Saturday’s women’s march doesn’t stand for all women, according to pro-life women leaders.
In exclusive statements, national pro-life leaders called the upcoming Women’s March on Washington hypocritical for excluding pro-life women while claiming to stand for all women. Pro-life groups Students for Life, Susan B. Anthony List and Family Research Council all chimed in. From criticizing the march for becoming a “Protect Planned Parenthood” event and marginalizing women to calling out the media’s gushing coverage, they emphasized the march doesn’t represent them.
Held the day after the inauguration, the women’s march promises to bring thousands of women together to “send a bold message” that (as Hillary Clinton once said), “women’s rights are human rights.” Except, according the march’s pro-abortion platform and its behavior towards pro-life organizations, “women” doesn’t include all women. That became even clearer when organizers recently removed pro-life group New Wave Feminists from its partner list.
In response, MRC Culture asked pro-life women for their reaction.
We believe in Reproductive Freedom. We do not accept any federal, state or local rollbacks, cuts or restrictions on our ability to access quality reproductive healthcare services, birth control, HIV/AIDS care and prevention, or medically accurate sexuality education. This means open access to safe, legal, affordable abortion and birth control for all people, regardless of income, location or education. We understand that we can only have reproductive justice when reproductive health care is accessible to all people regardless of income, location or education.
And (surprise, surprise) Planned Parenthood helped author the position. The platform names Kelley Robinson, Planned Parenthood's deputy national organizing director, as a “contributor.
Students for Life of America: ‘Women’s March’ Is Really ‘Planned Parenthood’s March’
Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America, said she wasn’t shocked by the march’s exclusion of pro-life organizations.
“Of course, they were removed,” Hawkins told MRCC in a statement. “Some intern probably saw the word ‘feminist’ and assumed they were abortion advocates.”
But Hawkins stressed a silver lining: pro-life groups escaped a partner list that boasts numerous abortion groups, including the nation’s largest abortion business, Planned Parenthood.
“New Wave Feminists should be relieved since they aren’t on the same page as Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion groups,” she explained. “Ever since the Women’s March took a specifically pro-abortion stance, abandoning their inclusivity language, it was inevitable that Planned Parenthood would hijack the march and use their partners as props to make the march into a ‘Protect Planned Parenthood’ event.”
“While it’s fun to be part of the cool kids crowd,” Hawkins added, “this is one lunch table I’m happy to not have been invited to.” Before the removal of New Wave Feminists, her own group contacted the march repeatedly about a partnership – but received neither a confirmation nor a rejection.
Hawkins still plans to make an appearance though, in order to give pro-life women – and women in the womb – a voice.
“Women’s rights aren’t trademarked by Planned Parenthood like they believe,” she said. “It’s going to be our signs, our faces, and our voices that will speak for those marginalized by the promoters of the Women’s March and their abortion industry partners.”
Susan B. Anthony List: Women’s March Marginalizes Women
As communications director for the Susan B. Anthony List, Mallory Quigley wasn’t surprised by the march’s exclusion of pro-life women either.
“The Women’s March has been aligned with the abortion lobby from its beginning,” Quigley began. “By disinviting pro-life women, the organizers further reveal themselves – they’re not interested in inclusivity, rather they only want women who agree with their extreme abortion ideology.”
She pointed out the march’s hypocrisy in claiming to represent all women.
“One of their stated goals is to defend the marginalized among us,” she said. “Well, they just marginalized the majority of women in America who support pro-life legislative proposals including ending taxpayer funding of abortion and protecting babies from painful late term abortions after five months.”
For those women to be heard, Quigley turned to the upcoming March for Life.
“This militant pro-abortion feminism is old,” she said. “I think the crowd at the March for Life next Friday will be exponentially larger than this gathering Saturday.”
Happening just a week later, the March for Life condemns abortion by celebrating human life around the anniversary of the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. As the largest annual Washington, D.C. rally, it’s (poorly covered by the media, if at all.
Family Research Council: Media Already Favor Women’s March
Like Quigley, Arina Grossu, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, pointed to the march’s two-faced messaging.
“The message that the Women’s March is sending is that about half of the U.S. female population is not welcome because they do not think that killing a child in the womb lends itself to women’s liberation,” she said. “The message is also that women can be and do anything they set their mind to, that is, they can be anything but pro-life.”
“One would think that a women’s march that upholds tolerance, choice, and peace would appreciate, or at least tolerate, women coming from diverse angles and backgrounds, even women who represent the choice of life and are against violence in the womb,” she added.
But that won’t keep the media from covering it, she said.
“The media has already done more coverage of the Women’s March than it has done for any of the annual March for Life marches,” Grossu stressed.
But the March for Life deserves just as much, if not more, attention. Grossu outlined why:
The Women’s March’s Facebook Page says that over 200,000 will be going. The annual March for Life, ongoing for the last 44 years, generally draws anywhere between 250,000 to 650,000 marchers per year in recent years, yet its numbers are always downplayed. For example, the Washington Post has described the March for Life as ‘a small, faithful crowd’ or that ‘thousands’ attend it. The New York Times barely even covers the March for Life or when it does, says that ‘hundreds’ attend it. Recently the New York Times removed references to the March for Life from an article about it, opting instead to call it an “anti-abortion march.
“The media bias is astounding,” she concluded.
<<< Please support MRC's NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>