What Personal Opposition? The Pro-Choice Canard


This is not a legal article. This is not an argument for one political proposal or another, an endorsement of one candidate or party. This is barely even a political essay, in that (today anyway), I do not wish to debate the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade, legal statues, what insurance should provide, how what should be funded, the practicality of banning a procedure or whether that is even preferable in the first place. So please, if you’re actually reading this right now and not just skimming the subject material, save those arguments for another day. In your response, I don’t need to hear about how Republicans are only “pro-birth” and how their irresponsible health care plans are anything about pro-life. I am not a Republican. In this essay, I am not talking about what the law should be.

I won’t even, God help, talk about why child-killing is objectively immoral, legal or not. Not now anyway, though if that intrinsic fact of natural law seeps in, it is only because it is unavoidable to any sane and decent person.

No rather, I am addressing now the tired and, I’ll point out, presently unfounded cliche that the “pro-choice” side of this most heated of issues really, truly doesn’t like abortion. That they regretfully endorse its legality but deep in their hearts and minds they really, truly don’t like that thing where a baby has its skull penetrated, its brains vacuumed out, and its body pulled apart with forceps.


There exists not one iota of visible evidence in modern leftist culture of a personal opposition to the act itself. The overwhelming majority wouldn’t dare to write an article, publish a book, send a Tweet, or mention in conversation that they think abortion is bad and something that should be discouraged. Sure, the politicians will pay lip-service, throw out that “Safe, Legal, and Rare” gem (why rare?) or state that they’re “personally pro-life” to appeal to the voter, being that the mass of humanity innately know this is a heinous act. But these are stale platitudes that carry no weight or conviction.

Liberals are loud mouths, everybody knows that. SJWs never shut up. Nor should they, in principle, if the principle they’re espousing is a worthy one, if the injustice they’re protesting is truly injust and must be opposed.

But see here’s the thing, if they really did find abortion in any way wrong, heinous, gross, or distasteful, you can bet we’d hear about it. Oh wow would we hear about it! Here is a list of things that ruffles the feathers modern progressive left enough to shout about. Not things they advocate outlawing, but events, actions, and attitudes they find personally abhorrent enough to speak out against:

Saying “Good Morning” to a woman on the street. (http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/10/28/street_harassment_video_a_hidden_camera_records_what_women_go_through_on.html)
A boyfriend “liking” a suggestive photo on Instagram. (https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/4/15721836/emily-ratajkowski-emrata-instagram-like)
A sandwich board that points out the respective calories in bagels and oatmeal. (https://www.thenation.com/article/fat-shaming-all-around-us/)
Cuddling. (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_drift/2015/11/04/against_spooning_a_manifesto.html)

Again, the raisers of these complaints are not advocating new laws to vindicate their many grievances. They don’t propose making “fat shaming” illegal or banning by government force certain Halloween costumes. But they are willing to passionately express their opposition to what they feel is wrong, and I say God Bless Them!

My problem though, is the disingenuous nature of the attitude vis a vis this specific issue. How many times have we heard the same thing?

“Nobody likes abortion, BUT…”

Hold. Is that even true? More and more as of late, it becomes painfully clear that there is a loud (minority? plurality? MAJORITY?!) of those on the other side of this issue who approve of, advocate, even celebrate the act itself.

I’m talking about those who get into a frenzy whenever a Juno or any other fictional character in a difficult pregnancy actually carries her baby to term. If you were really pro-choice, shouldn’t your support her decision? Why should it bother you that the Katherine Heigel character lives with being Knocked Up? I’m calling out Planned Parenthood’s grotesque “Shout Your Abortion” campaign. I’m pointing towards Lena Dunham, who said she wishes she had an abortion. I cite Salon’s “TV’s 10 best abortion moments of 2016” article. J’accuse the Democrats who celebrate abortionist Willie Parker, who sadly is considered both a doctor and a Christian in our culture of death, as the paragon of the Christianity they so elsewhere disdain. And I’m repelled by the “Reverend” Laura Young, who disgraces her Methodist church by publicly blessing an abortion clinic. It’s abundantly obvious, that whatever euphemism that try to characterize themselves with, these people are, in fact pro-abortion.

Say for a moment that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. Well, lots of things are rightfully legal, but that doesn’t mean they’re good. Why, if it is truly something you don’t like, is it so anathema to say a single breath against this particular action? Once again, because I feel like these are the types of responses I’ll be getting, I am not talking about the law. You support a woman’s choice, yes. But is that always a good choice, a right decision, something that can never questioned in any sense regardless of circumstance or lateness of term? Because your silence is deafening.

But it’s her choice, you’d say, I have no right to express any discomfort or disapproval whatsoever. Sure, I may not like it, but I have to keep my mouth shut. Well it was certainly Chris Pratt’s legal right to say “turn up the volume” on an Instagram post, but look at all the grief he got there.

