NRL News

Additional examples of pro-abortionists attributing to us the dishonesty that they have patented

by | Jul 31, 2020

By Dave Andrusko

Things come apart so easily when they have been held together with lies.”
― Dorothy Allison

Alas, if that weren’t only true.

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 COVID-19. Which is why they must insist pro-lifers are “lying” or “taking advantage” of this pandemic. But, for example, who is it that is trying to win one of their ultimate goals—Do-It-Yourself abortions—by having compliant judges negate protections the FDA has created when women undergo “medication” (chemical) abortions?

There are countless examples of pro-abortionists attributing to us behavior that they have patented. One 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 it first ran and I’d like to expand on it today.

Original? Hardly. 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,” written by Elana Glowatz? Does it live up to those glowing standards? 

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.

You’re kidding me.

It’s cutesy, to be sure, 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 since states which populations that disproportionately have abortions don’t report to the CDC. And, of course, what is the incentive to the abortionist to be accurate? Just the opposite.

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: Abortion