Pro-choice Nevada Democrats keep attacking organizations that offer choices to pregnant women.
Last week, Democrat attorney general nominee Aaron Ford lashed out at Wes Duncan, his Republican opponent, for visiting the Reno/Sparks Crisis Pregnancy Center. The center offers free pregnancy tests, free baby supplies and emotional support for pregnant women. Yes, really — providing free services and support to pregnant women is now a partisan issue.
“Wes Duncan’s radical anti-choice agenda is dangerous for women’s health,” said Peggy Yang, Ford’s campaign manager. “He is out of step with Nevada women, who have the right to make their own health care decisions and access lifesaving medical care.”
Funny. You’d think if you’re in favor of allowing women “to make their own health care decisions” you would be OK with a woman visiting a crisis pregnancy center. “Lifesaving medical care” is also quite the euphemism for a procedure that kills pre-born children. But workers in crisis pregnancy centers aren’t engaging in political debates with expectant mothers. They’re trying to meet the needs of those women in order to convince them to choose life.
And pregnant women have many needs. The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute did a survey in 2004 on why women have abortions. Most women cited myriad motivations, including worries about how a baby would change their lives, how others would react and how they would afford a child. Every reason was a problem women used abortion to solve.
Compare this to the reaction of women who want to have children. They’re thrilled about how a baby will change their world and excited to share the news with others. Having a baby isn’t free, but they’re willing to make financial sacrifices.
Think about that. The exact same situation — a pregnancy — elicits two very different responses. The difference isn’t the humanity of the pre-born child or even one’s personal belief about abortion, but the circumstances of the mother. Many women choose to have an abortion because they feel as if it’s their only choice.
Crisis pregnancy centers provide these mothers material and emotional resources to help them realize that they have options. Having more information — like seeing your baby on a free ultrasound — can change a mother’s decision. These organizations can’t compel anyone to do anything. They can only persuade through love, provision and prayer.
Because Democrats realize that attacking a group for being nice to pregnant women is a political loser, they turn to smears. Most amusing is the claim that these groups throw “lavish fundraisers,” implying that those involved are getting rich. Hardly. The director of the Reno/Sparks Crisis Pregnancy Center made $62,500 in 2016, according to IRS data. For perspective, that’s about one-third of what Ford owed the IRS in unpaid taxes, interest and penalties from 2010 to 2013.
If pro-abortion politicians actually believed in choice, crisis pregnancy centers wouldn’t cause a political stir. Instead, Ford, Democrat gubernatorial candidate Steve Sisolak and the state Democratic Party have each attacked these organizations. This is a radical shift from what Democrats such as Hillary Clinton were saying just 10 years ago.
“Could you see yourself, with millions of voters in the pro-life camp, creating a common ground with the goal ultimately in mind of reducing the decisions for abortion to zero?” said Rev. Joel Hunter, a Florida pastor, during a 2008 CNN forum.
Intentionally or not, he’s describing the work and mission of crisis pregnancy centers. Hillary Clinton replied, “Yes. And that is what I have tried to both talk about and reach out about over the last many years, going back really at least 15 years, in talking about abortion being safe, legal and rare, and by rare, I mean rare.”
Clinton’s position likely wasn’t sincere. She defended partial-birth abortion during her 2016 presidential run. It shows, however, just how radical Nevada Democrats now are on abortion. Not even the 2008 version of Hillary Clinton is pro-abortion enough for them.