It’s almost as though progressives have developed their own “You must be this tall to ride this ride” measuring stick for who appears in their messaging. Using even very young children in videos is great (getting them to swear a lot at the right people or carry vulgar signs is hilarious and a huge bonus), but whatever you do, don’t allow the triggering image of a baby to appear on screen.
After news hit that a pro-life group had planned to join Saturday’s Women’s March on Washington, organizers put out a statement clarifying in no uncertain terms that abortion rights were and always had been central to the organizers’ platform. The New York Times stepped up to amplify that message with a piece on the controversy.
"If you want to come to the march you are coming with the understanding that you respect a woman’s right to choose." https://t.co/SYnSW2YWGI
— Women's March (@womensmarch) January 18, 2017
Some kids whose mothers obviously chose life instead of abortion for them appeared in a video Wednesday reminding marchers that they were to observe principals of “Kingian nonviolence.” Harming others — at least those who made it through the birth canal to graduate from the rank of “clump of cells” to “person” — is a no-no.
For one, attack forces of evil, not people doing evil. Is haggling over the profit margin on body parts from aborted fetuses doing evil? Better check the official platform on the march’s website before attending and risking muddying the message of unity.
— Women's March (@womensmarch) January 19, 2017
— Ben Aksar (@BenAksar) January 19, 2017
Advocate for the violent deaths of the most vulnerable? What he’s trying to say is, hell yes, Planned Parenthood will be there! Look, Cecile Richards’ own pink pussyhat is taking shape.
— Cecile Richards (@CecileRichards) January 14, 2017
— Planned Parenthood (@PPact) January 18, 2017
* * *
'Proud' papa: My daughter made that 'keep Jesus out of my vagina' sign http://t.co/whutjlHsbZ
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) July 16, 2013