For the conspiratorial mind, it might seem odd that Time magazine ran a cover story on how abortion advocates have been losing ever since their Roe v. Wade victory, legalizing abortion 40 years ago.
Framing the abortion movement as in decline is particularly interesting, since the story was published just days before Planned Parenthood released its annual report marking a record number of abortions: 333,964.
The family-planning organization also received $542 million in government funding, possibly an all-time high, and had $87.4 million in excess revenue, with $1.2 billion in net assets. It seems that, for Planned Parenthood, business is booming.
Certainly, pro-life activists have made gains. Last year, 43 pro-life measures were passed in several states that create awareness about abortion and regulate abortion providers. Pregnancy-help centers and clinics now outnumber abortion clinics.
The efforts and gains of a growing and committed pro-life movement can’t be dismissed, but the context of the Time article might offer a different pulse on the state of the abortion movement in the U.S.
The article was written months after a presidential candidate won re-election by running openly on the issue of supporting abortion. Most pro-life candidates are too fearful of recriminations, foretold by well-paid consultants, to be articulately outspoken about their pro-life values, despite evidence like the recent Gallup poll showing more Americans are pro-life (51%) than “pro-choice” (42%).
This year it’s especially hard to believe that abortion advocates have been losing since Roe. Abortion activists won the presidency, and they have a new Health and Human Services' mandate in place that will force every large business and organization to cover every form of Food and Drug Administration-approved contraception and abortifacient, regardless of the values of the employer offering the plans. The only thing that kept the Affordable Care Act from including abortion as well was a paper-thin executive order declaring that abortion cannot be considered an essential health-care benefit.
There are more than a million abortions in the United States every year. It’s hard to see how that’s a sign of defeat.
Chances are, the financial supporters of abortion activists feel similarly, and you don’t have to be exceptionally suspicious to think this might be a significant factor in why Time chose to publish its cover story at this particular moment. In Washington, D.C., it’s widely accepted that the party or issue that loses a political race inevitably gets a windfall in donations. After all, there’s nothing like a political loss to prove to supporters how desperately their cash is needed to advance this very important cause just before it’s defeated forever.
On the flip side, it’s much harder to create a fundraising urgency when people think that a particular issue is succeeding and well-supported by government policies. There’s no evidence that their donations are needed, at least not nearly as much. After all, they’ve reached the goal for which they donated, whether it’s getting a candidate elected or putting a policy in place.
Nevertheless, a well-placed article — let’s say, on the cover of Time — making the case that major advances are about to be lost creates a great sense of urgency for the supporters of that allegedly about-to-be-lost cause.
Additionally, I must add that I’m a skeptic about the polls on pro-life attitudes, including the Gallup poll cited above. While I accept these polls at face value, I think a deeper analysis will suggest there’s a reason why people are at the same time more pro-life today and, according to other opinion samplings, more supportive of same-sex “marriage.” I call it the “no big deal” principle.
It’s no big deal to have a baby out of wedlock, as documented by a 40% rate of births to single moms. At the same time, same-sex couples are no big deal — or at least they are in our entertainment world, which many confuse with reality.
Cultural attitudes about single parents and same-sex couples have relaxed because our values about children and marriage have changed.
Fewer and fewer people think that children are so precious that they should enjoy the benefits of parents married to each other, even though sociological data consistently shows this is the best arrangement for a child.
Since we’ve come to accept so many variations of family, many of which are demonstrably incomplete, I find it hard to maintain that we’re more pro-life and that we have a greater respect for human dignity. Yes, we can see the undeniable humanity of the unborn child; but many will not make decisions as if the best thing for that child is to be raised by two parents married to each other.
And, while as a nation we may be more ready than a generation ago to acknowledge the reality of human life in the womb, tragically, for most people, it’s still no big deal that we remain locked in the easy-abortion legal framework imposed two generations ago by the Supreme Court justices in their Roe decision.
Meanwhile, I don’t hear about nursing homes closing down because there are too many older people with families who want to take care of them at home. And let’s not forget the increase in public massacres of innocent victims.
I’ll believe we’re winning once I see a culture where individuals consistently live for others and not just for themselves.
Until then, we have a lot of work to do, and I’m guessing that the Time article is more of an iron fist in a velvet glove or a really aggressive possum playing dead.
Pia de Solenni is a moral theologian and cultural analyst. She writes from Seattle.
Comments
Post a Comment
Thank you for this. I had the same intuitive response to what seemed to be a Pyrrhic victory at best, but couldn’t articulate it as well as you have.
