Daily Kos Article Says Number of Abortions is "Too Low," Doesn't Want Them Rare

LifeNews.com Note: Sarah Knoploh is a conservative, Christian and a freelance writer for the Culture & Media Institute. The item previously appeared on the NewsBusters blog and is reprinted with permission.

April 28 was apparently Abortion Uber Alles day at the liberal Web site Daily Kos. Aimee Thorne-Thomsen of the Pro-Choice Public Education Project stated that the number of women who receive abortions is “too low” in “Keep Abortions Safe and Legal? Yes. Make it Rare? Not the Point.”

A separate article blasted the new law in Oklahoma that makes it mandatory for woman to receive ultrasounds by making crude comparisons and calling it “blackmail.”

Even though 1.21 million abortions were performed in 2005, this was not enough for Thorne-Thomsen. She wrote, “On the other hand, if those 1.21 million abortions represent only the women who could access abortion financially, geographically or otherwise, then that number is too low. Yes, too low.”

She never explained how many abortions a year would be enough for the Pro-Choice Public Education Project, but continued to write, “We say we care about women and want them to have access to all the information, services and resources necessary to make the best decisions they can for themselves and their families. That is at the core of reproductive justice. Not reducing the number of abortions.”

Of course, Thorne-Thomsen didn't “care for women” enough to mention the negative consequences of abortions. Suicide, depression, infections, sterility, and even death can result from abortions, according to National Right to Life.

Rather, as an abortion absolutist, she asked, “Do we dare admit that increasing the number of abortions might be not only good for women’s health, but also moral and just?”

Unfortunately, the other Daily Kos article about abortion was not any better. The author complained that Oklahoma’s new abortion law, which mandates that women undergo an ultrasound of their fetus before aborting, is “tantamount to emotional blackmail. And it's not even blackmail of a particularly subtle variety. It's insulting and demeaning and humiliating and patronizing all at once.”

The author described that in the earlier stages of pregnancies the fetus resembles a “fleshy jellybean” and complained that Oklahoma has become, “a testing ground for radical anti-abortion lawmaking.”

The author also felt that having a pregnant woman view her fetus before receiving an abortion is the same as:

A: Setting a firefighter on fire before he can rush into a burning building
B: Requiring a soldier to get shot before he is issued a firearm
C: Showing a man seeking a vasectomy his own vas deferens by sticking a camera in through his urethra.

Not really anywhere equivalent to a pregnant woman looking at her unborn baby before an abortion. But good enough for the abortion absolutists at Daily Kos.

Likely when there are NO live births, she'll consider the number just about right.

I feel sick.

God's going to have to forgive me for wishing that she'd feel the pain for eternity that every baby who was ever aborted was forced to endure.

Obamacare will dramatically increase the number of abortions.
____________________________

I’m not sure if you’re correct on this.

But Obamacare will definitely dramatically increase the amount of money spent on abortion in America.

Right now, many abortion mill patrons don’t have medical insurance coverage for abortion and pay cash money. Once insurance companies and the government begin paying for it, the revenues will definitely pick up to catch up with the rest of the medical field.

The author makes reference to abortion being like setting a fireman on fire before rushing into a building, a soldier being shot before being issued a firearm, and a man having to view his vans deferens before getting a vasectomy.

This is a ridiculous analogy and completely wrong. It would be more fair to compare a fireman watching his child be set on fire, or his child being shot. It has always been a puzzlement to me when pro aborts go nuts about the ultrasound thing. If a woman wants an abortion, an ultrasound will NOT change her mind, UNLESS she had been convinced by someone that the baby she is carrying is a clump of cells, not a life. Abortions will NOT be reduced by this law unless most women don’t know they are carrying a baby in the first place, IMHO, and therefore, ultrasounds won’t deter them from their choice. That said, if they have been lied to about development of a baby in the womb, and this window in shows that, then there will be a dramatic drop in the number of abortions because of this law. Just what exactly are the pro aborts worried about? Perhaps misleading those women coming in to PP about abortion? Seems silly to me to be so off their rockers. They are the ones who always talk about learning, education, enlightenment, and all that. You would think educating a woman about this stuff would be a natural for those who consider themselves so progressive and enlightened, no?

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.