Tim Graham at the Corner describes a Washington Post story by Ceci Connolly which calls funding of organizations that provide abortion alternatives, unborn victims of violence laws (like Laci and Connor's law) and informed consent laws as "restrictions" on access to abortion.
Try to imagine an article where a state government action of funding alternatives to gun ownership was called a "restricition" on gun access.
Check out these three paragraphs and tell me if you're scratching your head too.
"Those opposed to abortion are finding new and different ways to increase the roadblocks and the hoops [that] providers and patients have to jump through," Emmert said.
Missouri, for example, has set aside $1 million to encourage low-income pregnant women to carry a pregnancy to full term and potentially give the infant up for adoption.
"A theme we're seeing this session is for legislatures to go back and put on more restrictions," said Katherine Grainger, legislative counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights. "They passed all these laws, and now they're saying, 'Let's see what else we can get.' "
How is spending a million dollars to encourage bringing children to term and adoption an example of a roadblock or a hoop to jump through or a restriction?
If Missouri spent a million dollars on encouraging hunters to use compound bows instead of guns when they hunt for deer, would that be a roadblock/hoop/restriction to buying a gun?