At Pro=life rallys (Washington), please popularize the following folk song (Only short verses can withstand reverbrations in large crowds)
“ALLL WE ARE ASKING ...IS LET THE CHILD LIVE”
(ARMS OVERHEAD SWAY LEFT TO RIGHT WITH VERSES)
Pia is absolutely right that Time is on the side of the culture of death and that the article’s motive is to shore up Democrat fundraising since most mid term elections mean big losses for the party in power. They are looking ahed to 2014. The pro-aborts are losing ground on the state level, but nationally, they’ve never been more solidly on top.
We may be pro-life as a nation, but until we put our morals ahead of perceived financial gains, and demand the same from GOP leadership, we will continue to be the underdogs while babies, the infirm, and schoolchildren lose their lives to the culture of death.
The Time Magazine Marxists are looking at the polls. 52% are against abortion. After 40 years constant propaganda from news media, entertainment media, and the Marxist Union controlled education system, they would think that the poll numbers would be 10% pro-life or against abortion. This is frustrating to them.
You make a very good point.
Second agreement to everything you wrote. Thank you for posting.
Society has crossed a threshold. We no longer value babies or look to the future . This is explempified by the fact that we no longer care whether they are aborted or whether they have to pay off our debt. Society is more concerned about what we want . It is a ” gratify me ” society unconcerned about the future .
The Time Magazine article was anything but anti-abortion. They were seeking sympathy for an already (thanks to those hefty taxpayer subsidies) well funded “women’s health” operation. Someday they’ll have to account for their lies and their actions.
Excellent article. Yes, I agree that there is invariably an ulterior motive to headlines in the mainstream media such as Time magazine. Your article explains it well. Thank you.
It’s so sad that satan and his followers are raking in so much money from their evil deed of killing off their descendants. Don’t they realize that no amount of money cannot buy their way out of hell. How do those mothers feel about killing off their children? How do they feel about paying for that?
Thanks for articulating my own suspicions.
Thank you for your insights. You are not thinking conspiratorially, but perceptively. I think the cover headline struck most of us as off base, particularly in light of the most pro-abortion president ever—who happily touted his anti-life bona fides throughout the campaign through personal appearances and by his choice of speakers at the convention—winning a SECOND term. The article itself legitimately presents some evidence to the cover’s claims, but I think only the most zealous advocates of “choice” perceive an imminent threat to abortion rights, broadly speaking, in this country. But I pray that very soon they will have a legitimate right to be concerned.
What a well reasoned article, thanks!
The Roe decision states that if personhood can be established for the preborn, then Roe collapses and the preborn are entitled to be protected by The Fourteenth Amendment. Since it is a self-evident truth that a human person can only conceive a human person, and it is true that a being who is conceived by a human person cannot be a human thing or a human place, the Time has come to challenge The Supreme Court on their erroneous ruling which denies the self-evident truth that every son or daughter of a human person can only be a human person.
January 12, we celebrated the Baptism of Jesus. We renewed our Baptismal promises. We reject satan and all that leads us into evil. We profess our faith! We are taught to discern with wisdom. We are called to the neighbors to show the love of Jesus and invite them to share in the mass. Truly, when we focus on living Jesus, even as we breathe, many more will be called. Then TIME can replace evil with the good!! No weapon formed against us shall prosper!! Isaiah 54:17
Personally I can’t imagine TIME ever trying to toss pro-life a crumb, so Pia DeSolenni is on target with her analysis. The TIME article is a call to arms for the pro-choice folks to start making noise in defense of tax dollars awarded to Planned Parenthood. A few brave members of Congress (very few) have introduced legislation to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. PP claims that most of the funding is not for abortion but for “women’s health services” such as mammograms and pap smears, but that is demonstrably untrue, as evidenced by the horrifying number of abortions they perform each year. Pro-choicers will once again claim that poor women are being denied basic health care services, and demand that the dollars for death will continue to flow. Maybe TIME has been losing its pro-life subscribers.
Although it has never dawned on me to ever purchase a Time magazine since many, many years ago, Pia I am pleased you had the stomach for it. You confirmed my suspicion that the editors of Time could be up to nothing except no good when caught entirely off guard by the cover I’d spotted in the supermarket aisle around Christmas time. Imagine the irony of it. As Christians around the world celebrated the birth of Christ, Time had the audacity to offer an unabashed pro-abortion cover story set in gift wrap like sheep’s clothing on a wolf. Of course, that is the very nature of abortion advocacy and provision - deception. Kudos to you dear woman.
