By Jonathon Van Maren
When the news broke that Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer would be vetoing $21.4 million in funding for pregnancy centers that assist mothers in finding alternatives to abortion and adoption programs due to their refusal to provide abortion or abortion referral, Dr. Charlie Camosy tweeted: “I spent many years trying to convince fellow pro-lifers that virtually no one is pro-abortion and there’s tremendous common ground available in working together to expand real choice. But the “one choice: abortion” crowd is now quite large. And growing.” Camosy is a former board member for Democrats for Life.
The evidence for that has been coming in fast and hard since the Roe leak several months ago. The Today Show published an article titled “Eight dads share how abortion shaped their lives,” in which men expressed their gratitude for being able to abort inconvenient children that would have transformed their lives (as people tend to do). The Washington Post published a grotesque piece of reportage profiling the mother of twins in Texas who admits she loves them dearly, but is not sure what she would have done if she’d been able to abort them. The point of the article is crystal clear: The Post journalist wants us to believe that it is a tragedy that these twins survived, not a blessing that the law protected them.
Particularly egregious was when Ana Navarro, a political commentator, cited her disabled relatives when explaining why abortion was necessary. She stated the quiet part out loud: If we can’t get abortions, what are we going to do with all of these disabled kids?
But the view of a particular sort of progressive was crystalized this week in the testimony of Renee Bracey Sherman, an abortion activist who has been referred to as “the Beyonce of abortion storytelling.” Testifying before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on the effects of the Dobbs ruling, Bracey Sherman openly explained how to “self-manage” an abortion by taking pills. She wore green, the chosen color of the abortion movement; she also added her pronouns to her name-tag. Some people, she stated, believe that the process she was describing should be illegal—but in her mind, it was necessary to ensure women everywhere could access abortion.
READ THE REST OF THIS COLUMN HERE
One thought on “Activist says minorities better off aborting children than raising them in America”
Here’s a different take on the Washington Post article. It’s actually a pretty good pro-life story, despite its desperate attempt to fearmonger about how bad the law is. The teenage couple got their lives together (the mother, Brooke Alexander, went back to school after having dropped out), had the babies, got married, and the family is now doing very well (especially after the Gofundme pro-life activists put on). Given that the twins very well might have been aborted if the law hadn’t been in effect, Ms. Alexander’s pro-choice views were challenged by the experience.
We can expect more of the same. Right now, almost everyone knows friends and family members that have had abortions. But in the future, everyone will know someone that’s alive only because abortion was illegal. Many will owe the lives of their children, or their own lives, to the law.