Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Matt Vespa

Bio

May 6, 2013 - 2:49 pm

Kirsten Powers at Daily Beast made a shocking comparison – legislatively speaking – concerning the Gosnell trial and the abortion rights movement in her column today.  They’ve become “the NRA of the left.”  She eviscerates the pro-abort argument in the first two paragraphs, saying how Gosnell’s clinic wasn’t:

“illegal…it was a licensed medical facility. The state of his clinic was well known: there were repeated complaints to government officials and even the local Planned Parenthood.”

[...]

Gosnell was not forced to operate in the dark because of anti–abortion rights regulations. It’s the opposite: he was able to flourish—pulling in $1.8 million a year—because multiple abortion rights administrations decided that to inspect his clinic might mean limiting access to abortion. It’s all in the grand jury report, if you don’t believe me.

 But that’s just the beginning.

Towards the end of her column, Powers admits that – as a liberal – she’s for more government regulation of “practically everything,” but is stupefied that when it comes to abortion, pro-aborts take a rather laissez faire position.

More and more, the abortion rights community has become the NRA of the left: unleashing their armies of supporters and lobbyists in opposition to regulations or restrictions that the majority of Americans support. In the same way the NRA believes background checks will lead to the government busting down your door to confiscate your guns, the abortion rights movement conjures a straight line from parental consent to a complete ban on abortion.

Now, you may disagree over the rights Powers is using in this analysis, but it’s true that just as the right is vociferous about their Second Amendment rights, the left will do anything to protect infanticide. The only difference is the right to bear arms is explicitly clear in the U.S. Constitution, while the right to an abortion isn’t.  Roe v. Wade gave those rights, and we’ve been in a cultural mess every since 1973.  Additionally, it’s murder, and government laws concerning the prosecution of murderous individuals is rather nonpartisan.

Powers, a former Democratic operative, should be commended for her courage for calling late-term abortion “legal infanticide.”  In the body of her piece, she noted that:

medical advances since Roe v. Wade have made it clear to me that late-term abortion is not a moral gray area, and we need to stop pretending it is. No six-months-pregnant woman is picking out names for her ‘fetus. It’s a baby. Let’s stop playing Orwellian word games. We are talking about human beings here.”   She also thinks that life begins at conception.

Concerning the media, she’s disconcerted that:

that so many people in the media seem untroubled by the idea that 12 inches in one direction is “private medical decision” and 12 inches in the other direction causes people to react in horror, should be troubling. Indeed, Gosnell’s defense attorney Jack J. McMahon has relied on the argument that Gosnell killed the babies prior to delivering them, therefore he is not guilty of murder. His exact words were: “Every one of those babies died in utero.”

Although, in liberal fantasyland, Powers should tread carefully since she’s acting like a misogynist.

Matt Vespa is a conservative blogger who contributes to CNS News, RedState, Noodle Pundit, and was formerly with Hot Air's GreenRoom.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (3)
All Comments   (3)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
"The only difference is the right to bear arms is explicitly clear in the U.S. Constitution, while the right to an abortion isn’t."

That's not the only difference. There's also the fact the right to keep and bear arms is *never* legitimately used to kill children -- whereas killing children is the only thing abortion does, legitimately or otherwise.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
My concern is that it is being played as a poisoned pawn. It's basically saying "killing babies and owning guns are equal acts and should both be treated as evil", even though the two are COMPLETELY different concepts. Even if this started a trend, all we'd end up with would be the Left pretending they're reasonable for backing away from hardline infanticide, while demanding we disarm in return.

In any case, once they have disarmed us, they can bring back the infanticide at their leisure. We can talk about votes to get rid of them and fix the laws, but they corrupt the voting process. After all, who's going to stop them? How?

I'm not sure if she does mean it as part of a larger play, but I'm suspicious.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It is a valid simile. Powers has always been anti-abortion, one of the few ways she departs from the Party line. She is the one who made them sit up and take notice of the trial.

What I find amusing is that she can see the equivalence, and can see the dishonesty, yet it does not occur to her, that she is much like them.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
View All