Democrats Want Google to Hide Care from Women | Opinion

One of the many tragic ironies of the Left's campaign to "serve" women by preserving their right to abort their children is just how often it does a deadly disservice to women in need of help.

Take the current rash of fire bombings and attacks on pregnancy resource centers. Violent pro-abortion groups are targeting organizations and individuals who have committed their lives to helping women and children. These centers provide prenatal care, including ultrasounds, as well counseling. Many offer free diapers, clothing, and baby formula. By attempting to disrupt these operations through violence and vandalism, the attackers deprive young mothers of care they desperately need.

It's illogical—and maddening.

The same individuals who claim to champion women's rights are also protesting, picketing and attempting to intimidate Justice Amy Coney Barrett and her family at their home. Individuals in clothes painted to appear bloodied are walking the sidewalks outside the Justice's household, which includes young children.

These individuals and groups are now receiving help from elected officials. Late last week, more than 20 Democratic lawmakers appealed to Google to block pregnancy resource centers from appearing in search results. In other words, they don't want women to know that help and care could be as close as a phone call away or just around the block. Instead, they want expectant moms to find Planned Parenthood, which will happily murder their babies and put them at significant risk, both in the short and long term.

And these are individuals who care about the health of women? Give me a break.

Over the course of the last 50 days, dozens of churches and pro-life organizations have been attacked. They've been firebombed and vandalized. On Father's Day, two pregnancy resource centers in Dearborn Heights and Redford, Michigan, had their glass doors and windows smashed. A week earlier, another clinic was set on fire in Gresham, Oregon. Too many of our national leaders have met these attacks with silence.

It's clear the Left doesn't want to help women. They want to help kill preborn children and deprive mothers and their babies of much-needed care. What heartless person would want to withhold assistance from a vulnerable woman?

It seems to me that in the face of undeniable reality—that a preborn life in the womb is not simply a clump of tissue—the best tactic the Left can employ is censorship. It knows it cannot win an argument about abortion on its merits, so it wages a war reminiscent of a Soviet-era misinformation campaign.

I'm reminded of Focus on the Family's pro-life gathering in New York City back in 2019. Owners of the jumbotrons in Times Square blocked our requests to buy time and broadcast the live ultrasound of a preborn baby. We had to bring in our own video screens, which we put on the back of trailers. The show went on.

Roughly 20,000 people attended what became the largest pro-life gathering ever in New York City. When the image of a baby appeared on the screens and his heartbeat rang out across the city, the crowd fell silent, as did the traffic. Some referred to it as a "holy hush" or "sacred silence."

This massive rally was one block from the headquarters of The New York Times—yet the Old Grey Lady refused to cover it. Not one word. It's a variation on the old adage: "if you can't beat 'em, ignore 'em."

Left-leaning news media have no choice now but to cover the ramp-up to the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, which is expected imminently. But pro-abortion lawmakers are fearful that abortion-minded women might actually choose life, so they're trying to silence pro-life voices sharing the truth about the options available to mothers.

Beware the emergence and expansion of this Orwellian strategy—an orchestrated campaign aimed at willing accomplices in Big Tech who are trying to shape the future by controlling present-day thoughts and reality. The stakes are, literally, life and death.

Jim Daly is president of Focus on the Family.

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.