NARAL trying to, yawn, get everyone's attention. Again

eucatastrophe found this Slate article on Naral's new need to regain the numbers in support of abortion outright. Apparently, the pro-abort powerhouse faces a conundrum:

NARAL certainly has its back to the wall. According to the poll, only 22 percent of Americans say abortions should be "generally available." Another 26 percent say "regulation of abortion is necessary, although it should remain legal in many circumstances." That's a pro-choice total of just 48 percent, even when you phrase the second option to emphasize regulation. Thirty-nine percent say "abortion should be legal only in the most extreme cases," such as rape and incest, and 11 percent say all abortions should be illegal. That's 50 percent support for two hardcore pro-life positions. I've seen polls that offered rape/incest as the middle of three options, but I've never seen a poll that offered a fourth, moderate option ("regulation is necessary") and still showed 50 percent saying that didn't go far enough. These are grim numbers for the pro-choice folks.

Seems their position on abortion isn't the default of the nation anymore. What to do? Ratchet up the rhetoric: Repackage the worship of moloch as another statement on doing My-Own-Thing. The power term is "responsibility":

That's where the new message comes in. Here's how the poll puts it: "We should promote a culture of freedom and responsibility by focusing on preventing unintended pregnancies and reducing the need for abortion through increasing access to family planning services, access to affordable birth control and by providing comprehensive age appropriate sex education in schools." The poll asks people to choose between this and "a culture of life that recognizes the importance of every human life," including the belief that "life begins at conception." The culture of freedom and responsibility beats the culture of life, 61 to 27 percent. The pro-choice minority becomes a pro-choice majority.

Of course, due to the post-modern tendencies of so many fine citizens, meaning is in the eye of the beholder. In other words, we make our subjective perceptions our objective observations. This holds true for words as well. Take that power word responsibility. It implies choice to some and duty to others. Consider these two differences of perspective:

A woman in one focus group interprets the responsibility message this way: "It's like your body, your decisions, your responsibility." She associates responsibility with women's rights. A man hears it differently: "It's really essential when you are talking about rights to talk about responsibilities because it's got to be the counterpoint so that people who are on the other side don't think you have the rights to everything but you don't have any responsibilities."

This is just the beginning of NARAL's troubles. They've tried this sort of thing once before. With less than satisfactory results:

Why are value words so effective? In part because they're plastic. They mean different things to different people. This is what NARAL loved about its 1989 message, "Who decides—you or them?" Women and liberals took it as an affirmation of women's right to control their bodies. They thought "you" meant each woman and "them" meant fundamentalists. Men and conservatives took it as a rebuke to big government. They thought "them" meant politicians and "you" meant families and communities.

The trouble they'll have is that people are on to them. They don't stand for the "freedom to choose". They stand for the ka-$-ching they get when a woman puts up the $300 for the abortion. They stand for the ka-$-ching of federal, state and local subsidies. Packaging this with rhetoric about "responsibility" will only fool some of the people some of the time. But the 3D sonagram isn't going anywhere. No one sane believes that children too young to go on a field trip without parental permission should have abortions without even their parents knowledge. Many parental notification legislation had a Judicial oversight clause in the event that a young woman's family is so dysfunctional they'd abuse her. In spite of this, NARAL lawyers and their partners in Moloch, Planned Parenthood, have sued these laws into the reasonable hand of moloch-worshipping robed activists. We know what happened then. Insanity carried the day in the name of "choice."

NARAL will ultimately fool only themselves. When the NY Times prints the story of an abortion activist (that selectively kills two of her unborn kids) as an ordinary woman on the back page of its sunday Magazine, people understand. NARAL will stop at nothing to keep making money on the deaths of children. That is the only "responsibility" they respect.