NRL News

A fatal miscalculation by the pro-abortion Movement?

by | Sep 3, 2020

By Dave Andrusko

This is a genuine predicament for the Abortion Industry and its defenders and apologists in the media.

You have persuaded yourself that (at least) 70% of the public is on your side, yet pro-life legislation continues to pass in state legislature after state legislature. The usual answers take as their starting place how nefarious and underhanded the Pro-Life Movement supposedly is.

A back-up–and a backhanded compliment– is (as Marie Solis wrote for Jezebel) that since Roe v. Wade “these groups have worked tirelessly toward this goal, primarily by passing arcane legislation that chips away at Roe little by little, carving out so many exceptions that it will eventually be rendered completely meaningless, if not overturned outright.”

But the point of Solis’s argument is found in the title: “This is a story about abortion, no one will read.”

Why will “no one read “it?  The gist is it’s the frog boiling in water argument.

If the changes (in abortion law) were suddenly and overwhelming,  it would be like a frog jumping into a pot of boiling water: it would immediately recognize what’s happening. But if the changes are gradual (the “water” is “tepid”), the frog doesn’t know what’s happening until it is too late.

Before we get to Solis’ remedy, there are obvious rebuttals.

The Abortion Industry and its political arms want unrestricted, unregulated, and unreviewable abortion. Only a tiny percentage of the population agrees with them.

We will see this played out in November. Trump/Pence are pro-life. Biden/Harris are extremists by any definition—except, of course, to the Mainstream Media which works overtime to tell us how “moderate” both are (especially Joe Biden).

Another response. Read honestly, polls for decades have demonstrated that a majority of the public does not support abortion for the reasons 90+% of all abortions are performed.

So what is Solis’s answer? It’s one we’ve seen gradually coming but its emergency is now becoming unmistakable.

Pro-abortion theoreticians and political operatives have their own “seamless garment” of issues. More and more they want to fly under the flag of “reproductive justice” which includes a host of issues that (once upon a time) you’d never have expected, say, Planned Parenthood to embrace.

This is a product of several factors. First, pro-abortionists are tired of losing. Second, they recognize (accurately) that overwhelmingly, their leadership, from the beginning,  has been composed of white woman, many very affluent.

The argument for “reproductive justice” is that by widening their focus, more women of color—especially younger women of color—will join their movement. Instead of “abstract” arguments about laws and court cases, the emphasis will be on personal stories, the kind that will emotionally grip people.

Well, a couple of responses. When I say they are embracing additional issues, they really are: en masse. They may bring in additional supporters, but they risk turning off a fraction—probably a sizable fraction—by insisting it’s all or nothing.

Put another way, the argument is that abortion—being pro-abortion—is not a single issue. It is “intertwined” with many others issues which some supporters of abortion will embrace, others will be turned off by.

The genius of the pro-life Movement is, and has always been, that it has resisted the temptation to be “multi-issue.” Contrary to media mythology, our Movement is comprised of people who disagree on a wide range of issues. But we come together around opposition to the killing of unborn babies and the exploitation of their mothers.

We are “single-issue.”

We are lectured unceasingly that if we are “really pro-life,” we will take positions on issues “a,” “b,” and “c.”

We have not. We will not. They are not our issues.

By doing otherwise, by adopting the advice of people like Solis, the pro-abortion movement will learn they have made a colossal mistake.

Categories: pro-abortion