Rep. Nutting-Wong’s House of Mirrors

After reading Rep. Allison Nutting-Wong’s (Nashua, Ward 5) recent op-ed that attacked state representative candidate Di Lothrop’s defense of the Republican stand on life, I’m stunned. That’s saying something in these times marked by blatant misrepresentation and untruths regarding our state’s modest protections for the preborn. I thought I could no longer be surprised by any statement a pro-abortionist might make, but I was wrong. Ms. Nutting-Wong’s claims and assertions are deeply and personally offensive to me and many other women who have suffered the unspeakable heartbreak of a miscarriage. If there were an award for editorial malpractice, she’s earned it.

Yes, Ms. Nutting-Wong sadly suffered a miscarriage, which I and many women can personally relate to. In no world can the natural and tragic ending of a pregnancy be conflated with abortion and abortion laws, medical terminology notwithstanding. In fact, our NH law specifically excludes miscarriage from the definition of abortion. And it includes exceptions for the life of the mother and fetal anomalies incompatible with life.

Yet, in the wake of deliberately misleading the reader by equating her miscarriage with the decision to terminate a viable pregnancy, she assumes the mantle of addressing “the confusion and myths” of the other side. It’s like a hall of mirrors – reflect, deflect – it’s an illusion designed to deceive and misdirect.

And the misdirection in her language doesn’t stop there. “Radical Republicans” – so, arguing for abortion up to the moment of birth is not radical? “Evidence-based medicine” – what medical evidence supporting the violent and voluntary termination of a healthy child is she talking about?

What politicians like Ms. Nutting-Wong seem to conveniently forget is the human life that exists and lives separately from the mother’s consideration of herself and her circumstances – a child with no voice in the process who is unable to plead for their own life. Most abortions aren’t a result of rape or incest nor because of pregnancies that endanger the life of the mother. They are undertaken not for medical reasons, but because the mother has decided to electively terminate her child’s life.

Let me be clear. Not even the most ardent protector of life would argue against seeking medical attention after a miscarriage nor attempt to punish the provider. That is not “abortion care.” Ms. Nutting-Wong paints a pathetic picture with absolutely no basis in truth. What is radical is the assertion that our freedoms should include terminating life in the womb up to the moment of birth. To follow Ms. Nutting-Wong’s logic, whose lives will be next?

Scroll to Top