By George Neumayr on 4.29.04 @ 12:07AM
By taking offense at a comment not directed at them, advocates of abortion stumbled into associating themselves with terrorists.
Planned Parenthood and other abortion groups are demanding that
Karen Hughes, an adviser to President Bush, apologize for saying on
CNN last Sunday that the "fundamental difference between us and the
terror network we fight is that we value every life." Hughes's
remark was "cynical, ugly, and mean-spirited," said Eleanor Smeal,
president of the Feminist Majority. Democratic Congressman Eliot
Engel said that "Hughes compared the 9/11 terrorists to Americans
who marched on the mall." (Actually she did not; she was responding
to Wolf Blitzer's question about how big an issue abortion would be
in this year's election.)
By taking offense at a comment not directed at them, advocates
of abortion stumbled into associating themselves with terrorists.
The Smeals and the Engels reveal themselves in their wild charge
against Hughes.
Unable to leave well enough alone, they demand an apology for a
comparison to terrorists not made until they opened their mouths
and formed an association that invites the public to ponder the
casualty counts of the abortion industry.
If anyone should demand an apology after Sunday's hideous march
for abortion, it is the Bush administration. Have the sponsoring
organizations of the "March for Women's Lives" apologized for the
placards saying Barbara Bush should have had President Bush killed
in her womb?
On Fox's Hannity and Colmes this week, Sean Hannity
asked Patricia Ireland, former head of the National Organization
for Women, about the placards reported in "Among the
Pagan Ladies" on Monday. Hannity: "They were holding up signs,
'If only Barbara Bush had a choice.' 'Barbara chose poorly,' was
another one. 'The Pope's mother had no choice.'"
Ireland didn't apologize for the placards. She just rationalized
them: "You do understand, Sean, that that was a small minority of
signs."
Hannity: "Well, why aren't you condemning it?"
Ireland: "There is a deep anger."
Rarely do American marches showcase such straightforward
messages about a missed chance at murdering a president. But
Ireland can casually chalk this up to "deep anger" -- in other
words, righteous indignation into which abortion advocates have
been provoked by Bush's "anti-choice" policies.
Railing at Karen Hughes, Gloria Feldt, president of Planned
Parenthood, said, "It is outrageous to suggest that those of us who
challenge this administration's attacks on reproductive rights and
access do not value life and human dignity."
No, it is not. Examine the words of abortion advocates. In a
cheerleading column after the march, Molly Ivins justified
third-trimester abortions of "damaged" children.
"If you know you are going to bear a child that is disastrously
deformed (which you still can't find out until about the fifth
month), who decides?" writes Ivins. "I don't mean to be unkind, but
the burden of caring for a damaged child is not only known to break
up marriages, but frequently to have an unhappy effect on the other
children as well. (Not always, I grant you.) But frankly, so much
of it has to do with whether there is enough money to care for the
damaged child."
Let's add Ivins's reasoning up: If the marriage is strong and
prosperous, the "damaged" child gets to live; if the marriage is
tottering and short of cash, the child can be killed.
Unbelievable.
This was the sick calculus on display at Sunday's march, where
marchers starkly spoke of "wanted" and "chosen" children, the
upshot of which is that unwanted and unchosen children be aborted.
During one moment in the march, the emcee appeared to announce a
"missing child" in the audience. Was the child lost or unwanted?
Many children were missing at the march, and marchers were doing
their best to brainwash women into not missing them. The children
enlisted into propaganda service at the march were mere survivors,
utterly random recipients of life in a culture otherwise prepared
to abort them had they proven "damaged" or inconvenient.
"Pregnant women for choice flecked the crowd, marching for their
unborn sons and daughters," rhapsodized Ivins after the march. They
marched not to abort their unborn sons and daughters but to give
them a chance to abort theirs? The thought of the abortion
advocates gets more and more tortured.
There is a good reason that they see themselves in Karen
Hughes's condemnation of the 9/11 terrorists. They have made
America a dangerous place for children. But Hughes didn't accuse
them of damaging the country like the terrorists. She didn't have
to.
topics:
Abortion