ABC’s Good Morning America decided on Wednesday to follow their leftists comrades in spewing fear-mongering rhetoric as part of their coverage on the leaked Supreme Court opinion on abortion, expresses sadness that there’s “abortion deserts”There are more places in the country that prevent the killing of children. Pro-lifers suggest they will ban in vitro fertilation (IVF), which is used to induce pregnancy in families with difficulty.
Congressional correspondent Rachel Scott framed the ruling almost exclusively on the supposed tragedy of women being forced to bring such nuisances into the world, calling the leaked opinion “a seismic shift” causing women to “wak[e] up to a whole new reality” unless they live in a blue state.
In a classic case of labeling bias, Scott referred to “the governor there in Connecticut” Ned Lamont without party affiliation, but she made sure to mention Oklahoma’s chief executive (Kevin Stitt) is a Republican.
Scott then made a ghoulish comparison between the closure of abortion clinics and impoverished regions without even one supermarket.
As we’ve seen, women will overcome any hurdle and go to great lengths to get the right choice. This includes traveling hundreds of miles from their state. They are — right now, we are seeing abortion deserts sort of sweep across the middle part of the country and what abortion providers fear most is for the women who do not have the option, who do not have the means to travel hundreds of miles[.]
Co-host and former Clinton official George Stephanopoulos pivoted to chief legal analyst Dan Abrams, who insisted that while Justice Samuel Alito insisted other rights (specifically ones involving privacy) are in jeopardy because abortion involves the taking of a life, Alito’s words would be meaningless because “it doesn’t mean that someone can’t come back to the court and say, let’s use the exact same reasoning…and apply it in a different context.”
Abrams claimed that individuals rights were on soft ground, which gives oxygen to the argument. “it’s hard to figure out how the reasoning wouldn’t also apply in some of these other cases.”
Robin Roberts was the co-host and she invoked IVF to help her. “some people are wondering about” Abrams and it gave rise to the idea that IVF could be prohibited. This was despite Abrams failing basic biology about how IVF involves the fertilization of sperm and eggs outside a woman’s body:
IVF has a problem because it’s difficult to understand how freezing embryos would be allowed. If a state says that life begins at conception then IVF could suffer. However, this depends on the exact definitions of when it begins.
In the second hour, Scott returned with more celebration of abortion, gushing over how “more women are showing just how far they will go to have a choice” and “sharing their own personal stories” with one dismissing the life of her third child as a financial hassle.
“I can barely make ends meet at the moment. I’m willing to do whatever is necessary because there’s no way I can afford another baby,” said “Nicole, a single mother of two in Oklahoma.”
Later and long after two scant soundbites from Oklahoma Republicans, Scott lamented that “[w]omen like Maddie now fear that more women will have to go through the same hurdles they did in order to have an abortion.”
ABC’s portrayal of abortion clinics being a necessity, like a grocery shop, was possible because advertisers such as Zales, Dicks and Carmax supported it. Follow the links to see their contact information at the MRC’s Conservatives Fight Back page.
You can view the ABC transcript of April 4th by clicking here