Why The Abortion Industry Thinks They’re Losing

To listen to the water-carriers for the abortion industry talk, one would think the racket is in serious danger of drying up. Time Magazine’s recent cover made it out as though the forty years since Roe vs. Wade have been one long non-stop display of misery for those in the corporate world who reap the benefit of over $500 million in government funding for Planned Parenthood.

The Time cover—which stated that abortion advocates had been losing ever since Roe manages to ignore the political arrangement in which every presidential candidate in a major party comes to dutifully bow down to the dons of the abortion mafia with the same reverence that Amerigo Bonasera approached Don Corleone. (“What do want of me? I’ll do anything you ask.”). If you took the Time cover seriously you might assume that Hollywood cranked out movies and TV shows which persistently cast pro-abortion activists in a negative light rather than vice-versa.

So apparently a United States where forty million innocents end up dead each year (since  Roe v Wade), where the Democratic Party’s presidential nominating process has been bought off and Hollywood is a fully owned subsidiary, is not enough for the champions of the lucrative abortion rackets. Nor is the re-election of a president who believes that infants on the operating table aren’t worthy of legal protection.  One wonders what exactly they do want.

To this comes New York Times columnist Gail Collins, who in a column that mostly whines about how difficult the abortion movement has it, makes a few revealing comments.

“Abortion clinics around the country are reeling under crazy new rules that make it impossible for them to operate”

And what might be these “crazy new rules”? Why don’t we let Gail tell us…

“In Virginia, the state board of health is demanding that clinics follow the same architectural standards as hospitals”

“In Texas, the Legislature is considering a law that would require that all abortions be performed in ambulatory surgical centers.”

“In Mississippi, the state’s one and only abortion clinic, the Jackson Women’s Health Organization, is in danger of closing because of a new law requiring that any doctor who does abortions have admitting privileges at a local hospital.”

Yeah, that’s all pretty rough. Basically Gail’s idea of crazy new rules are the ones that suggest the abortion racket be subjected to the same type of regulation as health care—you know, the same type of health care that the proponents of legalized abortion insist their favorite practice is really all about.

In this respect though—the question of abortion as health care—is something where perhaps Collins and Time are on to something. Whatever people believe about whether the innocent unborn should merit legal protection, the broad mainstream has a deep discomfort about abortion that doesn’t exist about any other health-care procedure. Which is an indicator that maybe deep down they know it’s not health care at all.

Collins herself notes that the Mississippi regulation that’s so onerous would be less so if not for the fact that hospitals don’t want to give doctors who perform abortions admitting privileges. Again, maybe that’s because deep down people understand that this has never been about health care.

The abortion industry and its Amen Corner like Time and Collins want it all—they want abortion to be accepted as true health care, while not playing by the same rules. Maybe even they too, know that it’s really not health care, regardless of how hard they protest otherwise. Even after forty years something–or Someone–is there tugging at human hearts.

Dan Flaherty is the author of Fulcrum, an Irish Catholic novel set in postwar Boston with a traditional Democratic mayoral campaign at its heart, and he is the editor-in-chief of TheSportsNotebook.com