Once you wade through the political rhetoric, the media cover-up and the overall ugliness surrounding the Kermit Gosnell trial, there’s an important message to take away: The abortion debate is transparently becoming less and less about when life begins, and instead about two groups of people separated by an increasingly large ideological gap.
How else do you explain the thousands of people killing their children on a mere “in or out” technicality?
No, as you peel the layers of obfuscation from the atrocity that is the modern abortion holocaust, you will find a battle between two groups of people with very, very different values. Those people are either Lifeists or Abortionists.
(Sidenote: Kermit Gosnell is an evil murderer, the kind of guy who has Satan personally praying for the man’s salvation just so that he can deny him entry. Is a fetus a human being? Certainly much more so than Gosnell. On with the column.)
Terms like “pro-choice” sound benign. Leftists designed them that way. Who could possibly be against choice? Whether it’s “reproductive rights” or pizza toppings, “choice” sounds like a really good thing. But for this term to hold any real meaning, one would have to assume first that its adversaries are anti-choice, and that “choice” has anything to do with legitimizing murder.
Lifeists believe in choices as well. The choice to abstain from sex, the choice to engage in protected sex, or even the choices made to correct past mistakes, like giving a child up for adoption, or taking responsibilities for one’s actions (be that through becoming a loving mother or active father).
No, Abortionists aren’t “pro-choice.” They simply allow the ideal of comfortable choice — of convenient choice — to trump the value of life.