By Dave Andrusko
When it comes to the Abortion Industry and its innumerable media enablers, it is always a highly contested race to the bottom. Who can be the most outrageous, the most bizarrely tone-deaf, and who can be counted on to scrape the bottom of the ethical barrel most bare?
Rewire.News almost always wins. It modestly describes its “slant” thusly: “We eschew false equivalences, believe in the separation of church and state, are unafraid to call out flaws in conventional wisdom, and do not pledge allegiance to any political party.” (The latter point is, of course, absurd, but no matter.)
The “conventional wisdom” they find flaws in is what? Anything that gives evidence of a shred of humanity, any sense that there are some places even the most blindly pro-abortion partisan ought not to go.
I grant you a tiny part of their cheerful descent into barbarism is to get a rise out of people like you and me. But, obviously, they couldn’t really care less.
For any publication that can run a piece titled “What It’s Like to Be a Pregnant Abortion Provider” has turned a corner from which it is highly unlikely they will ever return.
So who is the author, Stephanie Chen? A “board certified obstetrician-gynecologist based in Philadelphia and a Fellow of Physicians for Reproductive Health.” She tells us she is already a parent and is pregnant.
Chen tells us early on that she was asked if her situation felt “weird”—being “visibly pregnant” while aborting women?
No, she “half-truthfully” answers. But Chen does wonder how her “patients ” will respond.
But not to worry.
Chen tells us “[E]veryone congratulates me, and patients often want to know every detail of my pregnancy. Despite our different circumstances, talking about my baby allows my patients and me new opportunities to connect and bond.”
Think about that for a second. And then consider this classic case of disassociation:
Multiple people have told me that providing abortions while nurturing my own baby inside me must present a moral conflict. Those people don’t understand that my baby has nothing to do with my patients. The people who come to me for abortions cannot become parents at this time for their own perfectly valid reasons. Their situations are different from mine.
So, while nurturing her own unborn baby, she sucks out, scrapes out, and tears out limb by limb babies from mothers who are in situations “different from” Chen’s. Such on the one hand/on the other hand doesn’t “change my ethical understanding of abortion,” she tells us assuredly.
She takes refuge in the falsehood that “Most people [aka women] in the United States who have abortions already have one or more children.” This is no doubt a reference to a 2014 Guttmacher study that concluded that 59% of women obtaining abortions were already mothers.
However, James Studnicki et al. “analyzed pregnancy outcomes from the Medicaid records of the 17 U.S. states which provide Medicaid coverage for abortion . The reproductive histories of 4,884,101 women were analyzed.”
What did they find? “Women with both births and abortions represent 5.7% of the study population and have 7.2% of total births.”
One other pro-abortion talking point Chen trots out: being aborted ain’t all that bad:
Forcing the responsibility of supporting a life onto someone who does not want to be pregnant or become a parent is unhealthy for both the parent and the child. Rather than being “anti-family,” people who seek abortions are protecting their current and future families, whatever that looks like.
She ends with the usual excusatory blather and calls (what a surprise) for “eliminating the Hyde Amendment, an annual legislative rider that bars federal funding for abortion.” The lives of at least 300,000 babies were saved each year because of the Hyde Amendment—at least 2.4 million altogether.
The pro-abortion answer to everything? More deaths, more misery, more and more and more abortions.