Abortionists’ Latest Ruse: Claim to be Against DV
By: Carey Roberts
Protectors of the innocent unborn need to prepare for the impending assault on the right to life, this time waged under the banner of stopping â€œdomestic violence.â€
Actually, the first volley has already been fired. Democratic senator Barack Obama recently announced his support of the proposed International Violence Against Women Act, a bill the Family Violence Prevention Fund admits is designed to solidify â€œwomenâ€™s access to reproductive health service.â€
Mr. Obama is not the first to cloak the reproductive rights agenda in the domestic violence crusade. For years the rad-fems have been working behind the scenes, laying the groundwork for another frontal attack on the culture of life.
At the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the Ladies of the Left penned a manifesto called â€œReproductive Health Services and Intimate Partner Violence.â€ This document sheds crocodile tears over the fact that â€œviolence and reproductive health often remain distinct, despite the framing of both issues as essential components of womenâ€™s human rights.â€
Abortionists often wave the bloody flag that abortion must be legalized or else women will die. Of course they never mention that effective medical treatments are available to save an imperiled womanâ€™s life.
But the public is beginning to see through the subterfuge. So the pro-abortionists have devised a new argument that goes something like this: We have an epidemic of men who abuse their wives and force themselves on their girlfriends. Ergo, the solution is to grant women the right to abort.
Letâ€™s say it politely: Shame on these people for telling such lies.
Professor Murray Straus at the University of New Hampshire is the worldâ€™s leading researcher on family violence. Earlier this year Dr. Straus published the results of his 32-nation survey of dating couples. This is what he found:
1. Fewer than 11% of couples had engaged in any incident of serious partner aggression in the past year, proving that physical violence between partners is fairly uncommon.
2. Two-thirds of the time the violence was mutual â€“ she slapped him, he shoved her. One of those tit-for-tat affairs.
3. And hereâ€™s the shocker: Women were twice as likely to initiate unilateral violence as men. Thatâ€™s right, the stories about Amy Winehouse using her husband as a â€œpunch-bagâ€ and Hillary Clinton carving up Billâ€™s jaw turn out to represent a much broader problem.
So why donâ€™t we hear about female violence more often? Well, several reasons.
Abused men are far less likely to call for help (Can you imagine Bill calling down to the state troopers to pull Hillary off his back?). Police may arrest the man, even if heâ€™s the one with the scratches and bruises. Prosecutors scoff at the mention of men injured by their partners. And editors marinated in feminist ideology will do anything to keep the story off the front page.
That bias allows lawmakers to get away with laws bearing one-sided names like the Violence Against Women Act. And it keeps people in a perpetual hysteria over the faux epidemic of wife-battering.
This high-stakes struggle is taking place around the world.
One of the main mischief-makers is the UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund. Their website calls for ending violence against women which they allege is â€œwidespread.â€ (Remember, keeping people in a frenzy of fear is how they lock in their funding.)
Their solution to partner abuse? You guessed it: â€œUNFPA advocates for legislative reform and enforcement of laws for the promotion and the protection of womenâ€™s rights to reproductive health choices.â€
Amnesty International is another purveyor of the counterfeit claims. In Europe, AI voted to â€œsupport the decriminalization of abortionâ€¦and to defend womenâ€™s access to abortion, within reasonable gestational limits, when their health or human rights are in danger.â€ In response, bishops instructed Catholic schools in England and Wales to boycott Amnesty.
In Nicaragua, pro-abortion forces dropped their rhetoric about â€œreproductive rightsâ€ in favor of pushing an agenda of â€œstopping violence against women.â€
Sex-selective abortion, which has snuffed out the lives of 100 million baby girls in China and India, is another battlefront. This moral and demographic travesty exposes the hypocrisy of abortionists who claim they are only trying to help disadvantaged women.
The most obvious cure, and probably the only solution to sex-selective abortions is an outright ban on all abortions — but the baby-killing industry wouldnâ€™t be happy with that.
So they paper over the truth with Orwellian doublespeak about â€œpre-birth sex selection,â€ as if weâ€™re flipping some kind of genetic switch. And of course Sen. Obamaâ€™s so-called International Violence Against Women Act doesnâ€™t even hint at this modern-day holocaust.
Is anyone pretending to be surprised?