This was my response to the Time article.
SUBJECT: What Choice? Abortion-rights activists won an epic victory in Roe v. Wade. They’ve been losing ever since.
Professional Journalism is characterized by a direct presentation of the facts or description of an event without interpretation and without using the censorship of political correctness that distorts or side-steps the question central to the debate; does the new preborn life in utero have the right to be born and does it supersede a woman’s to choose his or her death. “Who” or “what” is in the womb seems to have no weight in the debate when in fact it is fundamental to the prolife position. One wonders how you can write so much and say so little about the male or female person about to be dismembered; we know from science, experience, and common sense that a preborn is person in spite of the irrational Roe/Doe decisions handed down by the 1973 U. S. Supreme Court. They didn’t have to face being dismembered, extracted, and photographed. And when you say scientific advances “complicate” American attitudes about abortion, you not only abuse our rich language, you insult our intelligence; by “complicate” do you mean the sciences reveal evidence that “educate” Americans to believe a preborn life is a person after all? And isn’t the termination of a pregnancy primarily the murder of a male or female zygote, embryo, or fetus, with its consequence being an abortion?
As for the disunity in the prochoice movement, it is minor compared to the muddled prolife groups. As a writer for life for almost forty years, my observations are that we lack the central focus necessary for an early victory. This fact is made apparent by our disarray; hundreds of pro-life groups work to save preborn life, but the downside is that they are disorganized, burdened by fragmentation, duplication, overlap, choir preaching, and are even divided by an intrinsic difference in strategy and tactics. And, in my opinion, we are also burdened by a measure of arrogance where humility should be the rule for drawing all factions together. The waste of millions of dollars, and millions of labor hours, has caused an enormous drain from our potential strength. If prolife leaders were more willing to humbly relinquish authority and to merge forces, by sheer force of numbers, our power and influence would be magnified a hundredfold. In marketing the first order of business is to measure our successes, and our failures, and then to implement change if and where necessary. Had prolife groups been united on a clearly defined marketing strategy, under a central command, abortion would have ended decades ago.
Charles N. Marrelli
Writers for Life
Irvine, CA 92620
prolifedigest.com
Who believes anything that Time or the New York Times prints?
The pro-life side of things may have made legal gains, I think the gains are way outweighted by the decline in morality. And I am not really sure people are nearly as pro-life as the polls would indicate. Contraceptives, including the abortafacient Pill and IUD, are widely used by people. And I suspect for most people, it is difficult to be Pro-life when faced with a “problematic” pregnancy, whether it be Down’s Syndrome, heart defect, Spina Bifida, etc. I know people who are solid conservatives poltically, who will nevertheless defend contraceptive use, childlessness (by choice), a relative’s abortion, etc.
I wish my local Catholic School wouldn’t do ‘Time for Kids’ worksheets. They promote mainstream media’s ideals. Talking to the principal tomorrow. Ug.
All we have to do is wait as these magazines (and newspapers) get progressively smaller and thinner. They will eventually disappear altogether.
I agree with this article. Something does seem amiss in our culture. I know firsthand people who have had their children (out of wedlock, a “surprise” third child, etc) and not aborted them, but all these same people have exactly the attitude mentioned in this article…that is, they have the child but the environment in which their child (or any child in such a situation) will be raised really doesn’t matter to them. Somehow I get the weird sense that the mere fact of having a child really doesn’t impact people…they just march on with their self centered attitude no matter what. They just fit the child in around their worldview and go on. Don’t get me wrong…I’m glad the children were spared the abortionists knife, but somehow these children are still subject to the unbending selfish attitudes of their parents. The children are still treated like an object that the parents will do with as they wish. When that attitude shifts, then I agree we will really start being a pro-life culture. But for now, even though people seem more inclined to spare their children from an abortion, the parents still have death in their hearts.
In the Catholic culture of life, abortion, contraception, homosexuality, adultery, masturbation and pronography would be felonies. Owning assault weapons to mow down 26 1st graders and school teachers would be a basic civil right.
.
Go figure….
What is pronography, a new sin?
All of the comments seem to indicate that they really had no need to read this article, nor that they really read it.
It was not Pro-life in any sense, but a bitterness that is not a Catholic charism. We are not just anti-culture of death, but we are children of God alive in the spirit, who are followers of the Risen Christ. In all we do, even to complain about Time Magazine, we cannot just be negative about the “enemy.” We recognize that Jesus had enemies that he did not blog about negatively. He did not raise himself up by tearing down others. This is as much the cluture of death, as it is justification through hate, and as St Thomas tells us, this is evil (the privation of Good in an apt subject.)
