More than ever, we are in a visual environment and therefore are captivated by images, drawn into social media, and increasingly steered towards new ways to be entertained. Though deception is nothing new, this environment presents us with a greater challenge to carefully discern truth and see what lies behind agendas and how they impact us.
To start with, recognize that everything coming our way, regardless of presentation, comes from a certain perspective and has a purpose. When it comes to perspective, people often take positions based on their upbringing, educational background, work experience, and various philosophical biases.
Now, with respect to purpose, discernment is especially important. Regarding politics, there are often key reasons political parties choose their candidates. For example, candidates deemed attractive and who can effectively move a crowd can be chosen over others whose proposed ideas and vision are superior and even have more experience.
Concerning public policy, messages communicated to the public to gain support are conveyed in a fashion like those that promote products and services on the market. One good example is abortion. For decades, those who insist that a woman should legally have the right to terminate her pregnancy have regarded themselves as pro-choice. The confusion here is that the term “choice,” is an economic term. For example, people follow their preferences to choose the gym that best fits them. Also, choices are made with respect to vacation destinations and restaurants. Deciding where to bank and where to buy a car are also examples of choices people make.
Realistically, those claiming to be pro-choice not only take the term “choice” out of context but clearly misrepresent it. I say this because the rest of the public whether they are pro-choice or not, have no option but to participate in the abortion movement. Now, why do I say this? As an example, Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers receive subsidies from state budgets throughout the country at the taxpayer’s expense. Many states, in fact, secure funds in their Medicaid budget for abortion thus deceiving the public into believing that abortion is a health necessity. Evidence showing that many women who’ve had abortions struggle emotionally and spiritually for many years afterwards says otherwise. Not only that, but many women have also incurred severe injuries during their abortion procedure while others have in fact died as a result. Sadly, abortion providers are rarely held accountable for these occurrences and fearing the possibility of exposure they often avoid calling the paramedics to assist the injured women. Also worth noting, Medicaid relies on funds from taxpayers, further proving that the public is forced into the abortion agenda.
In many states, through lobbying efforts the abortion industry in conjunction with lawmakers have required insurance companies to cover abortion procedures in their policies. This once again, misconstrues the idea of choice they’ve claimed to promote. We, of course, assume businesses still maintain the freedom to choose the products and services they offer their clientele. However, the abortion industry in this instance has utilized state legislative means to impose their “product” on us, this time through insurance mandates. Consequently, these imposed mandates have led to higher premiums for subscribers despite varying held ethical positions regarding abortion. By making abortion a mandate for health insurance policies, as previously stated in respect to Medicaid, the abortion lobby leads the public to believe abortion promotes a woman’s health despite the evidence showing otherwise.
Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade nearly a year ago, legislators in states favorable to abortion including Maryland have taken measures to assist women in crossing state lines to have abortions. Let’s look at this from a commercial standpoint. To illustrate the absurdity of these efforts, imagine a fictitious piece of legislation. Suppose a legislator in North Central Baltimore County attempted to advance legislation that would grant tax breaks to car dealerships in his/her district that sold automobiles to people living in Pennsylvania. This probably wouldn’t get far and, most likely his/her efforts to provide this preferential treatment at the expense of others would be questioned. Those living in states like Maryland where this new abortion legislation is being advanced should question the motives behind this legislation as well. So, we’re once again confronted with the question: if the abortion issue simply boils down to allowing a woman to make a choice regarding her body, why must her choice be the policy of the state and the public be involved in it? Worth noting, the Department of Defense recently announced plans to cover travel expenses for service members wishing to have abortions putting them in the company of major companies including Dick’s Sporting Goods, Bank of America, and Walmart who cover travel expenses for their workers seeking abortions.
Also in Maryland, legislation advanced allowing medical professionals other than doctors to perform abortions including nurse practitioners and midwives. Those in objection are concerned saying this will lead to more abortions performed. Another concern is the $3.5 million that has been set aside in Governor Moore’s budget for purposes of training the various medical professionals to perform abortions. This is especially telling, considering that medical professionals from other fields aren’t receiving this enormous amount of funds for their training. This allotment of funds once again ties the public to the abortion agenda by force though it may not be in accordance with their will and ethical perspective on the matter.
Bullying efforts are also demonstrated by those in the abortion industry. Roughly a decade ago, a Baltimore City pregnancy center was targeted by local abortion providers who insisted the center’s advertisements were misleading. The local abortion providers claimed the pregnancy center’s ads were misleading because they did not specifically state that abortion services were not performed at their center. Imagining a restaurant being accused of misrepresentation for not citing food items that aren’t placed on their menu made me see the absurdity of these claims. Regarding this pregnancy center, like similar centers, free services such as pregnancy tests, parenting classes, clothing, abstinence courses, various forms of counseling, and sonograms were provided and still are. Though the center’s First Amendment rights were vindicated in court, this came after long legal battles in which great legal costs were incurred. So, in the end we have an organization that promotes the dignity of women and their children targeted by another aiming to limit choices for women who want help while misleading them into believing that abortion is their only option.
So, now we see that the abortion movement is more than a cause but rather an effort to impose their will on the public. This clearly goes beyond simply allowing a woman to make a choice regarding her body as we’re often told. The abortion lobby-or industry as one may call it-has seen to it that their objective of terminating preborn lives life becomes the policy of the state.
As previously mentioned, discernment is especially necessary with the amount of media we’re exposed to. Beyond that, an even greater need for discernment exists considering the lies behind agendas and how they impact us. Looking at the abortion industry as just one example, we should take time to consider the many ways interest groups have used the state as a platform and a vehicle to advance their agenda at the expense of our liberty.
In His Image 