Opinion

Can the abortion industry offer women any better than the worst?

The pro-abortion lobby has long been frightening people into believing that without so-called “safe” and “legal” abortion, women would turn to dangerous, illegal, back-alley abortions. Even some of those not comfortable with abortion have conceded that if women will abort regardless, it might as well be legal.

But abortion advocates have been lying to us since the very beginning. NARAL Pro-Choice America was initially created in 1969 to support the legalization of abortion, founded as the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws. Its co-founder was the late abortionist, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who became pro-life before his death. He admitted that the statistics of pre-Roe abortion deaths were made up.

The procedure may be legal in a nation that has some of the most relaxed abortion laws in the world, but it is far from safe. The intent of an abortion is always to kill the preborn child inside the mother, and  January 2015 estimates show that over 57,000,000 children have died since abortion’s legalization in January 1973. Women have also died from this procedure that was supposed to be safe. While the abortion lobby certainly doesn’t care to remember the children, they also refuse to remember the women who died – women they would have otherwise claimed to have advocated for.

While the procedure has inherent risks, also making it unsafe for women is who is doing the procedure. The abortionists – who are hailed by some as health care providers and heroes, with an entire day devoted to them – are some pretty unsavory characters.

The Pro-Life Action League compiled a list of some of the most notorious abortionists, and a part of their website, “Meet the Abortion Providers,” is devoted to the testimonies of former abortion workers who share the true horrors of the industry.

If it seems as if Live Action News has devoted an extensive amount of time and energy to covering abortionists, that’s because we have. Here’s a list of coverage during the course of a month:

This list is not even a complete one, as it does not include the recent reporting on abortionists and abortion advocates from the April 2014 National Abortion Federation (NAF) Conference.

Speaking of the NAF, they’ve complained about abortionists in their own right. A 2013 article appeared in Remapping Debate, which included statements from NAF about how there is a shortage of interest. On the NAF’s website they also complain of a “shortage of trained abortion providers.” They have been holding conferences since 1990 about this shortage.

The website also touts the NAF’s formation of Medical Students for Choice in 1993.  But since then, we’ve also seen the rise of groups like Medical Students for Life. Many students have also rethought their views on abortion after studying chicken embryos, or after witnessing an abortion actually being performed.

Sarah Terzo has been writing extensively for Live Action News about the stigma abortionists face from other doctors, particularly late-term abortions. Considering that it takes a certain kind of person to kill preborn children for a living in all kinds of horrible ways, this shouldn’t come as a shock.

When it comes to motivation, many of these abortionists are in it for the money. Late-term abortion is a particularly lucrative and gruesome trade.

Perhaps it’s not just the fault of the abortionists. The abortion movement is also complicit in protecting them, with their lack of support for virtually any pro-life law. And yet, the abortion industry has proven that it cannot be left to regulate itself.

It’s worth noting how abortionists and the abortion industry are held to a much different standard than the rest of the medical field, in the name of playing politics with women and actual healthcare. As For instance, as Secular Pro-Life has pointed out, the habit of abortionists to travel from state-to-state, in any given day, would be considered patient abandonment for any other kind of doctor.

What is there to do, then? The abortion industry would say to train more abortionists, but medical students and most doctors don’t want to do such kinds of work. Women are thus told by abortion advocates that their only choice is to allow these unscrupulous, unsavory characters, many of whom are criminals, to operate on their most intimate and sensitive parts, ripping their offspring from them. Leaving women in the hands of such people is not pro-choice or pro-woman; it’s even more anti-woman to laud these abortionists as heroes when they should be labeled as the criminals that they are.

The abortion industry may eventually have to actually acknowledge that there are objectively better alternatives for women. Pregnancy centers already offer adoption services as well as help for those mothers who choose to parent. If the abortion industry is actually ‘pro-choice,’ then why can’t it do the same?

It would be nice, but I’m not holding my breath.

READ NEXT
Comments
To Top

Send this to friend