Until we have compassion for the women who decise for abortions, and compassion does not mean that you support their decision nor change your core beliefs, but until you have compassion, you are not speaking as Christ would, you are not acting in a Christian manner, and your heart and attitude is not truly Catholic.
This publication and the Catholic media needs to stop using hate in place of reporting and Catholic Commentary. The readers need to be challenged in the love of enemies, as it will only be true compassion and not marches and state laws that will make abortion be less of an option and will truly retore the value of life in our society.
Please lets stop the attacks on the souls of those who believe and act differently, and then try to diguise this anti-christ-like act as justified by the end.
In whatever we say or do, it is always a big deal to remain as Christ, even when we think of those who favor abortion. Lowering ourselves to being cruel or insulting even to these is not what Christ would have us be and do. If we are to be the light, we cannot act as if we are darkness.
“...as it will only be true compassion and not marches andstate laws that will make abortion be less of an option..”
Rich, to address your concern. I attended the Walk for Life last year in S.F. When (very, very few) protestors tried to stop the march by forming a line linking hands crossing the street or shouting and making gestures, the response I heard and joined in was a chant, “God loves you, God loves you….....”.
When our march was stopped right in front of me. I heard the man next to me say, “Let the police take care of it.” The thousands behind me waited patiently for civility an order to be restored.
I also suggest that you visit a pregnancy center and view the compassion that pervades the place.
How more Christian can human beings be?
Howard - You can never think that you are doing better than others just by marching. Marching is not visiting a pregnancy center, and there are many pregnancy centers that are run and assisted by people who hold themselves as pro-choice, and they work for the woman to chose birth as opposed to abortion. Compassion for pregnant women is not excusive to pro-life pregnancy center workers.
All human beings can be more Christian. If we have arrived at prefection, then we no longer need God’s grace. We can not limit our compassion to pregnancy centers, as that is not the only things that are influencing women to consider abortion. We have to have compassion in out taxes and in our neighborhoods.
The culture of death is not changed by saying we have done all that we need to by having pregnancy centers and marches. Until we stop having others as enemies we contribute to the culture of death, that is the culture that is not the life-giving response to our Lord who commanded us to love one another, and even our enemies.
I appreciate your comments, and the love of peace the permeates through the march you were involved in. Civility does change culture from death to life, and I thank you for that reminder. Still, there is nothing in this article that suggests anything that you remind us of. That is my criticism. Marches and rallies are great when they bring about good, and are not just a chance to talk badly about other people. How many times did Christ encounter a person who was considered evil and his response was to be moved by compassion. Why do not our stories about being FOR LIFE, also encourage us to be FOR CHRIST in all we say and do. Surely that is not too much to ask for those who love the Lord.
Well said. I hadn’t thought of that side of the coin. Thanks for writing.
Rich, I think you demand that everyone work towards a pro-life America EXACTLY as you feel called. I also read that you assume that because one method is mentioned, that is the totality efforts.
You make too many assumptions.
Unity would be better served by your recognizing there are others in our Catholic family who use the gifts given by God in many ways.
“…and there are many pregnancy centers that are run and assisted by people who hold themselves as pro-choice, and they work for the woman to chose birth as opposed to abortion. Compassion for pregnant women is not excusive to pro-life pregnancy center workers.”
Rich, it just occurred to me what you have said.
Pro-choice centers (planned parenthood?) and people have NO COMPASSION for the unborn! If they did they would not be pro-choice, they would be pro-life.
Are you sure you have the right idea about all of this?
Yes Howard I am quite sure that I have the right idea about Christ demanding us to love our enemies? Why are you looking for a way to justify hate? By doing that you play right into molding the culture into death.
I demanded nothing of how you continue the work of a living church. Just make sure you are really being pro-life and not just anti-abortionist. I agree totally with your statement about Unity, but unity is not served, it is the way in which we respond to the spirit of God in our lives. There are many gifts, and some of the gifts for the kingdom are given by God’s choice to those that do not always see eye to eye with us.
I am sure you may think you know the hearts of others, but I can assure you that that belongs only to the Creator. If you want to hold your mythology that everyone who is pro-choice lacks compassion, then they are not better or worse than you in your demonstration of lacking compassion and understanding, and for seeking God in all things.
Jesus did not go the the tomb just so people could feel superior when they do the right thing. He warned against this many times. Those who live in the spirit, live the life of the risen Lord, and do not waste their time trying to find ways to hate or dislike or demean others.
