The “logic” of “pro-women” progressives

Laws recently passed in Michigan that would require abortion clinics to meet the same licensing requirements as other clinics, and would prohibit coercion of girls and women contemplating abortions, have many progressives and their media allies in an uproar. The common refrain is that the lawmakers responsible for these regulations are “anti-women”.

Certain progressives are fond of clothing themselves in the mantle of The Enlightenment, reason, and science, while relegating religious believers to the rags of blind dogma and passion. But one wonders about “pro-women” progressives who…

Haven’t seen a health care regulation they didn’t support, but are opposed to “excessive” regulation of abortion clinics

Favor laws that prevent supervisors from intimidating woman subordinates at work, but are opposed to laws that would prevent men from intimidating girls and women into having abortions

Oppose “obscene profits” in the health care industry, but support abortion-for-profit…big profits

Favor informed consent regulations for hospitals and insurance companies, but oppose these requirements when it comes to abortion

Refuse to acknowledge the many pro-life programs that help women with difficult pregnancies, while themselves minimizing psychological and health impacts on women who have had abortions

Are champions of science, even speculative science, but ignore science that has demonstrated the human-ness and viability of fetuses

Oppose gender discrimination in the workplace, but are unconcerned by gender-based abortions that target females

Favor freedom of conscience to have an abortion, but oppose freedom of conscience when it comes to a business or individual being compelled to fund abortion

Favor the right of a few priests and religious to express their support for abortion, while, in academia and other progressive bastions, seek to silence and intimidate those who oppose abortion

Favor free speech when it comes to their “progressive” views, but oppose the “hate speech” that takes opposing views

Are dismissive of men who oppose abortion because they “have no right” to an opinion, while ignoring the many women who oppose abortion

Stand for logical, rational analysis and oppose “blind faith”, but avoid debate about when human life begins, when human rights commence, when constitutional protections commence

Consider disrupting a religious service to be a legitimate pro-choice protest, while asserting that a peaceful protest at an abortion clinic constitutes intimidation

Sounds to me like the emperor’s new clothes and these progressives’ mantle are spun from the same cloth.