NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

If the public is so supportive of abortion, why do pro-lifers continue to win?

Oct 20, 2014

 

By Dave Andrusko

twobabiesIt is—what can I say?—amusing to read the stories that pop up as we approach (in this case) mid-term elections.

On the one hand, there is the insistence that at long last pro-abortionists are getting the hang of grassroots organizing. On the other hand, there is the resentment that pro-lifers are masters of reminding the public that there is a difference between the candidates. (Darn those pro-lifers!)

The former is always inflated. The latter is usually accompanied by the declaration that this must be almost underhanded (at least not “fair”) because the public really does support abortion on demand. Never mind, of course, that the public is closer to our perspective than to NARAL’s and EMILY’s List’s and PPFA’s.

So I read this advocacy piece disguised as a news story by an Associated Press reporter who is, shall we say, not exactly the epitome of objectivity. So what’s the gist of Roxana Hegeman’s “Grassroots plays outsized role in Kansas elections”?

Two-fold. First, we are to believe that all responsible, civic-minded Kansans (regardless of political party) are coming together in “a bipartisan grassroots political organization calling itself Women For Kansas.” Why? Because it and other similar organizations represent a backlash to those crazy Republicans (almost all of whom are pro-life) who just happen to keep winning and winning and winning in Kansas.

Hegeman does allow Clay Barker, executive director of the Kansas Republican Party, to be the one dissenting voice in the otherwise harmonious story.

Barker told Hegeman that groups working together against is nothing new. (Pro-life Gov. Sam Brownback is used as the example of the targeted official.)

They “create a network of small issue groups, some focused on a particular issue, some focused on a segment of the voters, but they all work secretly together,” Barker said. “So it is not really grassroots, there is a central organization behind it.”

Click here to read the October issue of
National Right to Life News,
the “pro-life newspaper of record.”

Second, let’s pretend that authentic grassroots organizations, such as Kansans for Life, are such “old news” that they deserve nothing more than a dismissive paragraph. What a surprise. (That’s sarcasm.)

A couple of weeks back the Los Angeles Times, to its credit, wrote a long piece that showed how pro-lifers are winning—and big—in a number of states. But in both the beginning and near the end, there are statements like this from Alana Semuels and Maria L. La Ganga:

“Support for abortion rights remains strong across most of the country, according to the Pew Research Center for People and the Press. Last year, as the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade approached, 63 percent said they would not like to see the court overturn the decision. Only 29 percent said they wanted it overturned. Over the years, the numbers have remained fairly steady.”

We’ve several times pointed out how bogus this survey was, so let’s not belabor how misleading Pew’s conclusions are [for example nrlc.cc/13nGNgt and nrlc.cc/1purRmo].

Okay, if the public is so, so supportive of Roe, how do pro-lifers win and win and win? The headline is accurate: “For Abortion Foes, National Strategy Built At State Level,” but the explanation of what that means is flawed.

Pro-lifers would not win, would not be even competitive, if (as the story suggests) only “churches” and “preachers” were against abortion. Tucked away at the very end of the story is a very important point: pro-lifers are producing legislation that makes sense on every level and is being passed in a number of states.

Those provisions include, for example, the requirement that abortions have admitting privileges at a local hospital; abortion clinics meet the building standards of Ambulatory Surgical Centers; and that abortionists follow the FDA-suggested protocol for chemical [RU-486”] abortions.

Pro-abortionists challenge these laws. They have understandably taken a pass on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. They are not eager to remind the wider public that when these unborn children are ‘terminated,” they experience unimaginable levels of pain.

Detroit Free Press columnist Brian Dickerson, an implacable foe of Right to Life of Michigan (NRLC’s state affiliate), offered his two cents over the weekend to explain “How does Right to Life bend the Legislature and judiciary to its will?”

(In those states where pro-abortionist have the numbers to pass laws and a sympathetic judiciary willing to uphold them, does anyone believe Dickerson would characterize that as abortion advocates “bending” them to their will?)

The answer?

twobabies

Scandalous? Outrageous? Shocking? Or perhaps the way a representative democracy works in America?

You can see that Dickerson wants to figure out some way to go nuclear. The “best” he can do is to lament (my word) that like other pro-life groups around that nation (and groups that have nothing to do with abortion), RTL of Michigan grooms what he calls a “farm team” of women and men who will someday run for the state legislature. He even offers a back-handed compliment that Right to Life of Michigan.

The point is, like all pro-life organizations, this one marshals its resources, uses them wisely, and produces results year after year.

So what is the answer to the question how pro-lifers prevail when the public supposedly is so enthralled with Roe v. Wade?

To this day the public doesn’t even know what Roe unleashed and when they do, they are amazed by how radical it is.

Pro-lifers, although outspent by huge margins, employ their resources in the most efficient manner possible.

Pro-lifers pass laws that have wide public support.

Pro-lifers are authentically grassroots, indeed the most authentic grassroots movement to arise in the last 40+ years.

Categories: Pro-Lifers