Last month, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons published the qualitative results of a survey that sought to increase understanding of the emotional toll of abortion. The survey was unique in that it attempted to study the post-abortion experience on a more qualitative level than any previously conducted studies. By asking open-ended questions and then categorizing responses, Dr. Coleman allowed the respondents to openly discuss their experience after abortion in a way that was not limited by quantitative outcome measures and in a way that allowed them to describe their experience in their own words. While the participants in the survey did not constitute a representative sample of post-abortive women, there were a wide variety of ages, races, and demographics represented among the respondents. The survey gives us an accurate profile of those women who experience negative emotional reactions after choosing abortion. This is quite valuable, and despite the lack of a representative sample, there are some noteworthy takeaways from the survey as well as ideas that are reinforced by the categorized results. I wrote a post for Crisis Magazine discussing a few of these takeaways.
I had the chance to join CatholicTV’s “This is the Day” program to talk about Ready to Stand and why the pro-life cause is so important.
Here’s the show from Thanksgiving weekend. It’s basically a casserole of things I am thankful for, including my family, pecan pie, sidewalk counselors, the TV show Psych, pregnancy centers, and more. Take a listen:
Recently, the New York Times published a column claiming that Facebook is ignoring fake news masquerading as pro-life articles and viewpoints. Written by Rossalyn Warren, the column laments the fact that the massive social media platform has not done more to weed out what she refers to as misinformation coming from pro-life news sites. The major flaw in Warren’s column is obvious from the beginning. From the outset to the conclusion, she does very little to successfully explain why or how any of the articles, examples, or pro-life news sites that she identifies actually qualify as fake news. Ultimately, Warren is taking it upon herself to label as fake news any site that embraces an ideology that she herself does not agree with. She continually calls credibility of anti-abortion sites into question without doing anything to successfully prove a lack thereof. Her entire column rests on the premise that anti-abortion sites are full of misinformation and falsehoods, and yet her attempts to demonstrate her premise fall dramatically short. Warren’s condescending attitude toward people who oppose abortion is pervasive, and her column is as smug as it is uncompelling. I wrote a column for The Federalist responding to Warren’s column and explaining why she fails to accomplish her goal with it.
I joined EWTN Radio’s Morning Glory on Monday to discuss the FBI signaling an investigation into Planned Parenthood. The segment starts around 45:00.
Last week, the Wisconsin Assembly debated a bill that would make it illegal for state insurance plans to pay for abortions. Assembly Bill 128 contains exceptions for cases of rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother. During the course of the debate, Rep. Scott Allen took to the stand to offer his thoughts on why state insurance plans should not be permitted to provide coverage for elective abortion. Allen pointed out that abortion is bad for the state because it takes the lives of human beings who would otherwise eventually grow up, join the workforce, pay taxes, and help fund things. Thus, the state should prohibit coverage for elective abortion because the state has a compelling interest that these people grow up to be contributing members of society. Predictably, his comments caught the attention of lots of people and organizations that were not overly pleased.Allen’s comments divert attention from the beauty of preborn human life, pregnancy, and motherhood and point to a view of women as being at the service of the state. Pro-life advocates ought not fall into the trap of reducing abortion to anything other than a massive human rights violation. I wrote a post for The Federalist explaining that economic advantage has nothing to do with why abortion is wrong and how making abortion an economic issue undermines the pro-life cause.
Here’s this week’s show with Josh Brahm of the Equal Rights Institute. We are talking about a pro-life argument that has the power to change minds on the spot: the equal rights argument. Take a listen to learn about the equal rights argument and why it is so effective:
In this week’s show, I tackle President Trump’s decision to roll back some Obama-era mandates related to birth control coverage. Also, Planned Parenthood is dishonest and cannot be trusted, in case you forgot.