By DEXTER DUGGAN
Technology advanced a lot in 54 years, as technology has had a way of doing in the current age.
In 1965, the U.S. still was four years away from its July 1969 first manned landing on the moon. But in 1965, another great scientific adventure so captured public attention that all 8 million copies of the April 30, 1965 issue of the major U.S. weekly magazine appropriately named Life sold out within four days. The New York City-based magazine started doing reprints.
Color photos considered remarkable at the time showed the development of preborn babies from conception. This captivated readers, who’d never seen such images. It was about as arresting as if a magazine today suddenly produced photos of busy shopping malls, freeways, and airports on the “red planet” of Mars being used by 25-foot-tall human beings.
Showing photos of plainly recognized babies, Life headlined that at 11 weeks, “All of the Body Systems Formed and at Work.” At 12 and 16 weeks, “Growing Bones and Cramped Quarters.” At 18 and 28 weeks, “A Thumb to Suck, a Veil to Wear.”
Fifty-four years later, on May 4, 2019, in New York’s bustling crossroads of the world Times Square, a large pro-life rally gathered to watch the big-screen ultrasound of a moving, yawning preborn baby and listen to the fast little heartbeat.
Real-time 4D ultrasounds are familiar technology by now, but the scientific evidence they easily provide is about as welcome in the world-girdling media capital of New York as Jesus with His whip in the Temple would be at the headquarters of The New York Times, where fact-twisters deal profanely in counterfeit compassion every day of the week.
The fastest way to send a leftist scurrying away in terror? Respond to his boasts of how fact-based and science-loving he is by offering to show him some ultrasound images of preborn babies.
It was only a few years after New York media in 1965 showed the nation the then-startling, marvelous revelations of prenatal life that Life’s neutral, scientific photos became, in dominant media’s view, very controversial, troubling, unwelcome, and best treated as far worse than pornography.
What had happened was the obscene arrival of the pro-abortion revolution in the eyries of the elite. Undisputed scientific facts suddenly had to be shushed and crushed so that wild-eyed abortion fanaticism could be passed off as seemly moderation while the entire U.S. quickly was marched into the abortion slaughterhouse.
In January 1973 the highest court in the land remarkably imposed its personal prejudices on abortion to the smirking delight of a propagandistic dominant media that less than a decade earlier had had a healthier outlook.
It was even a faster deformation of law, morality, and journalism than had occurred in National Socialist Germany, and it would last longer than that eugenics-crazed “racial science.”
The New York Times was the flagship in a media flotilla determined to anesthetize conscience. But while they could try to assure the nation that killing tens of millions of babies through permissive abortion was a minor matter, they couldn’t kill the pain of people’s aching consciences that deep down knew better.
It has become all too familiar to see videos of pro-life vigil-keepers suffering the blows of angry assailants either delivering scornful mockery or outright physical battering. Why are the pro-lifers objects of such rage?
Because their very presence stirs the disquieted emotions of suffering people who made the mistake of embracing Times-style falsehoods selling death.
Times propagandists will have a world of agony they created to answer for.
The conservative Daily Caller on May 7 was among sites posting a video of an angry young woman viciously pummeling a pro-lifer at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill because, she screamed, he was a “f—king terrible person.”
On March 29 Fox News posted a video of an elderly pro-lifer in San Francisco being knocked to the ground then repeatedly kicked as his assailant tried to pry a “40 Days for Life” banner from him.
On April 12 a woman leaving a Louisville abortion clinic shoved a pro-life woman to the ground, breaking her leg.
LifeNews.com posted on April 23 that it “and other news outlets have documented nearly 20 incidents against pro-lifers already this year.”
In Philadelphia, no less than a liberal Democrat member of the state legislature, Brian Sims, was so proud of his prolonged harassment and insults against pro-life women outside an abortion clinic that he posted his own video on the Internet.
Fr. Dwight Longenecker posted at The Stream Christian site on May 7 that “Sims’ intemperate tirades reveal the irrational rage simmering beneath the surface of the pro-abortion movement. Beneath the self-righteous advocacy and Victimism, the agents of death in our culture thrive on rage against Christians, conservatives, and all those who would oppose their Culture of Death.”
