Posted on 04/27/2020 5:23:20 AM PDT by Kaslin
Several states are taking a stand on whether or not it’s “essential” to continue abortion during the coronavirus crisis. And so are many in the media.
Their stance is no secret: abortion is “essential.” Pieces from Slate to the New York Times go so far as to suggest it’s even more necessary during a pandemic. And the politicians that are placing abortion on hold are “f****** monsters,” according to one Vice editor. That’s because, among their many reasons, they say that abortion is time-sensitive – and the lack of it endangers lives.
Never mind that at least one life ends in every abortion.
Abortion is “essential preventive care—and if anything, it might be more essential than usual,” Slate staff writer Christina Cauterucci insisted in a piece published March 23.
A New York Times opinion piece, by the paper’s editorial board, ran with the headline, “Make Abortion More Available During the Pandemic — Not Less” on March 26.
In agreement, Salon writer Amanda Marcotte tweeted on March 24 that “abortion access” is “arguably more essential than ever” and promised that “Underlying all this is a conservative desire to shame people” for “having sex.”
When Texas pressed pause on unnecessary medical procedures, including abortion, Jezebel published an April 20 story with the headline, “Can Someone Please Tell These Texas Men That Abortion is Essential Healthcare.”
Reporter Esther Wang complained that Governor Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton had started the “wildly confusing legal battle” that “forced Texans seeking abortions to travel” so that they could “receive essential medical care.” In other words, abortion.
Also calling out Texas, Vice senior editor Susan Rinkunas tweeted on April 1, “you f****** monsters, abortion is essential, time sensitive health care.”
The purpose of health care is to save lives; abortion destroys them. But Rinkunas didn’t address that – and several members of the media agreed with her.
“Will this s*** ever end?” Jessica Mason Pieklo, Rewire.News’ law and the courts vice president, wrote on April 22. At the same time, she praised states that have “used the COVID-19 outbreak to reaffirm that abortion is essential health care, because well, it is.”
Her colleague agreed on Twitter.
“So now I gotta write an article entitled "Abortion is *Essential* Healthcare,” Imani Gandy, Rewire.News senior legal analyst, tweeted on March 30. “And in the body of the article it will just say, ‘M*****f******.’”
Also on Twitter, HuffPost senior women’s reporter Emma Gray simply repeated “abortion is essential health care” again and again in a tweet on April 7.
Her colleague, HuffPost senior reporter Melissa Jeltsen, added on March 23 that, “The idea that abortion is not 'essential' is mindboggling to me. It is time-limited.” According to her, “If you don't obtain one, you are forced to give birth -- much more medically risky than an abortion.”
She didn’t mention the risks to the baby.
And, targeting teens, Teen Vogue published a piece with the headline reading, “Abortion Is Being Halted in Some States During the Coronavirus Crisis.”
“Elective surgeries in many states are on pause — but abortions are essential,” the subheadline read.
The absence of abortion could be fatal, others argued – clearly oblivious to the irony.
During her TBS Full Frontal show on April 1, comedian Samantha Bee declared, that "Not having access to safe and legal abortion is scary, dangerous, and can even be lethal."
A Refinery29 headline argued that “Every Abortion Is A Medically Essential Abortion” on March 25.
“I’d say that forcing women to bring unwanted children into the world in a time when they already have plenty of causes for stress and despair seems downright inhumane,” Jennifer Wright wrote. “To say that it’s not essential is to say that women’s wellbeing is inessential.”
She cited financial hardship, abusive relationships, and mental health as additional reasons why abortion is “essential.”
This is the abortion industry’s lie: that women need abortion because they can’t succeed without it. The pro-life movement tells them instead that they aren’t alone – and that, as women, they are empowered with the ability to have children and thrive.
All too often, abortion is used as a crutch – the great straw man – to distract from the real issues. Americans should help pregnant women suffering financially, should offer protection for abused women, should research ways to medicinally improve birth, should support women physically and mentally as they bear children.
Abortion solves none of that. Instead, abortion – portrayed as a solution – only distracts from confronting the more difficult problems.
But there’s something that both abortion supporters and the pro-life movement can agree on: Abortion is time-sensitive. That’s because, without it, a pregnancy still ends – in the birth of a precious human person.
THIS is the Mantra of the DEMOCRAT PARTY! PURE EVIL!
Lackey...you have won at something....DUMBING DOWN DEMOCRATS!
Not unless or until there is an armed rebellion.
Serious question — does our legal infrastructure have some way to create an approved definition of terms?
Because it drives me crazy that they think abortion is needed in order to save lives. That gets to the heart of the definition problem. The fetus is alive. The chromosomes are there: it’s identifiable as a human. It is located in its mother’s womb, which is exactly where it ought to be — and it is perfectly viable right there.
Abortion is a crime against humanity IF one recognizes that a fetus is a living human being. It’s a baby. The lack of accepted legal definition of this seems to be the where all the contention is. I don’t know why we can’t solve that simple problem.
Roe v Wade seems to have been about a “right to privacy” in the penumbra of the Constitution. What? Our courts have totally let us down on this entire issue.
The people do not run this country. It is NOT a democracy or a republic anymore.
Have poor minorities figured this whole thing out yet?
They want you gone, this side of birth or the other.
The Left: OMG! The Trump virus is killing us. He is responsible for every person who has died! We need abortion to kill more babies!
There is a way to create an approved definition of terms, but that would not affect the holdings on Roe and Casey. Legislatures define terms in statutes all the time. But Congress or state legislatures cannot use defined terms to alter the meaning of the Constitution.. For example, they couldn’t define “speech” to exclude “hate speech” to create an exception to the First Amendment.
Here, the Supreme Court has decided there is a right to privacy incorporated in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, that this right includes a right to choose to have an abortion, and that the right to an abortion cannot be restrained except where necessary to achieve a compelling state interest. They basically recognize such an interest in protecting a “viable” fetus, but hold that the protection of what it terms “potential” human life in a pre-viable fetus is a legitimate, but not compelling, interest. So the Supreme Court recognized the fetus as human life, just not human life warranting a compelling state interest in its protection.
The issue also does not depend on definitions politically. The pro-abortion crowd doesn’t care if the fetus is a baby or not. This is about a monstrous ideology that views motherhood as a form of slavery.
They are driven to kill babies by their evil god, Moloch.
By the way, I like your tagline. Might make them think. Much more educated than mine, but mine tends to cause some of them to at least pretend to be horrified, so I’m sticking with it a while longer.
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.