Choice? What Choice?
Pro-choicers in the media have chosen an interesting tactic to “celebrate” the 20th anniversary of the Morgentaler decision. A few days ago, there was Antonia Zerbisias wondering why abortion wasn’t a more popular decision in Hollywood comedies and complaining about babies. Now, André Picard in the Globe and Mail treats the lack of an increase in abortions as some sort of setback.
While there are, theoretically, no restrictions on abortion, the number of abortions has not increased.
In fact, the number of abortions has held steady over all, and the teen abortion rate has actually fallen.
Why is that a bad thing? I thought pro-choicers insisted on their name, as opposed to being called pro-abortion, because they advocate the option rather than for an increase in abortions. Has something changed?
Picard and Zerbisias aren’t advocating choice at all if they are disappointed in babies and a lack of an increase in abortions.
Leave a Reply