A recent article on the Christian Life Resources website (christianliferesources.com) had the following statement:
"A federal appeals court has upheld a pro-life law in Texas allowing women a chance to see an ultrasound of their unborn child prior to an abortion." Note the phrase "allowing a woman the chance..."
Here is a quote from the story in the Chicago Tribune:
"The Texas law, enacted in 2011, requires abortion providers to display the ultrasound images and describe them in detail. Women cannot decline to hear the physician's description of the image unless they qualify for an exception under the statute. Exceptions include if the woman suffered rape or incest or if the fetus has abnormalities." (emphasis added) Note that the law requires, rather than allows the viewing of the ultrasound.
I don't have any quarrel with their opposition to the law, but I wonder why Christian Life Resources--a supposedly Christian organization--finds it necessary to misrepresent the law? If you favor the law then why would you be embarrassed to describe it accurately? Is it okay to misrepresent because you think it serves a higher purpose? Smacks of moral relativism.
No comments:
Post a Comment