The “Gift” of Death -- Part Two of Two

Most of the limited coverage I read of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s speech Sunday at Ahavath Achim synagogue in Atlanta dealt with her two observations. First, that she did not feel Roe v. Wade would be overturned. Second, that if Roe were swept up into the dustbin of history, she "not believe" it would "prevent women of means from accessing an abortion" but would "have a devastating impact on poor women,” according to the Associated Press.

In Part Two, let’s look at her second conclusion. It is very instructive to see where Planned Parenthood typically plants its flag. Does any pro-lifer doubt that the preponderance of their clinics is located either in low-income areas or in close-by suburbs where poorer women can still use their services? Would even PPFA deny this?

What a bizarre argument for maintaining the legal status quo, where 1.3 million unborn children each year are torn apart, poisoned, crushed, and--in the case of  older babies-- made to suffer unimaginable pain. If Roe and Doe are overturned, the children of wealthier women will suffer the torment, the injustice of abortion, but the babies of women of lesser means won’t.

PPFA targets poor women because it knows that many of these women are raised in a home that honors the lives of the unborn. PPFA believes, in its own demented way, that it is provided a  benevolent “service” to poorer women. Without the omnipresent PPFA in their neighborhoods, these women might carry their babies to term.

It is no accident that an organization whose founders’ ideology was grounded (at best) in eugenic assumptions, or  (at worse) in blatantly racist assessments should nearly a hundred years later still be helping to assure that poorer women have abortions wildly out of proportion to their numbers.

What a “gift”—the gift of death.

Please send your comments or questions to Dave Andrusko at daveandrusko@hotmail.com.

Part One