NYT Goes Off the Deep End Defending Abortion, Labels It a Life Saving Procedure

New York Times building by wsifrancis, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0/Original

Seton Motley | Red State | RedState.com

I expect a certain level of insanity out of the left when it comes to abortion, but the New York Times ran an opinion piece that deserves its own ward at the asylum.


In an opinion piece by Warren Hern titled “Pregnancy Kills. Abortion Saves Lives,” Hern makes the argument that complications come with pregnancies that can be life-threatening to the mother. 

He starts off by first declaring pregnancy as a “life-threatening condition” that women die from. Then Hern goes into listing all the complications that can occur during pregnancy and childbirth. He then followed that up by discussing mortality rates between white women and black women when it comes to death by pregnancy:

In Alabama, the overall maternal mortality ratio in 2018 was 11.9 per 100,000. Among white women, the 2018 maternal mortality ratio was 5.6; among black women, it was 27.6, making black women in Alabama almost five times more likely to die as a result of pregnancy than white women. For the United States overall, the maternal mortality ratio was 20.7.

Hern then presents the solution in the form of aborting your baby before it has the chance to kill you:

By comparison, a study in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology on abortion mortality from 1998 to 2010 found that for the 16.1 million abortions performed during that time, the overall death rate was 0.7 per 100,000 procedures. The death rate for early-abortion procedures — those that took place within the first eight weeks of the pregnancy — was less: 0.3 per 100,000.


I’d like to point out that Hern’s math is subtly off. The death rate during an abortion isn’t 0.3 per 100,000. It falls somewhere more in the line of 16.1 million deaths and some change between 1998 to 2010.

Regardless, Hern pushes the point.

“Pregnancy is dangerous; abortion can be lifesaving,” he wrote.

The fact is that, yes, pregnancy does come with complications that can sometimes result in the death of the mother. It’s tragic, and medicine evolves every day to make sure this statistic drops lower and lower.

However, pregnancy also has the interesting, and more common effect, of creating life. Instead of subtracting a would-be mother from the equation, you now get a +1. Hern doesn’t even mention this obvious fact, but why would he? He’s selling death, not life. The baseline here is that abortion results in death. Every. Time. Giving birth is far more likely to result in life.

The lack of logic presented here is astounding.

Furthermore, within the backward screed of this New York Times article is yet another stat geared toward trying to convince the black community that killing their children off before they have a chance to thrive is just a good idea. Before, it was naked models trying to argue that killing black babies in the womb is prudent because they’re just going to wind up in jail anyway. Now the reason is “kill your baby before it kills you.”


Why the left insists on pushing so hard for the black community to keep getting abortions isn’t really looked at by the left. They look at it as looking after the less fortunate, but what I’m seeing is the blatant bigotry of low expectations. The left doesn’t see much going for black people and are advising them to off their children instead of having them so that they can continue living what they seem to see as the black community’s shrug-worthy lives.

This article by Hern may take the throne for the most ridiculous things I’ve seen pop up from the pro-abortion crowd.



Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos