Skip links

No, NYT, Pro-Life Websites Are Not Fake News

Recently, The New York Times published a column claiming that Facebook is ignoring fake news masquerading as pro-life articles and viewpoints. In it, Rossalyn Warren laments that the massive social media platform has not done more to weed out what she refers to as misinformation from pro-life news sites.

The major flaw in Warren’s column is obvious from the beginning. From the outset to the conclusion, she does very little to successfully explain why any of the articles, examples, or pro-life news sites that she identifies actually qualify as fake news.

On Hillary Clinton’s Late-Term Abortion Comments

She begins by questioning an articlecirculated prior to the 2016 election about Hillary Clinton’s late-term abortion comments. Referring to the article’s author, Warren says, “She argues that a baby never needs to be aborted to save a mother’s life but doesn’t cite any sources or studies, and presents anecdotes and opinion as fact.” The phrase “late-term abortions” does not have a specific definition, but given the original context of Clinton’s comments, we can see she’s discussing late-second- and third-term abortions.

Warren neglects to address any of the arguments in the pre-election article, instead choosing to simply label the comments as false. She correctly notes that partial-birth abortions are illegal, but fails to explain how that disproves that late-term abortions are never necessary to save a mother’s life. While it’s unclear why the partial-birth abortion procedure was referenced, the logic presented in the original article is still valid.

Late-term abortion, in this context, occurs during the time in gestation when a preborn child could survive on his or her own outside the womb. Thus, there is never a need to abort a preborn child after 24 weeks to save the life of his mother, because in any situation where the mother’s life might be in danger, the preborn child could just be delivered (via C-section).

It does not take any sources or studies to come to this conclusion. It’s obvious by simply following the logic. A person could still argue that women have a right to a late-term abortion, but it’s clear that late-term abortions are never necessary to save the life of the mother.

Read more at The Federalist. 

Share with Friends: