At Townhall on Sunday, I applauded the Women’s March on Washington for being peaceful, despite Madonna’s F‑bomb laden speech, culminating with her daydream of “blowing up the White House.”
We’ll never know how many more folks marched in that much-heralded event than attended last weekend’s pro-life march, because the mainstream media did not pay enough attention to the later, inconvenient-to-their-narrative event, and crowd-counters didn’t count.
The two marches did “intersect” (figuratively) when a pro-life group was kicked out as a “partner” to the women’s march.
“If you want to come to the march you are coming with the understanding that you respect a woman’s right to choose [abortion],” declared Linda Sarsour, one of four chairwomen for the women’s march, who was described by the New York Times as “a Brooklyn-born Palestinian-American Muslim racial justice and civil-rights activist.”
In its favor, the pro-life march, anti-celebrating the 44th year since the Roe v. Wade decision, had far more tasteful placards — despite the fact that pro-life protesters are often remembered for grisly signs picturing aborted fetuses. I particularly liked a sign held by a young women, reading:
“We are having a clump of cells.” — [said] No One Ever
Speaking of young people, Slate magazine reported that “the demographic outlook for the pro-life movement looks anything but bleak,” citing a 2015 poll wherein “52 percent of millennials said the label ‘pro-life’ describes them somewhat or very well.”
Remember, the pro-life movement has been marching all these years not to secure government benefits for themselves, but to protect others.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
6 replies on “Women and Men for Life”
Thanks Paul, I appreciate this piece, especially coming from a fellow libertarian.
A “Muslim racial justice and civil-rights activist.”! The oxymoron is breathtaking.
Doesn’t respecting ‘a woman’s right to choose’ indicate there are two perfectly valid options? Obviously Ms. Sarsour doesn’t believe respect is accorded those who choose life.
The one thing to be thankful for is that the ‘pro-choicers’ will bring about their own demise. No kids to carry on their cause,.
Linda Sarsour is a very interesting figure to have as a co-chairwoman of the Women’s March. In the commentary ABOVE I link “civil-rights activist” to her Tweet, saying, “10 weeks of PAID maternity leave in Saudi Arabia. Yes PAID. And ur worrying about women driving. Puts us to shame.”
https://twitter.com/lsarsour/status/534073703588700160
So much for civil rights. I guess she prefers gov’t forcing her employer to offer a benefit over having equal rights. How many women marchers would agree to trade the right to drive for a gov’t order that employers pay 10 weeks of maternity leave?
Here’s another Tweet of her’s sent to me by a friend: “Brigitte Gabriel = Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She’s asking 4 an a$$ whippin’. I wish I could take their vaginas away- they don’t deserve to be women.”
https://twitter.com/ShireenQudosi/status/824762593940164608/photo/1
Shameful statements.
More on Ayaan Hirsi Ali here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayaan_Hirsi_Ali
I’m reminded of Barbara Branden’s response to a question, “What about the poor?” She said, “If you want to help them you won’t be stopped.” The subject of that passive verb is clearly “by the state.” I feel the same way about giving birth: “If you want to give birth or not give birth, it’s none of the state’s business… and certainly not mine.”
I’m with Brian. When is a person a person? To me it’s a function of the ability to survive without the mother. That probably is sometime in the third trimester of pregnancy. Regardless of my opinion, which I admit to being arbitrary and capricious. However, as Brian wrote: “…it’s none of the state’s business…and certainly not mine.”