About a month ago some reporters from the Gazette papers interviewed some of us who witness at the Spring Street Planned Parenthood in Silver Spring MD. The article appeared in last week's edition. Considering that the Gazette is owned by the Washington Post, a mainstream media outlet that makes no secret of its left-wing bias, the article was relatively decent although it was a tad distorted to the left.
This week the editorial staff weighed in with their editorial. Here is the link. Notice the first sentence, where they outright accuse us of overstepping the First Amendment into "harassment". The article also applies "hindrance" to our activiites, conceding to the perjorative terminology employed by the "Washington Clinic Defense Task Force". That is factually incorrect. In no way do we hinder or block those going into the building. We offer them information that is relevant to their situations - or at least we attempt to do so, for it is we who are hindered by the "clinic volunteers". Here is some prima facie evidence. Click here if you can't see embedded video.
One sentence in this editorial is almost breathtaking in its inadvertent honesty. I quote: "Women entering clinics may not be in the best frame of mind to talk with a stranger and think seriously about their decision." That's right! The Gazette is admitting that many of these women are NOT thinking seriously about their decisions. We simply urge them to do so, as a decision to abort their babies will have devastating consequences on them - maybe not immediately but those consequences will make their presence felt. Later on the Gazette states that the decsion to abort is "life-changing". We agree! Should they not be offered all available information? As you saw in the video, who's doing the "hindering"? More importantly, who is being harmed by the "hindrance"? The women - and their unborn children!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
(("Women entering clinics may not be in the best frame of mind to talk with a stranger and think seriously about their decision." That's right! The Gazette is admitting that many of these women are NOT thinking seriously about their decisions.))
ReplyDeleteI don't think that's what the article meant. I looked on the Planned Parenthood website, and saw that it encourages women to talk about their pregnancies with a "partner, trusted family member or friend", and in the end, make the decision themselves, without being pressured by anyone else: "Only you can decide which choice is right for you." (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/pregnancy/pregnant-now-what-4253.htm) The article was just saying that although sidewalk counselors have noble motivations, they don't help women as much as they think they do.
No doubt it is true that most women do have their minds made up (and sometimes made up for them) by the time they arrive and they won't listen to us. It is also undoubtedly true that some women are still undecided or perhaps ambivalent. These women welcome what we have to say, and they have a right to receive the information in an unhindered fashion. In the video above, you see how the orange-vested people act to hinder free exchange, contrary to Mr Valette's account. Some of these women ultimately opt to carry their children to term. While we may not be able to help all, we do help some, and for that reason we are, and will continue to be, out there.
ReplyDelete