The Christian Post is an outlet that serves numerous masters, like feminism and Zionism. But this past week, they caught the ire of the pro-life activists, known as abortion abolilitionist after running a series of articles against making abortion actually illegal.
The Foundation to Abolish Abortion (FAA) announced:
In the past week, The Christian Post has published THREE opinion pieces against abortion abolition. But they REFUSE to publish a rebuttal, with their editors instead telling us that abolitionism is “extreme.”
The Christian Post published opinion pieces against abolition on February 7, February 10, and February 13. Among other claims, these articles described equal protection for preborn babies as “shame-based legalism” and said those who support criminalizing abortion for everyone willfully involved “miss the gospel.”
We sent an email offering that Ginna Cross write a rebuttal. Anyone who knows Ginna Cross, a supporter of equal protection who runs a rapidly growing pregnancy help organization with her husband, is a godly, respectful, and intelligent advocate of our positions.In response to this suggestion, we were told that The Christian Post refrains from platforming “what we consider to be extreme views” for their opinion pieces, with their editors insisting that they will instead “objectively report abolitionist arguments.” In another email, they suggested that we host a debate about abolition, and said they would cover the event from a news standpoint.
As we noted, their choice to label equal protection as “extreme” allows them to silence debate, even as they repeatedly publish weak arguments and downright misrepresentations from only one side.
The Christian Post has clearly missed the mark on this editorial decision, and they are failing to serve their readers as a result. We would respectfully encourage them to reconsider this decision simply by giving the other side of the argument a fair hearing instead of only giving that opportunity to one side.
Christian Post has labeled criminalizing abortion “extreme,” but the outlet has no qualms about worshipping Israel, defending no-fault divorce, obfuscating the ethnic cleansing of Christians, and attacking John Chrysonstrom on Holy Week. All of these are rather extreme positions Christian Post has published. This does not include their regular support for amnesty for illegal aliens, their promotion of the Jesus was a refugee lie, promoting MLK, or their opposition to Republicans gerrymandering.
Extreme liberal positions, such as allowing the ethnic cleansing of Americans by giving illegal aliens amnesty, are allowed. But taking the standard Christian position that abortion is murder to its logical conclusion is not.
Christian Post is not applying equal weights and measures in its response to Zeisloft. They are, instead, operating under a liberal framework of what constitutes extreme.
