Travis Rowley: Abortion Advocates Lie

Travis Rowley: Abortion Advocates Lie

Someone is lying to you.

In regards to the RI Reproductive Healthcare Act (H5127) currently before the Rhode Island House of Representatives, House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello (D) recently admitted to GoLocalProv that H5127 "permits late-term abortions."

Speaking of the very same piece of legislation, particularly the idea that H5127 expands abortion rights throughout an entire pregnancy, University of Virginia Professor of Political Science Jennifer Lawless told GoLocalProv last week, "These are insane mischaracterizations of what is actually at stake in Rhode Island ... That is not what Roe v. Wade allows ... That is not what codifying Roe v. Wade would allow."

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

People paying close attention to the RI Left's plan to "codify Roe v. Wade into state law" are likely familiar with this confusion. It has been common across most media platforms to witness pro-lifers warn that H5127 is a covert attempt to entirely deregulate the abortion industry ‒ only to have pro-choicers feverishly deny it.

Jennifer Lawless proved to be no exception to this rule as she ridiculed the pro-life contention. "Nobody wants late-term abortions," the Professor scoffed.

Polling Fraud 

In the midst of this controversy has emerged an exhausting and seemingly petty sub-dispute over polling data being used to influence RI lawmakers. With pro-abortion advocates attempting to provide legislators with political cover by utilizing the refrain "71% of Rhode Islanders support the Reproductive Healthcare Act," pro-life activists responded by raising serious doubts over the truthfulness of that claim.

Sure enough, in 2018 a poll commissioned by ABC6, The Public's Radio, and the Providence Journal merely asked its respondents, "Would you support or oppose the General Assembly passing a bill to protect legalized abortion in the state?" 71 percent would respond that they "either strongly or somewhat supported such a bill" (emphasis added).

Pro-life lobbyist Barth Bracy would proclaim, “The poll question cannot in any universe be even remotely considered an accurate description of what [H5127 actually does].″

The Providence Journal would inadvertently bolster Bracy's argument within a story that had Director of the UNH Survey Center Andrew Smith explaining how the 2018 poll did not seek to gauge "where [Rhode Islanders] stood on a particular piece of 2019 legislation not yet introduced." Rather, it asked, "a broader question" concerning abortion.

CEO of The Public Radio Torey Malatia concurred: "[Pro-lifers] say that the poll doesn't measure the particulars and the range of the present proposed state legislation. I agree."

Abortion backers decided: "71% of Rhode Islanders support the Reproductive Healthcare Act."

Anti-abortion activists would go on to commission their own poll that asked Rhode Islanders if they would support "legislation allowing abortion until the moment of a live birth" ‒ enabling Bracy to inform House members that "an overwhelming majority of Rhode Islanders (73.8%) believe that abortion should not be legal up until birth."

Leftist Radicals Everywhere

Perhaps the progressives' mendacity could be excused if, in fact, H5127 truly seeks to only enshrine status-quo abortion rights in Rhode Island.

Which is what they maintain.

Which is probably how they sleep at night.

Okay, so who is telling the truth?

First, it's instructive to look to the State of New York, where Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) recently ordered the World Trade Center to be light pink in celebration of the passage of New York's own "Reproductive Health Act," a radical new law that legalizes abortions during all stages of pregnancy and allows doctors to mortally neglect babies who survive.

We could also look to Virginia where Rep. Kathy Trans (D), when asked during a committee hearing if a woman would be able to legally request an abortion during labor, responded, "My bill would allow that. Yes."

Over 20 Democrats are co-sponsoring Trans' legislation.

Asked to comment on Trans' bill during a radio interview, Governor Ralph Northam (D) allowed the world to hear what a defense of post-term infanticide sounds like:  “If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen," Northam began. "The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

Still, progressives like Jennifer Lawless would have people consider it to be "insane" to suspect that local leftists are attempting to institute the same type of madness in Rhode Island.

Did You Know? 

Lawless isn't even clever enough to discover contradictions within her own commentary, as she obnoxiously sneered at the very mention of late-term abortion (seemingly oblivious to the horrors that have been unveiled within the industry). "That's not a thing. No doctor would perform an abortion until birth. If you tried to end a pregnancy and the fetus was viable ‒ the fetus is delivered ... And frankly, nobody favors abortion until birth."

Then why not explicitly outlaw non-therapeutic late-term abortions within the text of H5127, Professor? If post-viability abortion isn't even "a thing," then why do the bill's sponsors insist on isolating the post-viability health exception (ambiguous language known to be interpreted broadly by the courts)? Why does H5127 savagely strike down current legal protections for viable fetuses, and then remain ominously silent when it comes to the State's constitutional authority to prohibit late-term abortions when a mother's life and health are not in danger?

These are the only questions Lawless would have to ask herself in order to confront what her progressive friends are truly up to. Because this is the legislative formula that would legalize late-term abortion in Rhode Island.

Only a classic case of cognitive dissonance could allow Lawless to voice this opinion while discussing polling data that notably informed her that ‒ while "74% of Rhode Islanders oppose legislation that allows abortion up to birth" ‒ "22% of Rhode Islanders believe abortion should be legal at any time during a pregnancy" (emphasis added)

"Frankly I'm surprised only [74%] of people were opposed to that. I would have thought it would be closer to 100%," the Professor mused.

So, Jen, clearly somebody "favors abortion until birth."

Now, who might that be?

Insiders Know 

As frustrating as all of this is, this is exactly where pro-lifers have always wanted to be ‒ engaging the abortion issue at the state level. Local progressives prefer abortion rights to be decreed from Washington in order to hide behind constitutional rulings and “the settled law of the land.” Nationwide, they don’t want to have to deal with tough questions or clumsy admissions of infanticide by pro-choice politicians.

And they certainly don't want to have to look their victims in the eyes via the ultrasound.

As it was pointed out at the House committee hearings several weeks ago, not one witness or pro-choice legislator came forward to defy the charge that H5127 would legalize late-term abortions. After months of online wrangling with conservatives – when all the key players sat before them to debate RI House Bill 5127 ‒ not one abortion defender dared to go on public record with a denial.

Because they all know.

Just like Speaker Mattiello knows.

So progressives simply sow the requisite confusion by allowing the deception to occur throughout the press. People like Jennifer Lawless will always do their bidding, publicly accusing pro-lifers of the very dishonesty and extremism that abortion proponents are, in fact, guilty of.

Progressive Democrats have been lying about poll results, just as they have been lying about the legislative specifics.

Go figure. People who kill babies aren't to be trusted.

 

Travis Rowley is a former Tea Party / Republican activist and GoLocalProv MINDSETTER™.