Monday, January 3, 2011

Fletch MTV Abortion Programme

Andrei posted about this a little bit the other day, but MTV had a show recently devoted to following some girls who have an abortion. Lori Ziganto over at Big Journalism posts a scathing review of the show and it's abortion sales pitch ("it's just a 'ball of cells'") to youth. It's worth reading the entire post, but some snippets -

The show was entirely agenda-driven and these young girls were sickly used and exploited for that purpose only. The token nod to a pro-life position was a quick question in the discussion panel: “Did you consider adoption?” One of the girls said that wouldn’t have been an option because it wasn’t the baby part that was scary; it was that pregnancy is icky. She had an abortion to avoid pregnancy symptoms. Another spoke of the sacrifices (her word) that she had to make to pay the $750.00 abortion fee. Her prom ticket, for one.
Sacrifice was a running theme, except it appears that the word has lost any real meaning. The girls spoke of not wanting to sacrifice their college plans. Or of not wanting their partners to sacrifice by having to work two jobs to support another child. And  Markai spoke of not wanting her living infant child to “sacrifice for my mistake.” Such rationales were among the most heartbreaking because it’s what we’ve been teaching our youth with society’s insidious entitlement mentality. There is no right to life, but there is a right to college and a right to not be poor. We can’t put a child through going without food or losing electricity for a few days; losing one’s LIFE is far preferable. 
Much was also made about how terrible it is that sometimes an abortion is made slightly more difficult to obtain. During the panel discussion, Natalia complained about how hard it is to have to “beg a judge for permission to make your own decision”, due to parental consent laws. She did receive a judicial bypass. The reason? She didn’t want to tell her parents and disappoint them. How on earth does that constitute a reason for a judicial bypass of parental consent? How does it supersede parental rights? That judge should be thrown off the bench. Worse, Natalia went without the love and support of her family in a time when she needed it most. Where is the compassion there? Where is the “informed” choice? Salon jumped right on the parental consent laws, calling them cruel.

(In an extended interview available online, Natalia also describes the cruelty of being legally forced to view the pre-procedure ultrasound.)
Cruelty? If actual informed choice, instead of lip service informed choice, is cruel. See, that whole ball of cells lie won’t work if a woman sees the actual baby. Of course, to Lynn Harris at Salon and pro-abortionists like her, that is cruel, yet there’s nothing cruel about making life expendable nor about disposing of a life before he or she even had a chance at A life. That matters naught to leftists. The only people who think the fear of being grounded by their parents is more important than a life itself are people who remain immature and child-like their entire lives. To wit, leftists. They never grew up, they never stopped rebelling against their parents. And they are attempting to teach the same to each subsequent generation. Don’t tell your parents! A super awesome nanny state judge will let you do whatever you want, decency be damned. It’s funny how much they dislike mommies and daddies, but they love them some Nannies.

We need more people posting like this, showing abortion for what it really is, not the propaganda of a music television station, aired ad-free with support from with Exhale, a group who says that they wish to raise awareness that abortion “is normal in the reproductive lives of women and girls.”

0 comment(s):

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.