Pro-lifers are accusing the New York Times of ignoring science by labeling an unborn baby’s heartbeat “embryonic pulsing” – language that wasn’t used in earlier stories but appeared in a May 29 report on the issue.
The story referenced a new Louisiana law that bans abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be detected. The bill was sponsored by a Democratic state senator and signed by the state’s Democratic governor.
“The measure would require an ultrasound test for any woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, and forbid abortion if the test detects embryonic pulsing,” The Times story read.
Earlier in the story, The Times said lawmakers had passed a bill that would “ban the procedure after the pulsing of what becomes the fetus’s heart can be detected.”
Micaiah Bilger of LifeNews.com said the language “dehumanizes unborn babies and ignores decades of scientific evidence.”
“This new terminology is not based on facts or scientific evidence,” Bulger wrote. “It’s based on an agenda that supports abortion on demand. ‘... It disguises the truth and attempts to manipulate the public into believing something different from what they know to be true..”
Alexandra DeSanctis of National Review said The Times was “taking its cues from the euphemisms of abortion-rights activists.”
Columnist JD Mullane also criticized the language and said The Time was “dehumanizing the unborn.”
“Progressives are all about science, until it comes to human life,” he tweeted.
Photo courtesy: Freestocks.org/Unsplash
Michael Foust has covered the intersection of faith and news for 20 years. His stories have appeared in Baptist Press, Christianity Today, The Christian Post, The Leaf-Chronicle, the Toronto Star and the Knoxville News-Sentinel.