Pro-Choice Violence, Big Media and Big Abortion

M. Scott Peck coined the term "the people of the lie" in his 1983 book of the same name, and if there was ever an inveterate lie that was concocted entirely to deceive, manipulate and kill, it is the term "choice." It's not that the English word is in itself deceptive. It's just a word. Rather, it's the use of the word, and its evil cognate "pro-choice," as abortion misinformation that makes it the destructive force that words sometimes can be. "Pro-choice" may be the modern world's most deceitful hypocrisy, but more distressing than the term and its usage are the hypocritical interests that propagate the lie: Big Media and Big Abortion.

The media has a certain pathological denial of basic truths when it comes to abortion. Newspaper editorial policies systematically refuse to mention "pro-life" unless it can be used in the most derogatory way to undermine our cause. I was once interviewed by a newspaper in front of an abortion mill while praying, and when the story came out, I, a Catholic priest, was referred to as an "anti-abortion volunteer" of all things! Needless to say, "pro-choice advocates" are heroic; everyone else is "anti-choice" — you know the rest as well as I.

The worst offender against the truth, The New York Times, is presently embroiled in a scandal of immense proportions which shows a detestable collaboration between the two money-making industries of media and abortion. In April of last year The New York Times Magazine published a story on the nation of El Salvador called "Pro-Life Nation" in which I was interviewed and HLI's affiliate director in that country, Julia Regina de Cardenal, was featured. The piece was written by a guy named Jack Hitt, and his surname was not far off the mark of his intentions: he clearly intended to slander the situation of a completely abortion-free nation by skewing evidence to make this tiny pro-life nation look as if it were throwing women into jail for what we in American consider to be a natural "choice."

 Specifically, Mr. Hitt presented the case of a woman who had been incarcerated for thirty years because she had exercised her freedom of choice in abortion. "She'd had a clandestine abortion at 18 weeks…something defined as absolutely legal in the United States. It's just that she'd had an abortion in El Salvador," Hitt wrote. The only problem was that, after Julia Regina checked the facts, that so-called "clandestine abortion" turned out to be a despicable lie. The woman did not have an abortion. The court determined that she had given birth to a full-term baby and then strangled him!

The nastier side of the story is that Mr. Hitt had used a translator in El Salvador who worked for Ipas (International Projects Assistance Services), an American organization that makes abortion suction machines and exports them to the Third World. This killing conglomerate in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, then turned around and used Mr. Hitt's article to raise funds to promote abortion in Latin America, a huge conflict of interest because Ipas stands to make loads of cash selling extermination machines any time countries legalize abortion. This was a perfect one-two punch for "choice" if I ever saw one.

When Big Media and Big Abortion collaborate to promote the "choice" of abortion, the world's cultures are degraded beyond belief. I do not need to tell you that the cozy conspiracy of media and abortion in our own country has drummed so deeply into our national consciousness the "pro-choice" dogma that this type of violence is now considered the norm. I for one am glad that, at least this time, the "people of the lie" got caught.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • Guest

    “The court determined that she had given birth to a full-term baby and then strangled him!” Was this much more humane than late term abortions in this country?! Neither is humane and neither is rooted in charity. To choose evil is to be enslaved to the father of lies, separated from Charity. Praying that all will seek and recognize truth so that none will be caught in Satan’s snares disguised in the modern linguistics of ‘choice.’

  • Guest

    Though I should have had it impress me immediately . . . it is frightfully, tragically sad that ‘choice’ has this anti-life, culture-of-death connotation.

    Because choice is exactly what is the conclusive decision to love.

    Of a fact, those ads on CE for Catholic Match begin rightly with Grow in Faith but get it wrong with Fall in Love. As what is becoming hackneyed for me observes, love is a decision. It is choice to make one’s own life actively devoted to another’s life. You no more fall into love as you would seek to fall out of window ten stories up.

    What is essential and epitomized love but God’s choice to make us in order to lovingly embrace us to Himself? He didn’t ‘fall in love’ but ‘made the choice . . .’ and with each of us ‘. . . to love’.

    Such choice to love for us follows the path of the theological virtues. We establish that we trust in the person, have faith in him or her. We go on to have confidence unto hope in her. Finally, we make the decision to love her, to choose to love her.

    And, this decision, in this choice to love, is the counter-weight to all the false choices we make – and Love saves us with and for His love.

    In faith, through hope, with love,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell or …

  • Guest

    Love is always a choice. I love my wife, but it is because I have chosen to do so.
    And in my opinion, love will have far more impact in the struggle against abortion that law. Option Ultrasound ( )looks to be very effective to me, as its root action is to connect women to their unborn children with love through the offer of a free ultrasound.
    Now, if only we could get irresponsible fathers to love the children they carelessly spawn, instead of seeing them as a threat to their carefree lifestyles, we would see far less pressure to choose abortion. It’s something to pray for.