Last January, Longenecker recalled, Covington Catholic pro-life high-school student Nick Sandmann quickly was pilloried in major media as a racist bigot because he simply smiled when a leftist agitator continued beating a drum right up in his face in Washington, D.C.
Longenecker asked, “What if Nick Sandmann had actually behaved like Brian Sims? What if the Covington boys went on an ageist, sexist, racist rampage like Sims and harassed the Native American elder? Imagine that Sandmann had mocked the elder’s faith, chased him around, got in his face, threatened to find his home and harass him further.”
Just for standing still, a high school student was made an instant object of country-wide denunciation by national pro-abortion media that avert their eyes when pro-lifers are hounded and pounded month after month.
Conservative commentator Jon Miller, of Blaze TV, said Sims only was behaving like your standard Democrat presidential hopeful: “The anti-science, anti-commonsense lefties who adore and praise abortion used to be fringe. Not anymore. Now, if you don’t jump with joy at the thought of late-term abortion, you are going against the mainstream Democratic Party platform.”
Miller added: “Every 2020 candidate feels just as strongly about making sure ripping little babies apart remains legal as the brutish bully who harassed the elderly woman and teen girls praying outside the Philly Planned Parenthood clinic.”
At least the fact that it was an arrogant Democrat state legislator out on the streets threatening everyday pro-life women inspired some prominent pro-lifers to plan for their own rally outside that abortuary on May 10, the day after this hardcopy issue of The Wanderer went to press.
Abby Johnson and Lila Rose were among the pro-life leaders scheduled for the 11 a.m. rally at 1144 Locust St., Philadelphia. So was local columnist Christine Flowers, who highlighted some of pro-abort Sims’ tweets that “Planned Parenthood protesters are scum!” as well as being “bigots, sexists, misogynists” with “your fake morals and your broken values.”
Something had happened to Sims, Flowers posted at Philly.com on May 6, recalling that she was impressed when she had interviewed him for the Philadelphia Daily News back in 2013. “I also noted: ‘As Sims once put it, he’s trying to find empathy for people who disagree with him’,” Flowers wrote. “. . . It seems that the Brian Sims I interviewed in 2013 is not the same Brian Sims anymore.”
Kill Them Later
Being steeped in the oceans of blood that The New York Times merrily sails over can have a disorienting effect on the ability to navigate life morally. While Pennsylvania’s Sims viewed himself as a heroic champion of women, an Alabama state legislator was franker that permissive abortion is a useful social tool to weed out the unwanted.
After pro-abortion State Rep. John Rogers in Alabama said permissive abortion is just a matter of “you kill them now or you kill them later,” the Washington Examiner posted on May 5 that Rogers was just saying “the quiet part out loud for everyone to hear” — Rogers’ hopeless view about inconvenient babies was “the very sort of comments that abortion’s defenders usually know to keep to themselves.”
Either abort these lives now or they’ll just be sent to the electric chair later, Rogers claimed, as if continued existence is only brutally deterministic.
Rogers must think that “no one has ever risen above oppression, poverty, or an unstable family situation to do something great in life,” the Examiner said. “Rogers and the millions who think like him believe implicitly that poor or adopted children must be incapable of happiness just because some grown-ups decided it is so. Not only that, but Rogers seems to think they’re all going to become murderers headed for execution.”
LifeNews.com posted on May 3 that Dr. Alveda King responded on Fox & Friends that Rogers made her think, “‘Wow, he’s been indoctrinated pretty well with the eugenics and genocide agenda, which is unfortunate.’ But compassion does not require the death of anyone. Compassion brings life rather than death.
“And so,” King said, “if someone is unwanted or an unexpected pregnancy . . . many people know that I had two abortions myself long ago without this understanding. So there’s a better way to serve women, the babies in the womb, the dads, the families, than to kill a person. We can deliver mercy without killing people.”
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress