In a despicable display of affection for degeneracy, Sunday, March
10th was the National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers, where
demonstrators held up signs declaring, "Abortion Providers are Heroes,"
and activists nationwide were asked to "take out ads in local
newspapers." Such a tasteless spectacle shows the depths of the
depravity of the abortion movement.
Perhaps this grotesque celebration would be easier to comprehend if it
were organized by fringe leftist organizations that have no real
influence in our political process, but it wasn't. The lead sponsor was
the American Civil Liberties Union, and it was also backed by the
inappropriately-named Catholics for a Free Choice and National
Organization for Women, among others. And their stomach-turning efforts
were underwritten by billionaires such as Warren Buffett, George Soros,
and anti-Catholic bigot Ted Turner.
Establishing a day to praise the virtues of abortionists belies the
assertions by self-proclaimed pro-choicers that they want, in Bill
Clinton's words, abortion to be "safe, legal, and rare." For the
abortion lobby, their political struggle isn't about "choice," it's
about abortion.
In the hippies' heyday, the movement may have been wrapped up in
women's lib efforts, with control over one's body-and the baby
inside-becoming symbolic of the overall campaign. But now, with the
original mission fulfilled, the abortion lobby has spiraled to the
radical fringes in a bid for continued relevancy, and the supposed
abortionist holiday is indicative of the excesses of the abortion
movement.
As they have moved further away from their original purpose, abortion
activists have become more strident in their support for the procedure
itself. No longer is abortion a necessary evil, but an act of bravery
to be celebrated with a national holiday.
This fanaticism has influenced the movement's policy positions in
recent years, including opposing a ban on killing babies who
miraculously survive abortion procedures. If a baby has staved off the
abortionist's murderous attempts, what "choice" does a woman need to
exercise? A baby outside the womb poses no inconvenience to a mother,
so why would abortion rights groups oppose efforts to protect born-alive
infants?
In revealing their true colors by endorsing the killing of born-alive
infants and partial-birth abortions, the abortion lobby has alienated
those outside its direct core constituency, minimizing support for the
abortion-on-demand views they espouse. In the early 1990's, public
backing for liberal abortion policies-abortion at any time, for any
reason-peaked at 34%, according to Gallup. In the five years since the
advent of the debate over partial-birth abortion, however, support for
both late-term procedures and abortion overall has plummeted.
In a recent poll tied to the 29th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Gallup
found that support for third-trimester abortions was a miniscule 7%.
Polling Company President Kellyanne Conway attributes this change to the
graphic nature of the discussions about partial-birth abortion. Most
self-identified pro-choicers had relied on not religion or morality, but
science and medicine in favoring abortion rights. After the realization
that there was in fact a living baby in the womb, at least in the later
stages of pregnancy, Conway explains that many could no longer support
second- or third-trimester abortions.
The Polling Company found last summer that a mere 16% of those polled
backed legal abortion after the first trimester. When presented with
six different policy options, three pro-life and three pro-choice, a
plurality of 48% supported pro-life positions, with 42% backing
pro-choice stances, although most in the latter category only supported
abortion during the first trimester. More significantly, in a widely
ignored poll last August, Gallup found that, for the first time since it
asked the question, as many Americans identified themselves as pro-life
as pro-choice, at 46% each, a 21-point swing in just five years.
Not coincidentally, the "Day of Appreciation" was born the year after
partial-birth abortion became a hot-button issue. With callous
disregard for how people with even an ounce of sensitivity or compassion
might view such a celebration, the abortion lobby cluelessly calculated
that it could rustle up political support by lauding those who commit
unspeakable acts against innocent infants. These radical activists have
become so ensconced within their own rhetorical nonsense that they fail
to gauge the reactions of those who don't view abortion as an
ideological ideal.
As disgusting as the "Day of Appreciation" is, widespread publicity of
the indefensible holiday would wreak havoc on the abortion lobby, giving
lie to myth that its leaders are fighting for "choice."
