NARAL Branches Out
The crones at NARAL are celebrating the fourth year anniversary of the "March for Women's Lives", an event that took place in Washington DC four years ago. Because the fourth anniversary is the Silk Anniversary, NARAL is appropriately recalling stories from the march and immortalizing them on their blog. Later today they will fold linen napkins in the shape of coat hangers.
The March for Women's Lives was a smashing success for the pro-choicers. They had a lot of women there, at least 800,000, possibly over 1 million. Pro-choicers gloat that their march drew in considerably more people than those who show up to the annual March for Life. This, to them, is solid evidence that more women are pro-choice than pro-life (I'm still checking, but I also believe that it's also evidence to them that the fetus can't feel pain). It's worth pointing out that dragging a bunch of rhetorically-ginned up college-aged women off the street and getting them to Washington DC for one event is considerably easier than getting over a million people to show up in January-weather year after year. (Note to fellow anti-choicers: can we PLEASE criminalize abortion in August so we can march in celebration of it every year?) And yet we get an average of 300,000 pro-lifers there every year. Multiply that by 35 years and we've slaughtered the pro-choicers, which is terribly ironic.
The blog entries are presumably still coming in, but NARAL policy director Donna Crane had an unintentionally ironic story about meeting the wife of Christopher Reeve, paralyzed actor and embryonic stem-cell proponent. She discussed the link between we "anti-choicers" and the death of Christopher Reeve. While his death is largely blamed on lack of federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, no one sees that, in fact, embryonic stem-cell research did nothing to help him. The fact remains that, today, four years after his death, he would still be paralyzed, advocating for the destruction of human embryos in order to help him personally. Notice that one can understand Reeve's selfishness and be somewhat empathetic. No one wants to be paralyzed. That doesn't makes his position automatically ethical, however. And what other issue can we empathize with the killers of innocent people? Abortion. Funny how NARAL's on top of both.
Even I can concede that there is a difference between destroying a fetus and destroying an embryo. I think most pro-lifers see that and even some grapple with it. It's much easier for us to accept a few cells being used for supposedly helpful research as opposed to a 2nd trimester unborn baby. But that's where we differ from the pro-choicers. We give the benefit of the doubt to life, every single time, even if we cannot see or understand its value. Pro-choicers, in general I am sure, oppose slaughtering children in Darfur. However, their respect for life begins only after a child has passed out of the birth canal. Then magically, they have rights and we should be outraged that evil people are killing them and their families! They dismiss the deaths of fetuses as nothing, however. After all, who are fetuses compared to women? Well, then I ask, what value to society does a 4 year-old in Darfur have? Realistically, none. And frankly, what value to society does even a 16 year-old pregnant girl have? Realistically, none.
But that doesn't matter. Pro-lifers don't base a person's value on their contribution to society. We give them the benefit of the doubt and we encourage them to leave a productive life We are against the taking of any innocent human life--even that "potential life" found in a bunch of cells in a dish.
Of course Donna doesn't have a problem with chopping up embryos in a lab. She is for abortion for any reason, throughout all nine months of pregnancy. She thinks that simply changing your mind during labor is an OK reason to kill your baby. Sure, it may never happen, but that what she supports. By being cool with killing early-term fetuses and embryos, the pro-abortion position of NARAL has reached horrifying proportions. Perhaps when euthanasia on infants with Downs Syndrome becomes the status quo, NARAL will be right along side those proponents as well.