Now take Planned Parenthood (please!). Women’s services you say. Need half billion a year in tax payer funding. Fungibility is not a real word. Uh-huh. They’re an organization that legally exists. But so is American Apparel, and you’re more than willing to call out their sexist ads. Look:

It’s possible that an organization could be doing legal things you don’t approve of, isn’t it? If you find the termination of a human heartbeat uncomfortable, if you think it’s unseemly that clearly human body parts, a hand and a leg, are on a pie dish being picked apart, if any part of your mind or conscience doesn’t like the fact that nascent children are being harvested for their organs, why not say so? Why doesn’t the left write any articles about how Dr. Uta Landy laughing when she says “An eyeball just fell down into my lap, and that is gross!” is an insensitive? Legal bodily autonomy extends from womb to hair, but that would never stop pro-choice social justice warriors from shaming white girls with dreadlocks for “cultural appropriation”. Everyone can and should express themselves about everything in life they like and don’t like. Politicos, right and left, are very vocal about what grinds their gears, even if they think it should be legal. But if all these pro-choicers really are “personally pro-life,
or that delightful neologism “prayerfully pro-choice” as Buzzfeed’s favorite heretical “priest” Rev. Francisco Garcia (an Episcopalian, big surprise) puts it, why don’t they ever talk about what they don’t like about abortion? Argue for its legality, talk about how we can improve society to make abortion less prevalent, okay. But for once, in the name of all that is Holy, would it be too much to ask to actually condemn the action? Garcia, you’re supposed to be a man of God. How about actually discouraging an action you supposedly consider a sin?

Troubling statistics are often evoked, rightfully so, as indicative of social ills. But we’re awfully particular with which figures we pay attention to, aren’t we? Democrats will lament the disproportion minority incarceration rate, point out the lack of diversity in this field or that, raise alarm that one out of every four homeless is a woman (a figure that may not be the evidence of male privilege they intend), and cite college acceptance rates. But you wanna hear some crickets? Check out these figures:
78% of Planned Parenthood clinics are in minority neighborhoods.
Minority women constitute only about 13% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but they underwent approximately 36% of the abortions.
Black women are 5 times more likely as white women to have an abortion (and this comes from The Alan Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion organization.

Racial issues are a major source of contention and point of interest in this country, and to be fair, the left often does seem more sensitive or cognizant than the right. While I don’t necessarily agree that all their grievances are valid (many of the charges of cultural appropriation, for example, come off as pedantic), I can applaud the compassion and awareness.

But if you nitpick every exchange and facet of society as racist, from Harambe jokes to the “a-ok” hand gesture, why is it of no concern whatsoever that a black baby in New York City is more likely to be aborted than born? #OscarsSoWhite? You’re outraged that more African Americans aren’t nominated for Academy Awards? Then why does the fact that there are 16 million less African Americans living because of abortion (http://www.blackgenocide.org/black.html) not mean a thing?

How about one single article, I beg you, on the sad racist implications in the fact Michael Novak observed, that since 1973, a quarter of the African American community has been aborted into oblivion?

If you personally oppose it, vocally oppose it. If you don’t like it, tell us why. Speak up! You certainly can’t keep your mouths shut about literally any other grievance you find rightfully legal but socially and morally objectionable. If you want us to believe it is possible to begrudgingly accept that something must remain legal even when it is distasteful and immoral, for the love of God, tell us, articulate why you don’t like it, explain why it should be discouraged, support social efforts to reduce the incidence with the stated purpose of reducing the incidence.

Perhaps this article is superfluous, as the “Shout Your Abortion!” crowd is more and more vocally, explicitly and unapologetically pro-abortion. But there remain the majority of Democrat politicians who can’t be as fanatically in favor of this bloody sacrament as their Tumblr constituents in public, and most quietly pro-choicers who repeat the tired bit about they don’t really like this thing but think it should be legal. I’m saying, put your money where your mouth is, or just don’t bother.

I’m going to conclude by evoking the Season 3 finale spiel of Chuck McGill, one of the most despised characters on one of televisions current best shows. A lot of people, pro-life, pro-choice, and yes, pro-abortion, dig the show Better Call Saul. I’m exploiting a popular pop culture reference because people like that even when they hate my position. I’m going to tweak the quote to my position. Butcher it, if you will, the way 1,876 African Americans (or “potential”, if you wish to dehumanize) are butchered every day in this country on average, a fact no social justice warrior cares about.



“Why pretend to have any regrets at all? What’s the point? You say you don’t like abortion. I’m saying don’t bother. What’s the point? You’re just gonna keep killing babies. You kill babies. Over and over and over. Then there’s this show of reluctance. I don’t doubt your discomfort is real, but what’s the point of all the sad faces and pointless platitudes? If you’re not going to change your position, why not just skip the whole exercise? In the end you’re going to keep promoting infanticide with no regulation or regret. So stop kidding everyone and accept it. Frankly, I’d have more respect for you if you did.”


About the author: brianzblogger

You must be logged in to post a comment.