tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post5370122056080948557..comments2023-09-11T08:30:08.843-07:00Comments on Life Training Institute Blog: Hey Pro-lifers: We are Not Winning [Serge]SKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01905606527143286458noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post-54321607730751180092013-02-05T07:06:11.014-08:002013-02-05T07:06:11.014-08:00I must respectfully disagree with this post. Reca...I must respectfully disagree with this post. Recall that the cover of the magazine reads, "[Abortion-rights activists have] been losing ever since [Roe v. Wade]”. It does not say, "Pro-life activists have won the abortion battle". Nobody is trying to claim that all aspects of this issue are lined up exactly how pro-lifers want them to be (the laws are perfectly just, the right politicians are in office, public opinion is fully in line with the pro-life position, and the number of babies being killed by abortion is virtually zero).<br /><br />It is undeniable that the results of the 2012 elections were disappointing at the federal level. However, an important thing to note is that they were not a wide scale rejection of the pro-life position. Instead, the GOP banked on the referendum model. The leadership bet the farm on the economy, avoiding social issues like the plague and leaving individual candidates to fend for themselves instead of training them to effectively communicate the pro-life message. Meanwhile, Obama was able to rally his pro-abortion base and win a second term despite record high unemployment. Marjorie Dannenflaser said it well: You cannot win a war that you do not fight.<br /><br />As for the Gallup poll numbers, they don’t show that most people actually take the true pro-life position. They also show that we have work to do in convincing pro-lifers to make this their threshold issue when casting a vote. Only 17% of self-described pro-lifers are committed enough to do so – we need that number to be approaching 100%. What they do, however, show is that pro-lifers have successfully reframed the debate in terms of the life of the unborn rather than a woman’s right to choose. This is attributable to the bitter debate over partial-birth abortion and the development of better ultrasounds, making the humanity of the unborn impossible to ignore. Certainly, most people have not yet connected all of the dots. But framing the debate is essential to winning it.<br /><br />The HHS mandate, which includes at least one abortifacient drug, is probably the strongest example of a policy change favourable to abortion proponents. However, all we need to neutralize or completely repeal it is a pro-life president in office. On the other hand, almost all of the legislation passed in 2011-12 restricted abortion. You object by suggesting that women will just travel to another city if the local abortion clinic is forced to close. But the same argument could be made about overturning Roe (at the state level) or even ratifying a Human Life Amendment (at the national level). Surely no rational pro-lifer would dismiss these as insignificant. As noted in the Time article, wider hallways doesn’t sound particularly exciting to people on either side. But the prospect of fewer abortion clinics is nothing to scoff at, especially in the states that are down to their last one. Furthermore, there is a strong correlation between abortion access and abortion incidence:<br /><br />http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/pro-life-states-have-lower-abortion.html<br /><br />So fewer abortion clinics means fewer lives lost.<br /><br />You also did not address several other important points in the article. Namely, abortion proponents are on the defensive and have failed to normalize the procedure they promote (which becomes harder and harder as the unborn child becomes more visible through new technology). Abortionists and abortion proponents also face a wide generational gap, but there are many young pro-life activists enthusiastic about defending the unborn.<br /><br />While you deny that your post is “loser talk”, I’m afraid that’s exactly what it seems like. I see lots of complaining about what’s wrong, but no insight into what pro-lifers need to do to end abortion or what they have/haven’t been doing effectively over the last 40 years. Without any of that, I must say that this post is no more helpful than the purely congratulatory posts that pro-lifers supposedly spend all of their time writing.Navinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post-65305599140491097522013-01-11T07:41:44.763-08:002013-01-11T07:41:44.763-08:00We’re delusional if we think that the pro-abortion...We’re delusional if we think that the pro-abortion side isn’t winning. I agree with everything Rich wrote, and would add a couple more:<br /><br />1. We completely forget all the babies that are killed by chemical means instead of surgical. Abortifacent drugs are killing more babies than surgical abortions. You don’t need to go to Planned Parenthood to get an abortion. You can go to a Target or Walmart.<br /><br />2. It’s only a matter of time until some scientist in the US or foreign country discovers some medical knowledge using stem cells from aborted babies. The fact that something is evil doesn’t mean it’s not effective. After that happens, we’ll not only be anti-woman for opposing abortion, we’ll be anti-medicine. If you think it's hard being pro-life now, try opposing abortion after Americans believe that embryo-killing is necessarily for medical discovery. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post-16901132218877229102013-01-08T04:30:43.236-08:002013-01-08T04:30:43.236-08:00so true...thanksso true...thanksTheresanoreply@blogger.com