By Dave Andrusko

I must confess that the obvious comparison had slipped right by me until a number of people emailed me a column written by Jeffrey Lord that appeared on the American Spectator website.

He reminds us of a story that you've probably read about in the past 24 hours. The Food and Drug Administration wants cigarette packs and ads to carry (what the Washington Post calls) "bigger, much more prominent and graphic health warnings, including images of dead bodies, cancer patients and diseased lungs."

According to Rob Stein, "The Food and Drug Administration said it is using its newly enhanced powers to regulate tobacco products to require the more prominent warning statements and color graphic images 'depicting the negative health consequences of smoking.'" HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement, "Today marks an important milestone in protecting our children and the health of the American public."

Examples of the warnings? "Cigarettes cause fatal lung disease," Stein writes. "It is shown with the picture of the feet of a dead body in a morgue."

Okay, not to belabor the obvious, two quick points. When pro-lifers show what are typically described as "gruesome" photos of aborted babies, opponents raise the roof, including trying to have them banned.

How would you describe a cigarette pack with a warning that "Smoking can kill you," and which Stein says "shows what appears to be the head and chest of a corpse. The chest is bisected by a large surgical scar"? "Gruesome" comes to mind.

Second, the act of smoking is not being banned. A message is being sent about consequences.

Mr. Lord asks, "If the federal government is now going to be in the business of putting on cigarette packs graphic photos of what happens if one smokes, how long will it take before there is a move in the pro-life community to require abortion clinics to have photographs of aborted babies in their waiting rooms?"

Abortion wouldn't be banned, but the consequences would be on display. And (to borrow from Secretary Sebelius), wouldn't that mark "an important milestone in protecting our children and the health of the American public"?

As Mr. Lord says in conclusion, "Just asking."

Please send your comments on Today's News & Views and National Right to Life News Today to daveandrusko@gmail.com.  If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha