One of the biggest problems in the proposed Healthcare Reform Act is that taxpayer money is used to fund abortions. So it comes as no surprise that the 37th anniversary of the monumental court ruling Roe vs. Wade got more media coverage than in years prior.
Normally, this would be a great thing for Pro-Life activists, as they use this date as a chance to stand up for their values and come together to rally and march toward our nation's capital. The problem is that by watching the major media coverage you wouldn't get a hint of the vast crowds of Pro-Life Americans that filled the streets of Washington D.C. this January 22nd.
There were several hundred thousand Pro-Life supporters there and at most several hundred anti-Life supporters. I was happy to see [URL=”http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/22/abortion.rally/index.html?iref=allsearch”]CNN finally post something on the Pro-Life rally[/URL], until I opened the story and found a picture of anti-Life activists.
This story influenced the reader to think that the two movements had an equal showing that solemn Friday in Washington D.C. It was not an accurate report of an uplifting event; the article was deflating and discouraging to readers because of the way the media portrayed us. Being Pro-Life and fighting for the Pro-Life cause is an uphill battle in this country. We have a rabidly anti-Life President and an anti-Life media. To have the media tell it like it is – to report events accurately and without bias – would be a huge victory for the Pro-Life cause. The majority of this country is Pro-Life.
Until the media accepts that this movement isn't dissipating, but is actually growing stronger, the impact of things like the March for Life won't be nearly as widespread as they could and should be.