Ever since I began reading Ben Shapiro’s Bullies, I have started to notice examples of progressive bullying everywhere. In his book, Shapiro describes how leftist bullies attempt (often successfully) to silence their political opponents by unfairly demonizing them instead of discussing the actual issues. The President gave us a great example in his recent speech on gun control:
“There will be pundits and politicians and special interest lobbyists, publicly warning of a tyrannical all-out assault on liberty. Not because that’s true, but because they want to gin up fear or higher ratings or revenue for themselves. And behind the scenes they’ll do everything they can to block any common sense reform and make sure nothing changes whatsoever.” – President Obama
Notice how he doesn’t even acknowledge that 2nd amendment supporters might have valid points. Instead, he demonizes them by assigning selfish motives without any evidence outside of the fact that they disagree with him. Now that you understand what progressive bullying looks like, let’s see how it applies to the national conversation on abortion.
This week marks the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade and over 55 million abortions in America in that time. This makes American abortion the 2nd largest genocide in the history of the world, second only to Mao’s 90 million or so. Like many Americans, I will be walking in protest of abortion on Saturday in one of the many Marches for Life across America. So I thought now is as good a time as any to warn my fellow pro-lifers about attempts to silence them and encourage them to not give in to abortion bullies.
As science has advanced, the wonders of life before birth are now seen in vivid detail with wide access to advanced ultrasound, successful pre-birth surgery, inter-uterine cameras recording every detail of development in research labs, and microscopes capturing the immediate change in an egg at the moment of fertilization. Life beginning at conception has been proven.This poses a problem for the pro-choice crowd as one of their go-to arguments has been that abortion doesn’t end a life; it’s just the removal of tissue. Salon.com writer, Mary Elizabeth Williams, admits this in her recent article entitled “So what if abortion ends life?” with tagline: “I believe that life starts at conception. And it’s never stopped me from being pro-choice.” In her article she explains how she and her other pro-choice friends never doubted that, when pregnant, they were carrying a human life:
“Yet I know that throughout my own pregnancies, I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life….I have friends who have referred to their abortions in terms of “scraping out a bunch of cells” and then a few years later were exultant over the pregnancies that they unhesitatingly described in terms of “the baby” and “this kid.” I know women who have been relieved at their abortions and grieved over their miscarriages. Why can’t we agree that how they felt about their pregnancies was vastly different, but that it’s pretty silly to pretend that what was growing inside of them wasn’t the same? Fetuses aren’t selective like that. They don’t qualify as human life only if they’re intended to be born.”
While I appreciate her honestly in acknowledging that a fetus is in fact a life, I am deeply disturbed by her reasons for supporting abortion despite this fact. She states:
“In an Op-Ed on “Why I’m Pro-Choice” in the Michigan Daily this week, Emma Maniere stated, quite perfectly, that “Some argue that abortion takes lives, but I know that abortion saves lives, too.” She understands that it saves lives not just in the most medically literal way, but in the roads that women who have choice then get to go down, in the possibilities for them and for their families. And I would put the life of a mother over the life of a fetus every single time — even if I still need to acknowledge my conviction that the fetus is indeed a life. A life worth sacrificing.”
The life of the mother in this case actually means her ability to be free of her responsibility of carrying her baby to term. This is more important to Mary Elizabeth Williams than the actual life of the baby. She thinks life only has value if its wanted or intended and she doesn’t hesitate at the thought of killing life that is unwanted. Where does this value system lead if we follow it to its conclusions? An orphanage ought to be able to kill their orphans if they choose because they aren’t valued? Of course not and I’m sure Mary Elizabeth Williams would agree with me on that, but this is her proclaimed value system. She calls it “A life worth sacrificing” when in fact she doesn’t think the life has worth so it’s acceptable to sacrifice it on the altar of personal irresponsibility. She explains why framing the argument in life vs. death is a losing one for pro-choicers:
“Of all the diabolically clever moves the anti-choice lobby has ever pulled, surely one of the greatest has been its consistent co-opting of the word “life.” Life! Who wants to argue with that? Who wants be on the side of … not-life?….They believe that if we call a fetus a life they can go down the road of making abortion murder. And I think that’s what concerns the hell out of those of us who support unrestricted reproductive freedom.”
Exactly. But that’s what being pro-life is. We actually support allowing babies in the womb to live no matter what. And people advocating abortion are actually advocating for murder. This is not bullying by pro-lifers as Mary claims, “We still have passionate debates about the justifications of our actions as a society, but we don’t have to do it while being bullied around by the vague idea that if you say we’re talking about human life, then the jig is up, rights-wise.” It’s merely stating the pro-life position on the issue. Progressives pull the bully card all the time. They demonize their opponents by calling them name like “wingnuts” and accusing them of “browbeating” and “sneaky, dirty tricks” like in this Salon article, while claiming bullying simply because someone disagrees and fights for a different policy. Ironically, the point of the article is that you can admit that life begins at conception and still be solidly pro-choice but she congratulates Planned-Parenthood on their effort to move the conversation away from using terms like life:
“And in the midst of this unique moment, Planned Parenthood has taken the bold step of reframing the vernacular – moving away from the easy and easily divisive words ‘life’ and ‘choice.’ Instead, as a new promotional film acknowledges, ‘It’s not a black and white issue.'”
This issue is about life. More so than any other major issue in American politics today. Don’t let the abortion crowd ever tell you differently and don’t allow them to change the terms of the debate into a mess of muddled euphemisms like “reproductive rights.” You are pro-life in the truest sense of that term. Be proud of it.
Bonus: For a laugh watch the video at the end of the Salon article that encourages people to have discussions on abortion that are free from labels but goes on to explain why the pro-choice position is the right one. Also, if you have any good sign ideas for the March for Life post them in the comments!
– The Engineer’s Daughter