We all go to publications like Huffington Post to get our super serious, unbiased, wholesome news. Citizens seeking to educate themselves would be remiss without HuffPost gems like “WTF GOP” and “If Pop Stars Were Breakfast Cereals: A Delicious Analysis.” It can be hard these days to find a news source that doesn’t lean strongly left or right. Good thing we’ve got HuffPost for all of our unbiased information needs.
Fitting right into their formula of honest, balanced reporting, HuffPost just released an article entitled, “4 Devious Ways States Chipped Away at Abortion Rights in 2018.” At first glance, this already ranks high on the impartial word choice scale. Unbiased news outlets like Huffington Post always make sure to post pro-abortion stories that include neutral words like devious, extreme, and stigmatize. In fact, the word “extreme” is only used six times in the article.
So, what are these 4 devious pro-life methods of protecting babies with public policy?
- “[We] instituted restrictions that make it really hard — often impossible — for women to get abortions within a legal time frame.”
It was already super crazy that pro-lifers wanted to protect 5-month-old fetuses that can feel pain from dismemberment. But now some states (like Iowa) want to limit abortion to when the heartbeat is detected!? Oh, the humanity. Literally. Not to mention, the nerve of us who think the states should even have a say in this at all. Naturally we all want D.C. to be the supreme overlords on this issue.
Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and the latest pro-life news.
- “[We] played on concerns about discrimination in order to stigmatize women who seek abortions.”
Buckle your seatbelts: In 2018, pro-life advocates were caught suggesting that aborting babies on the basis of race, gender, or disability was discrimination. And the HuffPost author’s reasoning for why this is wrong is super solid because she said a couple parents of children with Down Syndrome disagreed with it. So, like, I don’t know how you could refute it.
- “[We] used gruesome, imprecise language to paint a safe and common method of abortion as cruel and barbaric.”
Anyone who has looked into what abortion actually is would know that it is just a lovely, magical procedure that isn’t violent at all. So yeah, HuffPost, why pro-life lawmakers would describe dismemberment as “dismemberment” is beyond us. Plus, the leagues of women with perforated uteruses, hemorrhaging, infertility, PTSD, etc. would definitely agree that it was safe for them. These same women also know a thing or two about that “imprecise language” since so many of them were told the “removal of their clumps of cells and globs of tissue” wouldn’t have negative side effects.
- “[We] wrote laws [we] knew would be challenged in court in a big and public way, with the goal of toppling Roe v. Wade.”
Hold up. Americans who disagree with our abortion laws (aka majority of the population) are putting forth local legislation with the hopes that it reaches D.C. so that the most violent, unjust Supreme Court ruling in our country’s history is finally seriously challenged? No. Way. It’s almost like… the culture drives our politics. And the culture doesn’t like abortion.
Well, I don’t know about you, but I just can’t believe how devious this stuff is. Moving the legality of abortion earlier? Saying that killing someone based on race, gender, or disability is bad? Describing the violence of abortion accurately? And to top it off, proposing legislation according to those things? Boy, if 2018 is any sort of indication, 2019 is going to be one tough year for abortion.
LifeNews Note: Brenna Lewis is staff writer and Rocky Mountain coordinator with Students for Life of America