Charles Dickens and the French Revolution gave us the "Tale of Two Cities."
Roe v. Wade and the silent scream of the unborn babies gave us the "Tale of Two Marches."
The first and oldest March for Life started 46 years ago after the Roe v. Wade decision to allow the termination of the unborn baby, to deny its right to life. No, it's not a tumor. Science has proven, it's a life from conception.
The American College of Pediatricians says life begins at conception. Using this, the Women's March promotes the lie that life does not begin at conception and that abortion is a woman's right to reproductive health. Sorry, ladies, pregnancy is not a disease. We do not to have to cure her of her child.
The March for Life is a selfless march. These millions who march brave the cold for the voiceless victims of abortion.
The Women's March is a selfish march. The baby is an inconvenience, an intruder in their planned parent lives. For those who know it's a baby, they are the abusers of these innocent children.
The March for Life is counter-cultural. Sadly the values we once held sacred are being challenged by educators, the media and many medical schools.
The Women's March is supported by the prevailing culture as evidenced by the national media's coverage of the Women's Marches and the lack of coverage for the March for Life. Watch the House of Representatives' move to repeal the Mexico City Policy and the Hyde Amendment. Let us not forget the entertainment industry and its upcoming Rock for Roe concert in New York, a concert to support the Roe v. Wade decision's right to abortion.
To conclude the comparison of the two marches, it would help to summarize the life of the author of "The Tale of Two Cities," Dickens, as summarized by the English scholar, Edgar Johnson. "Charles Dickens showed sympathy for the poor and helpless, and mocked and criticized the greedy and cruel."
Could we be more like Dickens?