By Dave Andrusko
If there is polling out there that asked people (in an objective way) what they think about women-helping Pregnancy Centers, I’m not aware of it. But I would bet a pretty penny that most people, regardless of their overall inclination on abortion, have a soft spot in their hearts for these largely volunteer-run organizations also known as Pregnancy Resource Centers and Crisis Pregnancy Centers.
But that consensus only makes the NARALs of this world even angrier. On top of that imagine their indignation when the New York Times—the mouthpiece of the Abortion Establishment—somehow allowed a favorable story to appear in its pages.
You knew that NARAL and like-minded souls would huff and puff in letters to the editor. (For our take, see “Even the New York Times has a good word to say [finally] about Pregnancy Centers”)
NARAL Pro-choice New York President Andrea Miller had the lead letter published Tuesday. It’s the usual tripe, a combination of recycled “investigations” conducted by objective sources– NARAL Pro-choice New York!—and inane nonsense about the “threat to women’s health” that Pregnancy Centers supposedly pose.
But what’s interesting is her first paragraph, a blend of hyperbole, misdirection, and (inadvertently) an important revelation. Which is, to quote Ms. Miller—“[T]hese centers are proliferating across the country, including in New York, especially in low-income areas and communities of color, such as the South Bronx.”
That tells us a couple of things. While PPFA is busy creating suburban megaclinics, they haven’t forgotten their core clientele—poor women of color. “According to data publicized by the Chiaroscuro Foundation beginning in 2011, the rate of abortion in New York City is nearly twice the national average, with 40% of pregnancies ending in abortion in the City. In some zip codes, the abortion ratio approaches 60%.” Those zip codes are home predominately to African-Americans and Hispanics. (See also, “On New York Governor Cuomo’s Proposal to Help Foster MORE Abortions in New York.”)
Of course that is where organizations dedicated not to expanding but contracting the number of abortions would focus some of their limited resources. To listen to Ms. Miller, it is the height of effrontery for anyone to move in on THEIR territory.
One other comment. The third letter was even more hysterical than the first. Sandwiched in between was a letter from a self-described “staunchly pro-choice person,” who said he “was glad to hear about increases in pregnancy centers that offer a variety of services to women, including information about alternatives to abortion together with financial and other support. If choice means anything, it means having the support to make the alternatives viable.”
But to the “Pro-Choice” establishment, there can be only one choice: death.
If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha. Your feedback is very important to improving National Right to Life News Today. Please send your comments to email@example.com.