By Dave Andrusko
It’s good to read other pro-lifers joining National Right to Life in thanking Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell for signing into law the ultrasound bill which ensures that women in the Commonwealth are given the full range of information available before undergoing an abortion. As NRLC said yesterday, “The new ultrasound law provides mothers an opportunity to view real-time images of their unborn children, and then provides an appropriate waiting period before rushing her through an abortion.”
As we’ve discussed many times in this space, in the height of hypocrisy and insincerity, pro-abortionists not only accused pro-life legislators and the governor of demanding something that was not in the bill—use of a transvaginal probe—they slide right over the fact that almost all abortionists already use such probes to date the age of the about-to-be-aborted baby. In other words, in their outlandish use of “rape” imagery, they were falsely accusing pro-lifers of mandating something abortionists already routinely employ! What a bunch.
Interestingly, a reporter for the Washington Post with very good contacts in the abortion community wrote a piece today in effect asking pro-abortionists if they had outsmarted themselves. In training their fire on the (imaginary) requirement for a transvaginal ultrasound, guess what happened? A law passed requiring an ultrasound, the bane of the pro-abortionist’s existence.
“Abortion rights supporters say the final version isn’t less restrictive than what they were up against initially, in that it still requires an ultrasound prior to an abortion,” wrote Sarah Kliff. “’It’s not any better than what they introduced in the first place,’ says Elizabeth Nash, who tracks state legislation for the Guttmacher Institute.”
Which, of course, was the point we made in this space repeatedly. All the ranting about “rape” had nothing whatsoever to do with transvaginal ultrasounds. As one veteran pro-abortionist put it, they are “a benign and routine part of the abortion procedure.”
They wanted no ultrasound whatsoever. Thus, from her pro-abortion perspective Nash is absolutely correct: The new law IS “no better” because the objective was to ANY ultrasound!
But the reporter’s they-missed-a-golden-opportunity spin misses the point. Pro-abortionists in Virginia are not dumb. They understood that there is no public opposition to ultrasounds per se.
The only chance they had to succeed was to frighten the citizenry–that knew only that those crazy pro-lifers were proposing to “rape” pregnant women–and thereby stampede the legislature into running away from ultrasound legislation!
However, once the imaginary threat was “removed,” calm returned.
Your feedback is very important to improving National Right to Life News Today. Please send your comments to firstname.lastname@example.org. If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha