NRL News

NY Times bemoans “A Perilous Year for Abortion Rights”

by | Jan 20, 2015


By Dave Andrusko

NYTimesbldgOver at “Ronald Reagan: Abortion a ‘tragedy of Stunning Proportions,’” I alluded to a glum editorial that ran in today’s New York Times.

“A Perilous Year for Abortion Rights” refers not just to 2014 but more importantly to 2015. The Times wrings its institutional hands, noting the waves of pro-life legislation passed in the past couple of years, and then adds (hopefully?)

The dismal situation, created by the wave of new state abortion restrictions in Republican-led states over the past four years, would be even worse if not for the willingness of some judges to block unconstitutional laws.

We’ve written extensively about these decisions, which struck commonsense laws intended to make sure the likes of Kermit Gosnell are thwarted; that insist that fly-in, fly-out abortionists have admitting privileges at a local hospital when they botch an abortion; and that how the powerful RU-486 chemical abortion technique is administered is not left to the abortion industry to decide.

The Times, naturally, takes still another potshot at the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (although it cannot bear to actually use the bill’s title). The author of the editorial runs around two basic facts:

First an abundance of evidence supports the reality of fetal pain. As we have noted many, many times, “H.R. 36 would extend general protection from abortion to unborn children nationwide beginning at 20 weeks fetal age, based on congressional recognition that by this point in development, if not earlier, the unborn child is capable of experiencing pain.” (What’s interesting is that in criticizing the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, the editorial does not mention the usual pro-abortion talking point that this is “unproven.”) Some of the extensive evidence that unborn children have the capacity to experience pain, at least by 20 weeks fetal age, is available on the NRLC website and also here:

Second, as NRLC pointed out last week, there is overwhelming public support for a bill such as H.R. 36:

In a nationwide poll of 1,623 registered voters in November 2014, The Quinnipiac University Poll found that 60% would support a law such as the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act prohibiting abortion after 20 weeks, while only 33% opposed such legislation. Women voters split 59-35% in support of such a law, while independent voters supported it by 56-36%.

In its concluding paragraph, the Times’ editorial wanly waves the tattered “war on women” flag. That the Times is reduced to even mentioning this canard, is proof positive it is even more desperate than usual.

Categories: Abortion Media Bias