NRL News
202.626.8824
dadandrusk@aol.com

Pro-abortionists routinely peddle fake news while insisting it is pro-lifers who are “lying”

by | Apr 15, 2020

By Dave Andrusko

You would expect people and institutions who consider it a lost day when not “enough” unborn babies are slaughtered (there’s always that “unmet need”) that they would panic at the very thought we’d prioritize real medicine over abortion at the time of a pandemic. So it is that NRL News Today is running multiple stories each day updating the latest pro-abortion litigation against executive orders that included abortion among non-essential medical procedures banned during the state of emergency resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.

As I was typing away this morning on the latest ruling, it made me think of a story that appeared in The Cut  written by Rebecca Traister headlined, “Fake News, Fake Science and Why Doctors Lie About Abortion.” I wrote about it at the time. What was said then is even more true today.

It was the usual-usual. That is, it’s a “lie” to say there is an association between an induced abortion and increasing the risk of breast cancer, or it’s a “lie” to state the obvious–that there are associated aftershocks for a percentage of women who abort. Etc., etc., etc.

That’s what you would have expected from Traister. That’s what you’d expect from The Cut. Both are reliable fonts of pro-abortion misinformation and disinformation, in Traister’s case, bitterly so.

But Medical Daily advertises itself as “dedicated to covering health and science news that matters most to our generation” producing stories that will be “the kind of things you talk about at a bar with your friends,” all “based on relevance, clinical significance, and editorial integrity.”

Wow, pretty impressive.

So…what about “How Abortions Are Performed, And What Happens During Different Methods,” by Elana Glowatz?

The bulk of the post is, in fact, a You Tube video which appeared on the YouTube channel AsapScience created by Canadians Mitchell Moffit and Gregory Brown. The title there was, “What Actually Happens When You Have An Abortion?” We are to believe “regardless of whether you are pro-life or prochoice,” what follows is the straight scoop.

Hardly.

It’s cutesy, the kind of presentation you often see on You Tube, with someone narrating the work of a hand quickly drawing figures. But it’s full of pro-abortion propaganda; they more accurately would fall under Traister’s category of lies than what she chose to rail about.

To take a few example, chemical abortions, which often are incredibly painfully, are likened to a “heavy period.” The unborn, vibrant and growing, is “contents of the uterus.” Abortions after 24 weeks are “extremely rare.” No, they aren’t. By very conservative estimates there are at least 11,000-13,000 abortions performed annually after 20 weeks, probably many more.

And the refrain that these post-24 week abortions are “often due to severe fetal anomalies,” are distortions we have rebutted countless times, using analyses provided by the abortion industry’s own think tank.

Then, in the face of the results of many academic studies to the contrary, we’re told that abortion’s link to an increase in breast cancer or to emotional and psychological aftershocks and infertility are “myths.”

Abortions are safe, safe, safe. Pro-life laws do not reduce the number of abortions; they just turn safe abortions into unsafe abortions. This canard goes all the way back to the 1950s and repetition has not added to its zero accuracy.

Conclusion? “Ultimately access to legal abortions makes women’s lives safer and healthier.”

Real conclusion? Contrary to Glowatz’s bland assurances, “What Actually Happens When You Have An Abortion?” does not “offer an objective look.”

Categories: Media Bias
Tags: