The Abortion Industry’s Hypocritical Sexual Abuse Cover-Up 
Email this article
Printer friendly page
by Steven Ertelt
May 12, 2005
LifeNews.com Note: Steven Ertelt is the Editor and CEO of LifeNews.com.
Recent news once again proves the hypocrisy of the abortion industry.
As you’ve seen reported on LifeNews.com, state authorities in Kansas and Indiana are investigating allegations of statutory rape on young girls in both states. State officials know the girls were raped because they became pregnant and had abortions.
Amazingly, their efforts to find out more information about the victims and to prosecute the rapists have run into a brick wall as abortion businesses refuse to hand over paperwork that would help put the criminals behind bars.
Officials at Planned Parenthood and other abortion facilities say turning over medical records to authorities would violate the privacy of the young women. Somehow that’s a greater concern than the violation of the women’s bodies by the rapists. Never mind that state officials would redact the records to protect the privacy of the girls involved.
The mantra of the pro-abortion movement has always been "my body, my choice." According to that logic, a woman’s body is sacrosanct and any reasonable efforts to protect the life or rights of the unborn child are an abomination.
That’s true, unless it involves a thirteen-year-old girl who has had an abortion because an adult raped her.
The latest absurdity on this issue comes from leading abortion advocates in Congress.
The House of Representatives, by an overwhelmingly lopsided and bipartisan vote, approved legislation that would make it a crime for someone to take a teenager to another state for a secret abortion that violates parental involvement laws in the girl’s home state.
Abortion advocates offered an amendment to the bill that would have exempted grandparents or other adult relatives.
In other words, if little Suzy becomes pregnant after Grandpa Fred rapes her, he could take her to another state for an abortion – covering up his dirty deeds – and Suzy’s Mom and Dad may never know. Fred’s actions would be legal and he wouldn’t face prosecution for the rape unless Suzy had the courage to tell her parents or authorities.
Fortunately the amendment failed. Lawmakers, in their standard report on the bill, wrote that a Congressional committee rejected an amendment that "would have exempted sexual predators from prosecution.”
When they saw that language, pro-abortion lawmakers threw a temper tantrum.
New York Congressman Jarrold Nadler, who has made a career out of advocating abortion, threw such a fit that lawmakers ultimately revised the language of the report.
Nadler’s actions, however, exposed the abortion industry’s motives and disingenuousness. By offering the amendment, Nadler made it clear again that abortion businesses are more interested in selling abortions than protecting women. They are more concerned about preserving the secrecy of abortions than helping authorities prosecute statutory rape.
At their march for abortion in April 2004, the thousands of abortion advocates who attended held a sea of signs asking the question, "Who Decides."
When it comes to a young teen girl who has been raped and state officials’ efforts to protect them and prosecute their rapist, the answer is clear: the abortion industry decides. And their decision is making a few bucks off of a vulnerable girl is more important than the violence committed against her by rapists.
Until the Planned Parenthoods and Jarrold Nadlers of the abortion debate stand up and work side by side with authorities to stop the abortion-rape cover-ups, they deserve the "sexual predator protector" label Congress has given them.