The evil of abortion in not just what occurs in a clinic, but the injustice and lack of compassion that leads some people to think that abortion is not just a valid option, but a necessary one. I hope you are committed to bringing Christ justice into the world and not just changing the law on abortion. The compassion is not just needed in crisis pregnancy centers where people who are both pro-life and pro-choice work for much good, as gifted by God above.
Finally you know little about Planned Parenthood if you think all they are involved in is abortion. They do great work whether you agree with the organization or not. The work with STDs and Cancer prevention is good work, and is why the government awards them grants in the same way they do to Catholic Charities. They often do work that Catholic Charities is unwilling or unable to do, and many people are healthier today because of it.
“If you want to hold your mythology that everyone who is pro-choice lacks compassion…”
.
Preacher Rich, I think you need a course in reading comprehension you are making wild accusations..
.
Maybe I can make it clearer this way. NO ONE who agrees to an abortion shows compassion for the innocent person they agree should be killed. That does not mean that they cannot have compassion for something else. The whole purpose of the pro-life movement is to speak up for the UNBORN. The mother’s problems are separate from the right of an unborn child to live. The pro-life movement does address her problems with compassion as well.
.
Telling someone, like you, that taking the life of the unborn is not hate. It is our duty as Christians to protect the weak and innocent.
.
“The evil of abortion in not just what occurs in a clinic.”
.
If you are trying this fuzzy thinking on me it won’t work. An abortion happens only by the accent of the mother. Civilized people do not agree to taking a life that has not offended anyone to solve personal problems. You cannot hold hostage an unborn child because you think that is the way to solve the difficulties of life, or, more to the point get rid of an unwanted person when birth control fails. Try your phony excuses on someone else.
.
“Planned Parenthood’s business model is centered on abortion. Former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson has written that she was given an “abortion quota” and was even told by her superiors to double the number of abortions in order to bring in more revenue. Abortion patients constitute 12 percent of Planned Parenthood clients—332,000 of 3 million unduplicated clients in its most current report. 37 percent of all Planned Parenthood clinic income revenue is from abortion procedures, according to conservative estimates. Planned Parenthood has issued a directive instructing that all affiliates must have at least one clinic that performs abortion by 2013.”
http://www.sba-list.org/suzy-b-blog/top-12-reasons-defund-planned-parenthood-now
Oh, I knew they couldn’t be happy about it. That doesn’t surprise me. But don’t be discouraged—let’s just say their cronies aren’t the only ones who got a windfall. Some great organizations also were handed a mixed gift in the form of an Obama second term. I can’t reveal more.
Rich:
“...there are many pregnancy centers that are run and assisted by people who hold themselves as pro-choice, and they work for the woman to chose birth as opposed to abortion. Compassion for pregnant women is not excusive to pro-life pregnancy center workers.”
-
Not where I live. All of them, without any exception that I know of, are run by pro-lifers.
-
“Finally you know little about Planned Parenthood if you think all they are involved in is abortion.”
-
No, it’s just a majority of their earned income, that’s all!
-
“They do great work whether you agree with the organization or not. The work with STDs and Cancer prevention is good work, and is why the government awards them grants in the same way they do to Catholic Charities. They often do work that Catholic Charities is unwilling or unable to do, and many people are healthier today because of it.”
-
Any of it that is so exclusive it couldn’t be done as well or better by an organization that doesn’t kill for money? I find that remark about Catholic Charities odd. I’m guessing if they won’t do something, there’s probably a reason.
‘Hilary’ is it now?
Somebody’s cut and paste function is working overtime.
Is abortion murder? When the topic abortion comes up most people become silent, but are offensive at the same time. It’s 2013 and although some people are for abortion and some are against it, the issue has not been resolved. My 15 year old daughter recently found out I had an abortion before she was born. She is prolife and now is very upset with me. She told me that I was a murderer! I told her she was grounded and it has caused more drama in our home. She plays a Prolife song loudly in her room by a writer/singer named Evon Latrail. The song is entitle “Can’t You See” (Abortion Is Murder). She is not allowed to play her music loud, but she’s doing it because of a choice that I made. I got a package in the mail, and it was the song written by, Evon Latrail from my daughter. I told my daughter that I did not regret my choice. After
listening to the song I’m not sure about the choice that I made even though it was years ago.What should I do? What are your views on abortion? Can a song change the way I feel or is it my daughter? Have you heard, Evon Latrail’s prolife song? Have you ever interviewed her?
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
The time period for commenting on this article has expired.