Legislation is being proposed in New York City that would require crisis pregnancy centers to have signs stating that they do not provide abortions (see Alisa Harris' WORLD Web Extra report from yesterday). This is, the thinking goes, to stop the poor women who might walk in with abortion in mind, only to be provided the financial and other resources that would allow them to have their babies and put them up for adoption.
The "vague signage" and proximity to Planned Parenthood offices make these centers guilty of duplicity, at least based on the yearlong investigation conducted by NARAL Pro-Choice New York. One can only imagine how unbiased that investigation was.
It's apparently abhorrent that such pro-life pregnancy centers have the audacity to "oppose abortion, and [that] their staff members try their hardest to talk women out of having one," according to a New York Times piece on the subject. That Times article, by the way, is supposed to be a news article (unlike this, which is commentary). Just in case there were any doubt about the author's point of view, read this paragraph:
"The signs are not exactly as onerous as the scripts that abortion providers in South Dakota have been required by law to say: that abortion will 'terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.'"
How horrible to think that a pregnant woman might be convinced not to kill her baby!
Not long ago I interviewed several women for Salvo magazine on the subject of the abortions they'd had. I heard stories of agonizing guilt and years of suffering, even from those who felt no moral compunction at the time. I cringe at the thought of losing any tool in the arsenal of the pro-life forces-for the sake of the mothers-and for their babies.