Pro-aborts are both afraid of and pleased by the large bloc of pure pro-life congressional candidates who have no rape/incest exception – 63 at last count.
Pro-aborts are afraid because they know pro-life stalwarts like these won’t weaken, won’t compromise, if elected.
Pro-aborts are pleased because they know a number of Americans have trouble with the rape/incest exception, even if they lean pro-life. It is a heart-catching wedge issue.
But apparently pro-aborts don’t trust the rape/incest exception to be enough, so they have to kick it up a notch to a fabricated, untenable conclusion: that pro-lifers with no exceptions want to see aborting mothers jailed.
Hence, this new ad by NARAL New York against solidly pro-life GOP gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino, who is running against Catholic Democrat pro-abort Andrew Cuomo…
NARAL began running this ad September 29 afternoons in the NYC/Albany/Buffalo areas, to reach “the critical demographic of women aged 18-64,” according to its press release. NARAL didn’t list a dollar amount it was spending, so it must not be much. If NARAL’s history is a guide, it was expecting to get most of its ad’s bang from press coverage. In its release NARAL stated:
“… If these are Carl Paladino’s positions on abortion, then he certainly doesn’t support Roe v. Wade and would be perfectly satisfied if abortion were made illegal,” said Mary Alice Carr, VP for Communications.
The ad shows women getting their mug shots taken to emphasize the implications of Carl Paladino’s dangerous position on abortion: if abortion is made a crime, then women will be treated like criminals.
This claim rests on not 1 but 2 falsehoods:
First, the almost uniform state policy before Roe was that abortion laws targeted abortionists, not women…. In fact… state courts expressly called the woman a second “victim”….
Second, the myth that women will be jailed relies on the myth that “overturning” Roe will result in the immediate re-criminalization of abortion. If Roe was overturned today, abortion would be legal in at least 42-43 states tomorrow, and likely all 50 states, for the simple reason that nearly all of the state abortion prohibitions have been either repealed or are blocked by state versions of Roe adopted by state courts.
Common sense would dictate that we look back to pre-Roe days when abortion was illegal, to see how illegally aborting mothers were treated. According to Forsythe:
… There are only 2 cases in which a woman was charged in any State with participating in her own abortion: from PA in 1911 and from TX in 1922.
There is no documented case since 1922 in which a woman was even charged in an abortion in the United States.
That’s 88 years.
How effective will pro-abort scare tactics like this be in the 2010 elections? There is evidence that even pro-abort voters are jumping ship for Republican candidates even if pro-life. Liberals and MSM constantly claim social issues don’t matter, and they may not this year – to the pro-abort voter anyway, which is fine.
So for this particular election, it doesn’t appear pro-abort scare tactics will have any or much of an impact.
But what pro-life bloggers and commenters can do is take the platform pro-aborts have handed us and combat this message by educating readers on these important topics of rape/incest and what post-Roe America will look like legally while they’re getting attention.
[Painting: "Rape of Tamar," c 1640]