There is no more self-ennobler than the abortionist who, through gritted teeth, tells her/his readers how brave they are to fight on for “women’s basic rights” (abortion) after a defeat—in this case the stunning victory of pro-life Donald Trump over abortion maven Hillary Clinton.
For example, there’s abortionist Diana Friedman, writing at rewire news.
Right out of the chute (in the caption under the graphic that begins the story), we read that with the election results in, “After about an hour of self-indulgent scrolling through social media posts and news articles, I moved forward.”
To what? you might ask. To her shift at the abortion clinic.
Why? Because she knew “that my patients, the clinic administration, reproductive rights advocates, and Hillary Clinton would want me to get out of bed and go, and to do what I had set out to do.”
Unfortunately (for her), when the topic of the election and Trump’s victory came up, at least one “patient” hadn’t gotten the message. She didn’t like either candidate, she said, illustrating “that many women and men of this country do not understand the extent to which reproductive freedom will likely be under attack in the new administration.”
So Friedman ends with a pledge to keep on keeping on. “I’ll continue to fight for the rights that I believe in and support,” she vows.
If there is a baby to abort, for any reason or any reason, by golly Friedman will be there equipped with her handy-dandy bag of surgical scissors, curettes, forceps, cervical dilators, and the like to crush and maim and pulverize her helpless victims.
One other thought. There is this narrative that pro-abortions habitually trot out which is supposed to convince you that what they are doing to the children is for the children, especially female children.
So, before Friedman motors down to the local abortion clinic, she goes into her 2-year-old daughter’s room, burdened with the knowledge that her daughter’s “early childhood years” would not be “under the leadership of our nation’s first female president.”
Friedman adds that her daughter
beamed up at me, still hot from her sweaty toddler sleep. I immediately teared up at her sheer innocence, her innate desire to express and receive kindness. When she asked, “Are you a little bit sad, Mommy?” I struggled with how to respond.
How about responding that when she finishes her shift, there will be many more babies who will never reach the age of two? Or that there is no place for her daughter’s “innate desire to express and receive kindness” at the local abortion clinic where the only innate desire is to exterminate as many unborn babies as they can squeeze in?
How about that perhaps Friedman might occasionally shed a tear for her hapless victims who, if given a chance, would beam up at their parents?
In all probability she’ll return to scrolling through the kind of stories that feed her own sense of victimhood, oblivious to the 1,000,000+ real victims whose lives are exterminated each and every year at places just the like the one where Friedman plies her deadly trade.
LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. This post originally appeared in at National Right to Life News Today —- an online column on pro-life issues.