How can it be? Washington Post and the NY Times both have front-page photos of pro-lifers?
By Dave Andrusko
I did not see Thursday’s New York Times until later in the day but I did see and read the Washington Post’s account of the oral arguments before the Supreme Court in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the challenge to Texas’s pro-life law, HB 2, first thing.
I almost choked on my bowl of cereal when I saw a large front-page photo of joyful pro-lifers taken in front of the Supreme Court. Not exactly a common occurrence, I can assure you. But I literally did a double-take when I went to the jump page.
There was a photo of a pro-abortionist, but across from that small photo was a separate story accompanied by a much larger photo of pro-life Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wi.) addressing the pro-life contingent.
Later on Thursday, I learned, to my utter amazement, that a photo of pro-lifers also graced page one of the New York Times! (See “Pro-Abort Activists Freak Out Over Pro-Lifers on NY Times Front Page.”) Worse yet, one held a sign reading, “I am a pro-life feminist.”
To what do I attribute this double blessing (double whammy from the pro-abortion point of view)? I haven’t a clue. Here are a few entirely speculative possibilities.
Pangs of conscience for having given short-shrift to the many, many March for Life rallies in which anywhere from 60,000 to 200,000 pro-life champions assembled in our nation’s capital on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade? I think not. Why now? We’ve been invisible for 40+ years.
What about a new photo editor[s], with a secret determination to be fair enough to alert readers to the fact that there are such things as pro-lifers. That is even less of a possibility.
Could it be the contrast between the two assemblies? As we discussed yesterday, the much larger crowd of pro-abortionists menacingly surrounded the pro-lifers. Their mouths spewed venom, pro-lifers smiled and sang hymns. Hmmm.
Or it could be (and I am speculating, after all) that these Media Establishment titans understand that come what may with this particular Supreme Court case, our Movement is ascending, the anti-life movement is on the wane.
Whatever the reason, what a wonderful and pleasant surprise.