The radical left – with the help of allies in the media – is masterful in its use of language and narratives that create false impressions for less-informed Americans.

Among the top areas where this is readily seen is the issue of abortion. Earlier this month, ABC presidential debate moderator Linsey Davis abruptly interjected a “fact-check” of Donald Trump’s statement about the Democrats’ radical stance on abortion in which he cited former Democratic Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s comments – which the governor refused to recant in 2019 – in support of a law that would allow women to request an “abortion” even at the moment she is giving birth to her baby.

Northam said about this circumstance:

If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.

“There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it’s born,” moderator Davis immediately chimed in.

“That’s a lie,” wrote author and commentator at the Daily Wire Ben Shapiro Wednesday. “They fact-checked Trump, and it was a false fact-check.”

Shapiro also observed:

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

Democrats do want that. That is why Tim Walz opposed a Born Alive Infant Protection Act in Minnesota, and eight babies have been born during botched abortions and died on the table in Minnesota. Trump said that, and he was correct.

Yet another claim inserted into the national dialogue by the abortion industry is that the Supreme Court’s ruling in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson is “harming reproductive health” by causing OB/GYN shortages. The false narrative persists that fewer OB/GYNs want to live and work in states with pro-life laws since the Court overturned Roe v. Wade, bringing about “maternity care deserts.”

Tessa Cox, a senior research associate at the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI), and OB/GYN Ingrid Skop, M.D., CLI’s vice president and director of medical affairs, challenged this claim in a piece published several weeks ago.

The authors noted several findings from recent data released by the Association of American Medical Colleges showing total medical school enrollment has actually increased nationwide over the past five years – including in states with abortion restrictions.

“Pro-life states are still receiving many times more applications than they have spots available,” Cox and Skop explained:

While one study showed residency applications to pro-life states dropped slightly, it also showed that residency applicant rating of interest in programs in pro-life states was equal to that of other states. Additionally, when compared to the rest of the country, in the 2023 match cycle, 86.8% of all applicants still applied to residencies in pro-life states, and virtually all residency spots were filled.

The authors observed as well that “the closure of hospitals across the country is a long-term problem that began well before Dobbs,” and added that media coverage about recent hospital closures demonstrates hospitals that have shut down have done so due to “financial problems and declining patient volumes, not abortion policy.”

Additionally, Cox and Skop pointed out that data show most OB/GYNs choose the profession because they want to deliver babies and help women through their pregnancies.

“For a variety of reasons, some ideological, some not, only 7-14% of obstetricians surveyed reported they would perf

orm an abortion if requested by their patient,” the authors wrote.

Another related false narrative that has been pushed along by the abortion lobby and its media allies is that, in pro-life states, obstetricians can be faced with criminal penalties if they intervene to protect a woman’s life in an emergency situation.

“In reality, every pro-life state permits a doctor to use his or her clinical judgment to determine if intervention is necessary due to a life-threatening medical emergency,” the authors underscore. “Appropriate education of doctors on pro-life laws will dispel this fear and confusion.”

Similarly, Christina Francis, M.D., CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), wrote in a CLI “fact check” in June 2022:

Treating ectopic pregnancies or miscarriages or other life-threatening conditions in pregnancy is not the same thing as an abortion … In the rare but tragic situations where a pregnancy puts the mother’s life at risk, there are medical procedures for compassionately separating the mother and her baby and working to save both lives. The only intent of an abortion is to produce a dead baby. Women deserve to be empowered by medically-accurate information.

Democrats have also demonized pro-life pregnancy centers that offer both emotional and material support to pregnant women, claiming they are “deceptive and dangerous” because they do not offer “lifesaving” abortions. These same Democrats – in particular the Biden-Harris administration – recently boasted $440 million “to support pregnant and new moms, infants, and children” through the Medicaid program.

The claim in this case is that American women, especially black and Hispanic women, are experiencing a “maternal health crisis” stemming from inequitable care that makes pregnancy and childbirth too dangerous for them.

As CatholicVote reported, however, Skop’s review of the literature on maternal health found 84% of pregnancy related deaths “were considered preventable, defined as ‘a chance it could have been averted with one or more reasonable changes to patient, community, provider, facility and/or systems factors.’”

Furthermore, data in studies she reviewed showed “more deaths following abortion than childbirth.”

“Like other Americans, doctors are often drawn to a geographic location by factors they feel will improve their quality of life,” Cox and Skop wrote, suggesting that abundant outdoor activities, low taxes, or good schools for children are often associated with pro-life states.

“Many will also be attracted to states that have implemented medical malpractice reforms and physician-friendly policies,” they concluded. “Pro-life states should not be afraid of losing medical care, but should instead continue to work to attract obstetricians who feel called to care equally for both their patients.”

LifeNews Note: Susan Berry writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.