On Twitter, Fr. Frank Pavone—who, to my knowledge, has neither repented nor been disciplined for putting a dead fetus on an altar and filming a propaganda video for Donald Trump—wrote this: “There is an immigration crisis, the 1st immigrant is the unborn child. There is a #Crisis at the border of the womb. They are not being detained or deported, they’re being #dismembered. We’re not going to be able to welcome an immigrant when we can’t welcome our own children.”
No, excuse me. This is exactly why people say that those who are pro-life care only about the unborn, not about the born. Exhibit 1 is the odious Frank “Coughlin” Pavone, who here pits the unborn child against the migrant child. Unless we stop abortion first, then the migrant child can go hang.
But what happened to “save them both”? That’s what we constantly hear from the Old Pro Life folks. Someone objects, “Hey, what about when the mother’s life is in danger?” and the pro-lifer replies, “Save them both!”
So tell me, Fr. Pavone: Why can’t we “save them both” in this case too? Why can’t I advocate for both the unborn and the migrant?
Because you see, Fr. Pavone, all that people like you are interested in is trying to portray those who defend the migrants as hypocrites. Why do they care about the migrants, but not the unborn? I hear it all the time. But no, I’m not going to let you get away with it: I defend both. You will find plenty of articles on this blog about the evil of abortion. No, sir: Why do you defend the unborn but not the migrants? Why do you use the unborn as a weapon against the migrants? That’s the question that matters. Until you discover consistency, I don’t want to hear any talk from you about hypocrisy.