Linda Greenhouse Shows Her Colors (Again)

Veteran pro-abortion reporter Linda Greenhouse shows her heavy slant once more, this time in an article entitled “Stories We Tell.” Her target: the pro-life side in the cases of McCullen v. Coakley (free speech rights for sidewalk counselors) and Little Sisters of the Poor v. Sebelius (conscience rights challenge to the HHS abortifacient/birth control/sterilization mandate pursuant to Obamacare).

Some particularly foul tidbits:

1. Greenhouse refers to the McCullen case as involving “settled questions concerning abortion.” Sorry, but McCullen is about free speech, which applies to all issues, not just abortion. Greenhouse shows she thinks free speech cases at abortion mills are not free speech cases, but abortion cases. That only makes sense if, like Greenhouse, you think abortion trumps all competing rights. Under this mindset there is little if anything more important than having the “choice” of eliminating one’s offspring. If free speech has to yield, so be it!

2. The Little Sisters object, among other things, to drugs and devices that can kill unborn children very early in pregnancy, even before the new human being can implant in his or her mother’s womb. Notice her clever wording in referring to this objection as resting on the “unfounded belief that some of the contraceptives to which the nuns object can actually terminate what the medical profession regards as an existing pregnancy”. Translation: the Sisters adhere to the out-of-fashion biological recognition that human life begins at fertilization, not implantation, despite the politicalcomplicity of medical professional organizations in redefining “conception” and “pregnancy” to begin at implantation, not fertilization.

3. Greenhouse even calls the Little Sisters “a school-yard bully,” as if the Obama Administration goliath were some sort of toddler!

4. Greenhouse claims (if you believe her) that she sees “a claim by religion for primacy in the public square”. In other words, free speech and freedom from government totalitarianism in health care is actually a clandestine religious plot. Who would have known? Not to mention the inconvenient detail that religious freedom is right there in the Bill of Rights, at the top of the list.

Greenhouse's piece isn't journalism; it's propaganda.