On November 11, wildly hypocritical pro-abort HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced the FDA was considering forcing cigarette companies to include graphic warnings on their packaging. I’m highlighting a few of the the proposed images throughout this post. All 36 can be viewed here.
As I said, pro-abort Sebelius is wildly – no, insanely – hypocritical. Whatever, in light of this, Theodore King at The Daily Caller has hit on a fabulous idea:
… This is the same Kathleen Sebelius who, as the governor of Kansas, was a supporter of “a woman’s right to choose” abortion and was a protector and defender of the late-term abortion “doctor” George Tiller of Wichita….
When the government gives itself the power to post in-your-face, gruesome warning labels in order to nudge public behavior, that power can work in other ways. It may come to pass that some pro-life state legislatures might just decide to post gruesome warning signs inside the waiting rooms of abortion clinics. Just imagine those posters of aborted babies going from the hands of pro-life protester Randall Terry smack dab into the waiting rooms at Planned Parenthood clinics as required by law.
This would be a real challenge to those who say they want abortions to be legal, safe, and rare, many of whom want smoking to be illegal and so rare as to become non-existent. Women with a crisis pregnancy could decide not to abort their babies once they see photos of aborted babies. Those photos in abortion clinics can save lives, and isn’t that what… Sebelius wants? It seems that she may have unwittingly opened a Pandora’s Box with these new in-your-face, like-it-or-not labels on packs of smokes forced by government fiat on taxpaying smokers. Yes, smoking, which is enjoyable, may eventually kill; and, yes, abortions, which are not enjoyable, will immediately kill.
Seriously, in light of recent pro-abort attacks against pregnancy care centers in Baltimore, Austin, and New York City demanding “truth in advertising,” and in light of the FDA’s plans to force an industry to post graphic images showing the truth about its product, I think it would behoove pro-life state governments and/or municipalities to force abortion mills to post graphic photos of aborted babies.
Seriously. How could the other side legally win an argument against it? Graphic signs could also show perforated uteruses, mastectomies, hemorrhaging, and dying post-abortive mothers.
[HT: Missy Smith]