Analysis

For abortion advocates, more babies are a reason for ‘sad face’ emojis

0876The U.S. Supreme Court will hear Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt on March 2, which will examine if Texas’s law (HB2) requiring abortion centers to be held to the same standards as surgical outpatient centers and requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at hospitals places an “undue burden” on women seeking an abortion. While HB2 has been in effect, an estimated 10,000 lives have been saved in Texas from abortion. Many would forget that these children are living, breathing human beings.

Abortion advocates claim that women dangerously self-abort when they can’t access abortion or birth control (ignoring the dangers of even legal abortions performed at abortion centers). They even came up with a faulted study to support these claims.

But now, seemingly overnight, they’ve changed the argument – they’ve decided that Texas women have actually just been having a whole lot of children they can’t support.

Image via screenshot of Facebook Thursday morning.

Image via screenshot of Facebook Thursday morning.

Planned Parenthood is still trending on Facebook, as of Friday morning. Lamented are the results from a study claiming that births increased by 27 percent (only they actually didn’t), which were paid for by Medicaid. These living, breathing human beings were allowed to be born and might even go on to be blessings in their parents’ lives and in the world around them. Apparently, that’s horrible news.

Planned Parenthood Action linked to an article from the Los Angeles Times: “After Texas stopped funding Planned Parenthood, low-income women had more babies.” And News Republic shared an article from The Guardian: “Aggressive Planned Parenthood cuts hurt poor women the most, study finds,” written by pro-abortion columnist Molly Redden.

Pro-abortion media outlets have also been making the rounds on Twitter. Cosmopolitan has taken a lot of heat for using a ‘sad face’ emoji in their post about Texas women having more babies:

Why is it that Planned Parenthood and their friends in the pro-abortion media portray having children as what “hurt[s] poor women the most”? If anything, what’s hurting women is the mindset that poor women shouldn’t have children simply because they are poor – arguably, it’s a eugenic mindset to say that poor women shouldn’t reproduce.

Planned Parenthood should know. Their organization was founded by Margaret Sanger, known for having held eugenic and racist views. Why should we be surprised, then, that the organization providing one-third of abortions in the country (along with their media friends) would see more births as a bad thing?

We can talk about the “cost” until the cows come home, but pro-lifers would always prefer that money is directed towards life and not death.

READ NEXT
Comments
To Top

Send this to friend