NRL News

A chorus of clanking “pro-choice voices”

by | Jul 6, 2015

By Dave Andrusko

Unbornbaby76Now THIS is an interesting headline: “As Statehouse strips abortion rights, where are pro-choice voices?” This could mean a great many things, so let’s see if we can zone in on what Marina Bolotnikova, a columnist for the Toledo Blade, is specifically getting at.

That there have been lots of pro-life laws “strip[ping] abortion rights” passed? Obviously. Although she doesn’t cite the pro-abortion Guttmacher’s “State Trends at Midyear, 2015,” she easily could have.

There we learn

So far this year, states have enacted 51 new abortion restrictions; this brings the number of restrictions enacted since 2010 to 282. Although only about a dozen states remain in session as of July 1, these states may well enact additional restrictions before the end of the year.

Then she cites–laments–the many pro-life victories the Movement has won in Ohio. Her point is that there are so many abortions, it’s practically un-American to consider laws that protect unborn babies and their mothers. That these laws have driven down the number of annual abortions from 1.6 million to a little over 1 million is given short shrift.

But her major point addresses “how the anti-abortion movement has achieved such far-reaching victories.” Let’s count just a few of the ways, according to the skewed perspective of Ms. Bolotnikova.

  • Confusing the public “about the medical consensus on abortion safety”;
  • Employing “dishonest tactics to ram through anti-abortion laws that can affect millions of women and their families”;
  • The absence of the voices of women who’ve aborted because “they’re made invisible by the shame, silence, and political disfranchisement that accompany it. ”

Anything that suggests there are negative consequences to having an abortion is either lying or sowing confusion, according to the abortion lobby. And the lengths to which they will go to censor the relationship between abortion and breast cancer or abortion and premature birth or abortion and a number of other consequences has to be observed upfront to appreciate.

And most women choose not to talk about their abortion not because of us but because they are not proud of what they did. Indeed, many bitterly lament the loss of that child. That shame comes from within, not without.

Just two other points about Bolotnikova’s column. She makes one of those tiresome faux “common ground gestures,” which is always, always code for “I respect your rights to oppose abortion on religious grounds but don’t shove your religion down my throat.”

She tells us in still another bogus gesture of reasonableness that “No one disagrees that at some point during pregnancy, the state has a legitimate interest in protecting the life of an unborn child.” Actually, the entire Abortion Lobby disagrees.

Sometimes they tell you candidly, other times they achieve the same result by insisting there are countless reasons why abortion should be legal until birth. Face up to it, Ms. Bolotnikova, that it, was, and always will be the pro-abortion movement’s default position: abortion on demand for any reason, or no reason, throughout pregnancy.

She then puts a bow on her disjointed argument by confusing what the pain-capable unborn child protection act covers and misstating what medical science is finding to be the new line of fetal viability.

What to do going ahead? “Pro-choice Ohioans, and Americans, need to do much more to rally around abortion rights, and to create the political will needed to uphold — not eradicate — the constitutional right to an abortion,” she intones.

Okay, but how? A large part of that reclamation project is “stripping away the stigma of abortion, and inviting the millions of women who have had one to tell their stories”–a reference to those “pro-choice voices” in the headline.

Bolotnikova and others like her must believe this. They must believe that a combination of genuine sympathy for women who’ve taken their child’s life and a desensitization brought about by hearing these stories en mass will wear down the American public.

Put another way the wish is father to the thought and pro-abortion propaganda is mother (they hope) to the deed.

Hasn’t worked so far–and it won’t it in the future.

Editor’s note. If you want to peruse stories all day long, either go directly to and/or follow me on Twitter at

Categories: pro-abortion