A few weeks ago, Hollywood’s pro-abortion mouthpiece Alyssa Milano decried the use of the term “fetal heartbeat” to describe an unborn baby’s heartbeat in the first few weeks after conception.
The actress, upset over irrefutable biological facts about when fetal heartbeats begin, took to the Twitter machine in an attempt to correct the media, Republicans and pro-lifers on the matter:
Dear Press, stop calling them “heartbeat” bills and call them “fetal pole cardiac activity” bills https://t.co/PVDTr6pLd0
— Alyssa Milano (@Alyssa_Milano) May 15, 2019
Just a couple of weeks later, CNN “New Day” co-host Alisyn Camerota went from neutral anchor to pro-abortion activist in a flash with her line of questioning of Indiana AG Curtis Hill (R). The subject was the recent Supreme Court decision to sidestep the most controversial aspects of a 2016 pro-life bill Mike Pence signed into law when he was governor.
After aggressively grilling Hill with questions like “Why would you want a family to have to have a child with a severe disability?”, Camerota backtracked on the use of the term “children” to describe unborn babies:
While [Camerota] already had acknowledged at several points that the end result of a pregnancy is, indeed, a child, she catches herself referring to it as such in the womb.
“Yeah but lots of families make that decision based on — Hold on a second. Lots of families do have to make that decision based on the single characteristic of finding out their children, that their fetus, has a severe abnormality,” she said.
CNN's Alisyn Camerota refers to unborn as "children" before catching herself and calling it a fetus during combative interview with Indiana Attorney General pic.twitter.com/2U6HDuNpDa
— David Rutz (@DavidRutz) May 29, 2019
In the latest twist involving the mainstream media switching up the terminology they use to describe unborn children and their development in the womb, the New York Times wrote last week about Louisiana’s fetal heartbeat bill, which was signed into law Thursday by pro-life Democratic Governor John Bel Edwards.
Except they have a new term they’re using for “fetal heartbeat”, as Life News writes:
On Wednesday, the newspaper described the Louisiana heartbeat law with bizarre new language that dehumanizes unborn babies and ignores decades of scientific evidence.
Rather than say the word “heartbeat,” the New York Times used the words “the pulsing of what becomes the fetus’s heart.” It also described the legislation as a “so-called fetal heartbeat bill” – as if it is questionable whether the unborn baby actually has a heart or a heartbeat.
The anti-scientific language did not end there. In its description of the Louisiana law, the New York Times wrote:
“The measure would require an ultrasound test for any woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, and forbid abortion if the test detects embryonic pulsing – which can occur before many women know they are pregnant.”
This new terminology is not based on facts or scientific evidence. It’s based on an agenda that supports abortion on demand. “Embryonic pulsing,” for example, is such a vague description that it is hard to understand precisely what it means. And it appears to have been used that way on purpose.
You better believe it was on purpose:
In an article on the Louisiana heartbeat bill, @nytimes refers to a fetal heartbeat as “embryonic pulsing,” taking its cues from the euphemisms of abortion-rights activists. pic.twitter.com/dgPHi8KYKB
— Alexandra DeSanctis (@xan_desanctis) May 31, 2019
Why is this change in terminology so notable and important? Allie Beth Stuckey gets to the heart of the matter (no pun intended):
In using “pulsing” instead of “heartbeat” in an effort to further dehumanize what is scientifically human, @nytimes takes cues from slaveholders, Nazis & every depraved force that has ever attempted to strip a group’s personhood in the name of power. Demonic. https://t.co/0pJuIjUaSo
— Allie Beth Stuckey (@conservmillen) May 31, 2019
Indeed. The pro-abortion left, including their mainstream media allies, realizes that the most surefire way to keeping people believing in the “right to choose” is by dehumanizing unborn life by way of using vague or clinical terms. Like in their use of “fetus” instead of “child” or “baby.” Like in the way they’ve (falsely) asserted that there is no such thing as a “late term” or “partial birth” abortion.
Democrats and their feminist supporters have been very effective over the years at shifting the debate over abortion from being about the unborn baby and instead to being about the “woman’s right to choose.” They’ve been successful in this endeavor because liberal mainstream media news outlets like the New York Times and CNN willingly and eagerly go along with them.
—Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–