From: Rachel L. Solomon [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 7:45 PM
To: Gregg Cunningham
Subject: Regarding “pro-abortion”
My name is Rachel Solomon and I am a student at the University of Washington and a reporter for The Daily, the school’s student newspaper. The Genocide Awareness Project visited our campus this week and I reported on it. I do not wish to comment on the graphic images on display, as my own views are quite contrary to the ones expressed – a fact that, I might add, did not come into play in my unbiased news reporting. Instead, I would like to comment on your groups use of the term “pro-abortion” to describe those who are not “pro-life.”
The activists who oppose GAP and the pro-life movement are not pro-abortion; they are instead accurately described as possessing the opinions of “pro-choice” or “abortion rights.” “Pro-abortion” is a horrible misnomer that implies that these people push for abortions as the only way of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy. Rather, the reality is that this side often views abortion as a last resort. No one advocates FOR abortions. They advocate for THE OPTION to have an abortion.
I would greatly appreciate it if, in the future, you would correctly describe those who hold differing viewpoints from your own. Thank you very much.
Dear Ms. Solomon,
Thank you for your note and for your fairly balanced coverage of our Genocide Awareness Project at The University of Washington. My only criticism of your reportage is that you chose to suppress the facts surrounding our dispute with the administration over the location of our display site. School officials wanted to push us into a much more obscure corner of Red Square and only relented after we retained legal counsel and threatened a lawsuit in writing. Those are newsworthy events which your readership will now never know.
But in addition to that indiscretion, I must also take issue with your assertion that our characterization of the pro-abortion position on abortion as “pro-abortion,” is a “misnomer.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Your accusation is intellectually dishonest. Imagine a Nazi having the effrontery to say “I’m not pro-Holocaust, I just don’t think it should be against the law to kill Jews.” Or try “I am not pro-rape, I think sexual assaults against women should only be legal when men commit them as a last resort.” Or “I am not pro-slavery, I merely believe whites should have the OPTION to enslave blacks. At various times and in various places, Jews and women and African Americans were widely viewed as sub-human and were consequently denied rights of personhood. In fact there are still plenty of countries in which it is effectively legal to kill Jews, rape women and enslave blacks.
People who support the right to kill a baby are understandably embarrassed by that fact so they seek to conceal the truth with the same crude, word games played by Southerners who said they didn’t advocate slavery, they advocated States’ Rights. To this day, historical revisionists deny that the Civil War had anything to do with slavery. But the truth is that when a Klansman uses the term “States’ Rights,” he means the rights of states to legalize slavery. You may play head games with your liberal classmates, Ms. Solomon, but not with us. If you think it should be legal to kill babies, you are pro-baby-killing.
Again, thank you for relatively fair coverage of our project.