Indeed...
Posted on 08/19/2005 8:42:49 AM PDT by Graybeard58
The paranoia that infects some pro-abortion groups drives them to desperate measures to combat any perceived threat to the procedure. Those measures often include obfuscation and lies. This was demonstrated when pro-choice groups used underhanded techniques to upset Judge Robert Bork's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. Thus was the term "to bork" someone added to the vocabulary.
The tactic was resurrected with President Bush's nomination of federal appeals court Judge John Roberts to the high court. NARAL Pro-Choice America ran a television commercial that falsely accused the judge of supporting abortion-clinic bombings. Various leaders in the abortion-rights movement defended the ad, but in the face of heavy criticism that it distorted the truth and was unfair, it was pulled off the air.
The ad accused Judge Roberts of filing "court briefs supporting violent fringe groups and a convicted clinic bomber." It also said "America can't afford a justice whose ideology leads him to excuse violence against other Americans." The statements don't just twist the truth, they mangle it.
The briefs were filed in 1991 when Mr. Roberts was serving as deputy U.S. solicitor general and dealt with clinic blockades, not violence. The bombings took place seven years later.
Despite this clear distortion of the truth, NARAL President Nancy Keenan claimed many people "misconstrued" the ad.
A NARAL official who was a key figure in the preparation of the ad, Communications Director David Seldin, insisted it was "100 percent accurate." Mr. Seldin resigned from the organization after the ad was pulled.
The affair is being viewed with dismay by many pro-choicers who believe NARAL simply abetted the progress the anti-abortion activists have been making in swaying public opinion. As one pundit pointed out, a recent poll showed 60 percent support abortion rights, but more than half of that number favor very limited uses, such as saving the life of the mother.
Pro-lifers are getting additional help from an unexpected source: rappers. A particularly effective song and video by singer Nick Cannon is entitled "Can I Live?" A pregnant teenager goes to a clinic but flees when she sees an apparition of her baby. Outside, she is greeted by a chorus of children singing, "Can I Live? Can I Live?"
Now that's a powerful message.
NARAL = a truly despicable organization.
Worshippers of Molech.
The debate has lasted a long time, but I see gains overall by the pro-life side and increasing desperation and absurdity on the pro-death side. For example, in the early years of the controversy, the pro-death argument seemed to be that the unborn child "wasn't really alive". Science puts the lie to that. Then they switched to, well, it is living but not human. Logic knocks that one out of the park (Well, what is "it", then? Science tells us that offspring of a species are of that species, they don't magically change to something else.) Then they tried, well, yes, it is a living human being, but not a "person". The illogic, as well as tortured semantics and legal gymnastics needed to support that one make it pretty much untenable. Now, the pro-aborts seem to argue, well, it should be legal that a parent has the right to murder her children. If that one holds sway, we've lost any vestige of a claim to being a civilized society. Might as well throw our lot in with the Canaanites and other worshipers of Morlech.
It makes me sick when these people use the term 'Pro-Choice'. To them, there is only one decision possible - kill the baby.
"It makes me sick when these people use the term 'Pro-Choice'."
You should call them "baby killers". It's what they do.
Excellent comments..it is the tremendous advances in premmie care that has pushed back the argument of fetal "viability" and discredited those who espouse the "blob or protoplasm thesis..
I never had a valid refutation of this argument from any pro-aborts I discussed it with. But I did get a lot of name-calling and foul language, which seems to be the endpoint of many "debates" with these people.
Looking back, there were two events that really seemed to reshape the whole viability argument...Remember the McGhauhy (sp) multiples..6 or 7..they're about 10 now...all born at 23 weeks, or so..and all survived..and the pics on Drudge, about 5 years ago..of the fetus grabbing the doc's finger with his hand while they were operating on him inside the womb...and now we have the #D, and soon 4D ultrsounds..showing babies smiling..and
That last paragraph gave me chills! :)
Good news for the babies!!!
"This was demonstrated when pro-choice groups used underhanded techniques to upset Judge Robert Bork's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court."
I think the Republican Party needs a new talking point.
Either they are Pro-Abortion groups or everyone, regardless of belief is Pro-Choice.
An example:
Ms Liberal: "Andy, just wondering, are you pro choice?"
Me: Yes, Ms. Liberal, I am Pro-Choice. I choose life? Do you choose life or death?
The only thing these baby killers have ever had on their side is that an evil old man, Harry Blackmun (?), got some other old fools on the Supreme Court to legalize this particular form of murder and they don't want anyone under any circumstances to review or question that. When Roe is overturned - and I believe it will be - the level of violence from these people will be unprecedented.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.