Anticipating the greatest push for abortion rights our nation has ever seen, the pro-life community has sounded the alarms. On January 21, one day after the inauguration of Barack Obama, and one day before the March for Life, Cardinal Regali summoned pro-life leaders across the U.S. to attend a Mass and a reception at Washington’s Trinity College. In attendance was Bill Donohue.
The number-one concern at the meeting was the Freedom of Choice Act, the most radical piece of legislation ever sponsored by pro-abortion forces. But in the weeks that followed, it became apparent that the Obama administration thinks it may be too risky to go for it all right now; the chatter is that a more incremental approach may be followed. If so, it means a change in strategy. The goal, of course, is the same.
Two days before leaving office, President Bush proclaimed January 18 to be “National Sanctity of Human Life Day.” He pointedly said, “All life is a gift from our Creator that is sacred, unique, and worthy of protection.” He emphasized that “we aspire to build a society in which every child is welcome in life and protected in law.” We responded with a news release that said, “George W. Bush will be remembered as doing more to build a culture of life than any president.”
According to a story in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, approximately 300,000 people marched for the cause of life on January 22. While the march received some coverage in papers like the Washington Post, USA Today, Investors Business Daily, the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune, the New York Times said nothing about it.
Ironically, the motto of the New York Times is “all the news that’s fit to print.” Why a story about hundreds of thousands of marchers—for any cause—isn’t fit to print is a mystery. Well, not really. It’s the cause that matters to the New York Times, not the throngs who show up.