Pro-Life Group: NARAL Report on Samuel Alito Riddled With Errors

National   |   Steven Ertelt   |   Dec 16, 2005   |   9:00AM   |   WASHINGTON, DC

Pro-Life Group: NARAL Report on Samuel Alito Riddled With Errors Email this article
Printer friendly page

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
December 16, 2005

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — Another pro-life organization is addressing a 25-page report the abortion advocacy group NARAL released Thursday attacking Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. The report says Alito would likely uphold pro-life laws that would limit abortions just as much as overturning Roe v. Wade.

"NARAL does itself a disservice by applying its usual tactics to Samuel Alito," said Wendy Wright, Executive Vice President of Concerned Women for America.

"Abortion enthusiasts rely on euphemisms to cover up the gruesome reality of abortion. And, desperate over losing voters, they are following the advice of political gurus to claim their ‘moral’ position," she explained. "But the clumsy attempt to do both in its report only leaves readers shaking their heads."

Wright pointed to one section of the NARAL report addressing a "Federal Abortion Ban" the group says was signed into law in 2003. NARAL claims the ban would prohibit abortions as early as the 12th week of pregnancy.

However, there is no national ban on abortions — instead there is a partial-birth abortion ban that prohibits a specific type of abortion in the middle months of a pregnancy. Abortion practitioners and advocacy groups filed three lawsuits against the measure and it has yet to be enforced.

"As everyone knows, the Partial Birth Abortion Ban addressed one horrible procedure that mostly delivers a baby until only the head is in the birth canal, at which point the baby’s brains are sucked out," Wright says.

"It’s quite telling that NARAL does not quote the law, or even call it by its name, in order to mislead readers – unless it is referring to a nonexistent law," Wright adds.

Wright also said NARAL’s unyielding support for Roe v. Wade is a disservice to women.

"In its insistence on absolute allegiance to Roe v. Wade, claiming that ‘Roe put an end to back-alley abortions,’ NARAL overlooks that Roe merely allowed back-alley abortionists to hang out a shingle," she explained. "What was illegal on January 21, 1973, was suddenly ‘legal’ on January 22, 1973."