“Months of ads deliberately lying about the goals of pro-life Republicans misled many voters”—Olivia Gans Turner, President, Virginia Society for Human Life.
“Big money and big lies are a dangerous combination. That’s the chief takeaway of the 2023 general election in Pennsylvania”– Maria Gallagher, Legislative Director, Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation
“Backers of Ohio Issue 1 to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution boast a hefty fundraising advantage over their opponents”– Jessie Balmert, Cincinnati Enquirer
We reside in Virginia, where the airwaves were inundated with a seemingly endless stream of pro-abortion advertisements for weeks on end. It is unnecessary to provide further evidence of the absurdity of the aforementioned advertisements. Those in favor of limiting abortion rights were depicted in a negative light, with some portraying them as callous and indifferent to the suffering of women.
For example, in the race for governor of Kentucky—as well as a race to the bottom—incumbent pro-abortion Andy Beshear “had run one of the sharpest abortion-related ads of the year,” featuring a young woman who says she was raped by her stepfather at age 12.
Ohioans voted in favor of “Issue 1,” which incorporated abortion into the state constitution. It is noteworthy that the majority of accounts have described the amendment as “enshrined.” However, the truth is that Issue 1 effectively removes any limits on abortion up until the birth of the child.
One might inquire as to the manner in which this was accomplished.
The editors of National Review Online explained how:
The amendment was written in a way to give voters the wrong impression that it would permit meaningful limits on abortion after “viability.” Ohio voters who want some limited right to abortion may have a hazy understanding of what viability means or when a heartbeat begins. Ohio voters were also misled about the amendment’s true implications for taxpayer funding of elective abortions.
One might reasonably assume that a biased media would prioritize coverage of the most challenging cases. The editors of National Review Online observe that a significant proportion of abortion stories in the mainstream media focus on a relatively small number of cases involving rape, incest, or fatal fetal health conditions.
It is similarly vital that pro-life officials challenge the misrepresentations of the abortion industry, which asserts that hospitals may be compelled to postpone treatment of conditions that threaten the life of the mother due to pro-life legislation. No legislation requires that action be delayed until such a threat becomes imminent. Some progress has been made in countering such misinformation, but more work remains to be done.
The results of the election last night were profoundly detrimental to unborn children, their mothers, and, in my estimation, to the moral fabric of our nation. Such circumstances, however, serve to reinforce my resolve.
When we became members of the most significant social justice movement of our time, we did so with full awareness of the circumstances and without reservation.
To borrow from the Bible, those who are pro-life must continue to prepare themselves mentally and physically for the challenges ahead. I am confident that you will join with National Right to Life in opposing this reprehensible phenomenon.
Chelsea Garcia is a political writer with a special interest in international relations and social issues. Events surrounding the war in Ukraine and the war in Israel are a major focus for political journalists. But as a former local reporter, she is also interested in national politics.
Chelsea Garcia studied media, communication and political science in Texas, USA, and learned the journalistic trade during an internship at a daily newspaper. In addition to her political writing, she is pursuing a master's degree in multimedia and writing at Texas.
