to help unborn babies,
Click here to receive the latest pro-life news and commentary

The day is getting away from me, so let me make just two quick points.

First, if you go to the site where this first appeared——you see that it is the pro-abortionists who are obsessed with “sexual freedom.” That’s their business, not ours, but why trash pro-lifers for not being? For being single-issue on abortion?

Second, every negative stereotype (negative to her, that is) that Marcotte affixes to pro-lifers just makes the point clearer. For example, to respect women in their role as mother, if that be what they wish to be, does not say or imply that is the ONLY role they can and/or should play, no matter how many times Marcotte insists it is.

The ones who insist that women, collectively, march in ideological lockstep are the writers at

Our agenda is simple—and 100 times less diffuse than Marcotte’s. We fight to save unborn babies from death and their mothers from making a decision many of them will regret their entire lives.

If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at Please send your comments to

Categories: pro-abortion