The point of my weekend question about Time magazine’s graphic cover photo of a young Afghan woman who had been mutilated by the Taliban was to expose MSM’s hypocrisy – willing to show the truth about the plight of women in Muslim countries but unwilling to show the truth about the plight of preborn babies in America.

Time was actually taking a step in the right direction. I would guess its readership base is liberals opposed to the Afghanistan War, as is the journalist community, by and large.

So Time was actually confronting them: If we abandon Afghanistan, the abuse of women will certainly continue.

And so the response to Time’s photograph has paralleled the response of abortion supporters to graphic photos of abortion.

For instance, Nancy Pelosi, who opposes the war, averted her eyes when ABC’s Christiane Amanpour confronted her with the photo. Click on the link below to see the video, which begins at 2:30:

And according to the Associated Press, Muslims, some of whose members are committing terrible atrocities against women, also opposed Time’s photo:

At least some commentators, including some writing from Muslim perspectives, are troubled by the photo itself or its placement on the cover of a magazine with a 3.25 million-copy print circulation and a website that drew nearly 9 million unique U.S. viewers last month.

Hofstra University anthropology professor Daniel Martin Varisco wrote on the Islam scholars’ blog, Tabsir, that the cover photo is an “unfortunate example of sensationalized news reporting” that downplays the gains Afghan women have made.

Krista Riley, a sociology graduate student and contributor to a Muslim women’s website, Muslimah Media Watch, finds the photo “invasive and deeply troubling.” To Riley, the image plays into racial divides and cultural distances.

Likewise, abortion supporters understandably oppose the display of graphic photos of aborted babies.

But why do some pro-lifers?