Pro Life Apologetics

PRO-CHOICE ARGUMENT:
"Anti-abortion fanatics break the law, are violent, and bomb abortion clinics.
"



PRO-LIFE ANSWER:
Media coverage of prolife civil disobedience often bears little resemblance to what actaully happens.


The pro-abortion bias of the media is well documented, but has never been more blatant than in its reports of prolife rescues. The media's opposition to the prolife position, coupled with extreme resentment at any appearance of interferance with someone's free choice, has resulted in subjective and selective reporting.


After observing the peaceful behavior of the participants in a prolife rescue, my daughters were shocked to read the account in the next day's newspaper that described the rescue as "violent." They had a clear view of the events and had not seen anything remotely violent. The newspaper was full of other inaccuracies as well, leading then my ten-year-old to ask through tears, "Daddy, how can they lie like that?" Unfortunately, most Americans have never seen a rescue firsthand, and are wholly dependent on the media for their impressions.


A classic example of such media distortions is the coverage of the Wichita rescues in the summer of 1991. After ignoring the situation for the first week, the media consistently distorted the nature of the events. They spoke of "violence," while those present said there was no violence. They said the protesters were unwelcome by the citizens of Wichita, not mentioning that some local hotels,resturants, and other businesses provided free or low cost services for these protesters because they believed in what they were doing. They falsely stated that most of the protesters were from out of town, when the majority were from Wichita itself.


The Associated Press printed a story picked up by many newspapers, including USA Today, which said, "Prosecutors are weighing charges against a man,36, suspected of beating his three kids with a board because they refused to wear red ribbons in support of abortion foes." Yet the district attorney's office in Wichita---which was never contacted for confirmation--says the report was "erroneous." But the 6.6 million readers of USA Today, outraged that anyone would do such a thing, will never know that in fact no one did.


Newspapers around the world printed another Associated Press report quoting a proabortion spokesperson: "Who could have never assumed that people would push 2-year-old children in front of moving vehicles? To use children like that is just so appalling." It would have been appalling, but it never happened--this report was also totally false. Furthermore, AP failed to mention that the woman who made this claim was an employee of the abortionist whose clinic the protesters were surrounding. When asked why he didn't check to see if the charge was true, the reporter said he was under a deadline and didn't have time. Of course, there was no retraction, and literally millions of people--including many Christians--still believe what was reported.


Some news sources did not even report a rally of thirty thousand people, most Wichitans, who gathered to support the prolife efforts. Thousands of peaceful protesters were arrested, again most of them locals. The protesters had the support of many community leaders. Even the governor of Kansas, Joan Finney, said, "It is the character and courage of our state which is at risk. We shall not achieve the ideals for which this state is founded as long as Kansas turns its back on the powerless, the helpless, the unborn." Most Americans didn't hear this quote, but instead heard from proabortion advocates, selected according to the political tastes of reporters.


While media coverage of the 1992 rescues in Buffalo, New York, was not as dramatically biased, it still left many inaccurate and misleading impressions. One of these was the continuously repeated footage of a man in a business suit angrily yelling at and shoving prochoice demonstrators. This man was called a "prolife activist" when in fact he was a passer-by trying to walk down a blocked sidewalk. He had no connection with the rescuers, but millions of Americans were left with a different impression.


In any case, the great majority of prolife groups do not practice civil disobedience. Furthermore, there is honest disagreement among prolifers as to both the legitimacy and effectiveness of civil disobedience to save the lives of unborn children. Those groups that do practice civil disobedience have strict codes of conduct, and they require a commitment to peaceful nonviolence before they allow anyone to participate.

_____________



Timothy December 5, 2008 1:38 PM Reply
Not to mention that I oppose toxic chemicals shipped from China into America. I oppose melanine in our baby formula. I oppose flouridation of our water supply as well. Therefore, I mention these things. To call any form of dissent with Obama as exhibiting racism is not only silly but nearly draconian. Now, we can't dissent?


Lou December 5, 2008 10:30 PM Reply
Obama is a sick man. Among his deviant proposals are:
- Pay for poor American women to kill their little ones. The victims will be mostly black and brown, something the KKK could only dream of.
- Send money to foreign agencies who will pay foreign women to kill their little ones. The victims will be mostly brown and black.
- Reverse the ability to ban partial-birth abortions. Stabbing babies in the skull and sucking their brains out is an Obama family value.
Obama is a sick man.