By Dave Andrusko
I don’t think I qualify as even a hoarder-lite, but it is true that I have kept remembrances stashed away going all the way to high school!
My beloved spouse asked me to go through a couple of boxes with the intent, no doubt, that, at best, I would throw most of the stuff out, but at a minimum take it to the office. I chose the latter.
I was in college (gulp) in the 1960s and wrote for what was then universally agreed to be one of the top two college newspapers, the University of Minnesota Daily . But what caught my eye this morning was not something I wrote on January 24, 1968 (five years before Roe v. Wade) but a story without a byline that was headlined, “250,000 die in illegal abortions” with a subhead, “Of one and a half million yearly.”
In the story itself, the physician who provided the 250,000 figure actually said “at least 250,000 deaths are known to occur in this country each year due to abortion.”
There is zero correspondence between those numbers and reality, as we have demonstrated a gazillion times. None.
The source quoted in the Daily story was largely hewing to the line the abortion industry came up with by inferring, extrapolating, and multiplying by ten: 200,000 to 1.2 million illegal abortions per year performed in the 1950s and 1960s.
But as I wrote a few years ago, the huge number of illegal abortions was preposterous on its face. It was based not only on extrapolations from wildly unrepresentative sources, but was inflated by including miscarriages (25-30%) and “therapeutic” [legal] abortions (10-15%).
As for maternal deaths, even Guttmacher, the in-house think tank for the Abortion Industry, concedes, “By 1965, the number of deaths due to illegal abortion had fallen to just under 200,” almost entirely because of the introduction of penicillin.
Why do I mention this old, old story? For two reasons.
First, pro-abortions treat the truth like funny putty which can and should be twisted to come up with the right conclusions. The 1968 story was about what called “The World of Sex” conference and the objective of these distortions was to try to change the law in Minnesota. Recent efforts to “liberalize” the law had failed.
Second, just as they unconscionably make up numbers to advance their agenda, they ridicule, mock, and scorn pro-life scholarship which challenges the pro-abortion narrative. The most obvious recent example is the onslaught on changes to informed consent laws that tell women undergoing the two-drug chemical abortion technique that should they change their mind before taking the second drug, there is a very real chance they can save their baby’s life.
Final thought. The one “pro-life” voice in the 1968 Daily story is inarticulate, inconsistent, and concedes everything that matters.
That allows the editors to pretend they have written a balanced story. Geez, these people are shameless.