It is condescending and classist to claim that low-income people “need” abortion

By Maria V. Gallagher, Legislative Director, Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation

They had both been born in the same country, but never met until after each had migrated to the U.S. They were young and filled with hope when they married—a union which would lead to seven children.

He supported his family as a barber, but he found that, in times of economic downturn, customers could be hard to come by. At Christmastime, a local firehouse would provide gifts for his beloved children, who well knew the poverty of their state in life.

These were my Italian grandparents, Leonard and Theresa. They may have had little in material goods, but they had plenty of love to spare.

I think of them often when pro-abortion politicians threaten to take away the Hyde Amendment, which ensures no taxpayer funding of abortion except in the rare cases of rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother.

I think of my grandparents because, while materially poor, they were rich in principles. And they viewed each of their children as a treasure.

It is condescending and classist to claim that low-income people “need” abortion. What they need is material and emotional support for themselves and their families. It seems especially revolting if a pregnant woman needs help with her rent payment and she is instead extended a cold-hearted offer to take the life of her preborn child.

It has been estimated that 2.5 million Americans are alive today because of the Hyde Amendment. It has stood the test of time and should not be tampered with. Attacking the Hyde Amendment is an attack on people who lack basic resources.

It is unconscionable, and should not be permitted in a civilized society.