Actually, Ayanna Pressley, White Supremacists Love Abortion

Printed from:

U.S. Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-Dorchester) brought out one of her worst pro-abortion talking points in the U.S. House chamber recently.

Pressley attacked pro-life policies, as she has frequently done, by trying to label them as white supremacy.

“Anti-abortion legislators in 47 states focused on legislating hurt and harm to push this critical health care out of reach,” she said. “These misguided bans will not actually prevent all abortions. They simply put safe and necessary abortion care out of reach for our most vulnerable, specifically our lowest income sisters, our queer, trans and non-binary siblings, black, Latinx, AAPI, immigrants, disabled and … indigenous folks. And none of this is happenstance. It is precise. Like the roots of the anti-abortion movement, these bans are rooted in patriarchy and white supremacy.”

For those who know little about the way that white supremacists think or the reality of abortion, maybe it’s a convincing argument. For those who are familiar with the alt-right movement in the United States, however, it’s an absurd thing to say.

Why would white supremacists oppose abortion? They don’t. In the United States, their main fixation is the racial demography of the country. They want the United States to be a majority-white country.

Abortion prevents the United States from becoming even more racially diverse. The majority of abortions in the country kill nonwhite unborn babies (61 percent); only 39 percent of abortions in the country kill white babies, according to The Guttmacher Institute, which supports legal abortion.

Actual white supremacist Richard Spencer, who popularized the term alt-right and is a leader in the movement, supports legal abortion. One of the other most prominent white supremacists in America, Jared Taylor, founder of the publication American Renaissance, also supports legal abortion.

Spencer openly admits that he supports abortion for eugenic reasons.

“One of the primary moral justifications for legal abortion is that it allows spiteful, nihilistic, petty, sick, and ugly people to voluntarily remove their lines from the gene pool,” Spencer tweeted in May. “We must be cruel only to be kind.”

So he thinks that women who have abortions, who are disproportionately low-income and non-white, should be taken out of the gene pool for the betterment of society.

Of abortion, Taylor told Compound Media, “I think that abortion, on balance, prevents unwanted children from coming into the world and I think that’s a good thing.”

Taylor has also mocked American conservatives for their pro-life beliefs, especially when trying to convince them that racial demographics are more important for building a competent society than specific government policy.

“Do you dream of a traditional, religious, free-market society with small government, low taxes, and no gun control, where same-sex marriage is illegal, and abortion, divorce, prostitution, and illegitimacy are scorned?” Taylor wrote in a July 2015 column. “There are such places:  the tribal areas of Pakistan and Somalia. And what about countries that violate your principles – with high taxes, huge government, clogged markets, a weak church, strict gun control, and sexual license of all kinds? There’s Scandinavia. And yet if you had to leave the United States you’d much rather live in Denmark than in Waziristan.”

To be clear:  universal health care isn’t the reason why Taylor likes Scandinavia.

Greg Johnson of Counter Currents, a self-professed white nationalist, thinks that abortion in the United States is a good thing.

“The aim of White Nationalism is to prevent our race from being demographically swamped by non-whites — today by combating anti-white policies, eventually through the creation of homogeneously white homelands,” Johnson wrote in 2016. “Thus abortion is good for whites in America, because it has postponed, perhaps by decades, the date that we will become a minority in this democracy.”

Pro-lifers oppose abortion because they think it’s horrific to kill a vulnerable, innocent human being — no matter what race the human being is or who the human being’s parents are. They know that life begins at conception and that abortion ends a human life and think it’s better to allow someone to have a life than it is to deny them one. 

Protecting unborn children is the only incentive to oppose abortion in a multicultural country like the United States. It’s not an electoral boon for Republicans; more non-white and low-income Americans would likely help the Democratic Party. And more poor people would cost the country more in public services.  This isn’t about electoral strategy, though; it’s about saving lives. There are pro-life Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians — and unenrolleds, like myself.

To her credit, Pressley understands it’s wrong for the government to push a policy that ends lives when it comes to capital punishment. She has called capital punishment “inhumane, racist and flawed.” I agree with her that capital punishment is wrong and think she deserves credit for pushing to abolish it.

However, it seems as though she can understand the argument against ending a life here, but not when it comes to protecting the unborn. The Boston Marathon bomber is guilty of killing people; an unborn child is pure of heart. If only Pressley would give the unborn child the same protection she wants to give the marathon bomber.

The pro-life position in this country comes from a place of love, not hate. It’s unfortunate to see it misconstrued by politicians when speaking to the masses that won’t fact check them on it.


New to NewBostonPost?  Conservative media is hard to find in Massachusetts.  But you’ve found it.  Now dip your toe in the water for two bucks — $2 for two months.  And join the real revolution.