On November 6, the Chicago Tribune nicely advanced the abortion industry’s talking points regarding the Partial Birth Abortion Ban.
Those talking points, which I was in court to hear Wednesday, were that Congress “absolutely betrayed” a 2000 Supreme Court ruling against Nebraska’s partial-birth abortion ban by basically resubmitting the same ban in 2003 that the Court previously ruled was vague and excluded a health exception.
The Trib article will likely be typical of the mainstream media, so I want to address its bias.
You’d think the Trib would have analyzed the issues of vagueness and health between the two bans, but it did not. You’d think the Trib would have at least explained what partial-birth abortion is, but it did not.
Rather, the Tribune led with a tragic story of a mother who “may” have undergone a partial-birth abortion after discovering she was carrying a terminally ill baby, only admitting at the end of the story she didn’t have a partial-birth abortion at all….

Continue reading my column today, “Legitimizing partial-birth abortion” on WND.com.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...