Pro-Abortionists Spin Furiously But “Life is Winning Again in America”

By Dave Andrusko

National Right to Life

Having written my share of book reviews, I know the added blessing that comes along when you are evaluating/critiquing multiple books on the same topic. You can go hither and yon and correct/deepen the arguments made.

Which brings us to a review (under the headline, “The Abortion Battlefield”) of two new pro-abortion books by a fellow pro-abortionist, Marcia Angell.

For those with good memories, you will recall that at one time Angell was the Editor in Chief of The New England Journal of Medicine. We have written about her several times, plus including a post by Wesley J. Smith in which Wesley took her to task for her outright embrace not of abortion (in this instance) but of euthanasia—“even for those who can’t ask for it themselves.”

In 2012 I wrote about a hysterical opinion piece she co-authored for USA Today in which the authors harshly critiqued “an unprecedented and sweeping legal assault on women’s reproductive rights” and called on “Physicians, both as individuals and as a profession” to “stand with their patients,” including by acts of civil disobedience!

In other words, the New York Review of Books was not asking an impartial observer to review two books, but a passionate pro-abortion partisan.

Her review is interesting, not for the pro-abortion sound bites or the warmed-over anti-male “feminism,” but what she concedes or misses. For example, immediately after the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, 

“Legal abortions rapidly became common.” Or “antiabortion organizations were formed, such as the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), which had millions of members and chapters in every state by the late 1970.” So, Roe meant a proliferation of abortions and the impetus for grassroots pro-life resistance.

There immediately followed this odd sentence: 

“Like the Catholic Church, [NRLC’s] focus was on protecting the embryo (defined as less than eight weeks’ gestation) or fetus—both usually referred to as the “unborn child”—through legal and legislative strategies.” 

Actually, from the get-go NRLC opposed all abortions at all stages. Nowhere in Angell’s review is there a hint at the atrocities performed experimentally on often very mature unborn children which were grotesque even by pro-abortion standards.

National Right to Life article continues