A couple years ago I tried engaging progressive author Rachel Held Evans over a series of morally inconsistent remarks she had made relative to her politics and her faith. She began to respond, but when it started going poorly for her, she blocked me.
I didn’t shed many tears, but I do admit to finding it frustrating how often left-wing apologists, particularly those like Evans who wear the name of Christ, are unwilling to confront their own inconsistencies, logical errors, and self-contradictions. It smacks of an intentional dishonesty that is always disappointing.
A few days ago, in the course of lamenting the potential overturning of Roe v Wade (Evans claims to be opposed to abortion, but you’d never get that impression from reading what she says about it), Evans couldn’t get to the block button fast enough. Her comments, posted to Twitter, were alarming, revealing – and were quickly deleted when the responses began pouring in.
Here’s how it happened. Evans began with her standard “I’m pro-life BUT” introduction:
Thread: I’m pro-life by conviction, though my views on the legalities of abortion are complex, ever-evolving, & detailed elsewhere. That said, today I’ve been wondering if most pro-lifers have considered what overturning Roe v. Wade would look like in actuality…
Okay, first of all, if you are “evolving” on whether or not it should be legally permissible to dismember a tiny baby in the womb, please stop sullying the term “pro-life” by attaching yourself to it.
But more to the point, notice what Evans is doing – she is setting up a warning to pro-lifers. She is saying, “I know you all think this is a good idea, but let’s pause to consider what is going to happen if we actually overturn Roe.” I completely expected to read next about the negative consequence of back-alley abortion, increased poverty rates, or abandoned children, etc. But that wasn’t what she wrote. Instead, well, see for yourself:
“It’s important to understand that the abortion rate is highest in poor communities of color. The rate among black women is almost 5x that of white women and the rate among Hispanic women more than double…”
Uhhh…what? Evans asks pro-lifers if they realize what they’re doing when demanding an end to legal abortion and then proceeds to tell them that they’d be saving more black and Hispanic babies. Is that a bad thing, Rachel? What in the world?! She really needed to stop talking. But Rachel doesn’t do that. Unbelievably, she went on:
“…So when I see conservatives celebrating the ‘millions of lives’ that will be saved if Roe is overturned I wonder if they realize a significant percentage of these lives would be in poor communities of color – communities this administration has actively oppressed…”
Forget the unsubstantiated and silly charge that this administration has “actively oppressed” communities of color. She offers no evidence of that, and is just making an appeal to emotion, not anything factual.
But here’s the far more important reality. Of course conservatives realize that the majority of lives lost to abortion are minorities, and specifically black babies. We’ve been screaming that from the rooftops for years – pointing out that, following in the footsteps of their racist, eugenicist founder Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood today strategically places its abortion mills in black communities. Recent numbers show 79% of their facilities are within walking distance from minority communities. Pro-life groups have been talking about abortion as a black genocide for decades now.
Yet the entire point of Evans’ thread was to dissuade and discourage overturning Roe v. Wade.
And she makes that case by pointing out that black and Hispanic babies would be the ones disproportionately spared if we did?
I have to say this again because it is so jaw-dropping: Rachel Held Evans is discouraging the overturning of Roe and offering as rationale the fact that it would result in more minority babies. Yikes.
“Oh my goodness…Every now and again the wind blows the curtain open to give us a glimpse of the darkness within the heart of the abortion movement. So the lives of people from “poor communities of color” is not worth protecting from abortion?”
It’s a great question that Evans needs to answer. I’d ask her to myself but, you know, I’m blocked.