Obama said yesterday in a meeting with Catholic reporters…
“I don’t know any circumstance in which abortion is a happy circumstance or decision, and to the extent that we can help women avoid being confronted with a circumstance in which that’s even a consideration, I think that’s a good thing.”
It sounds an awful lot to me as if Obama thinks there is something wrong with abortion, much like NYC officials think there is something wrong with smoking. Here is their plan, according to AOL News, July 1:
“A proposal from [NYC's] Dept. of Mental Health and Hygiene suggests prominently displaying antismoking signs near the cash registers of all cigarette retailers.
The legislation would be the first of its kind in the U.S. And while Canada, New Zealand and Australia currently have sign requirements, NY would be the first to include graphics…” [note: I've certainly seen graphic signs in Toronto...]
Here are the salient points, from the New York Times:
“It’s really about getting them at the point-of-sale moment,” said Sarah Perl, the health department’s assistant commissioner for tobacco control….
“We want them to also think about the consequences about what it will do to them,” Ms. Perl said….
“This type of signage which communicates purely factual information about a commercial transaction is legal,” she said.
Does anyone else see where this is headed?
If we all agree abortion is something be “avoid[ed],” as Obama said, then we could easily launch the same sort of anti-abortion campaign, using “factual information about a commercial transaction” at the “point-of-sale moment,” as Perl stated, of signs showing abortion at abortion mills, since it “can be effective to display gruesome health effects….”
The NYC anti-smoking campaign ad:
And Jill Stanek’s suggestion:
Somehow, I’m guessing abortion supporters would call one of these ads “factual” and the other “manipulative.” I’d love to hear someone try to explain why.