The View Features Anne Hathaway's Newspeak

​Anne Hathaway was a featured guest on ABC’s daytime show The View, where she shared some of her thoughts on abortion. Conservative media sources such as The Daily Wire, Sky News, and The Rubin Report have all shared criticisms of her thoughts. One commentator said it was silly to look up to someone who lives their life reading lines that someone else writes for them. Perhaps he has a point.

​When you watch her interview, you realize that her thoughts are even more incoherent than you would have gathered from watching the reaction videos and puff pieces that have exploded across the internet and The Washington Examiner. Most of the clips utilized do not show the full picture of how much her words fit into George Orwell’s Newspeak language of Oceania.
 
Joy Reid of The View reads Hathaway’s Instagram post celebrating the sixteen-year anniversary of The Devil Wears Prada, “I am struck by the fact that the young female characters in this movie built their lives and careers in a country that honored their right to have choice over their own reproductive health. See you in the fight.”
 
Joy Reid then asked her, “Why did you write that?”
 
“Because we’re in the fight,” she replied. “We’re in the fight everyday…”

​While Hathaway and others attempt to frame these discussions around a woman’s right (or fight) for what is falsely called reproductive health, they are in all actuality fighting for something much more sinister. If the unborn babies in the womb are living human beings, then the pro-choice movement is simply what James White and Jeff Durbin have been calling it for years, a movement to promote a “culture of death.”

So we need to answer the question, are unborn babies living, human beings? We need to establish some basic biological facts. There are seven characteristics of living things. Living things have some form of mobility, they respire, excrete waste, grow and develop, respond to stimuli, and reproduce. Human cells which compose a fetus (at all stages of development) inarguably fit this criteria.

Fetuses are living things. And as my favorite progressive Christian would say, full stop. But fetuses are also human beings.

Biology tells us that when a sperm cell fertilizes an egg cell, the result is a genetically unique human being. It is a living thing, it fits all of life’s criteria, and it is human, because it is a human cell with a full set of human DNA, growing in the uterus of a human woman. It will, if left to nature’s course, without the interference of the deadly hands of an abortionist, hopefully develop anatomically into the structures of what we know to be human in appearance. It also has a developing placenta that oddly arises from the father’s genetics that will supply the much-needed food for the baby to grow and develop as intended.

But regardless of what feeds the baby, the baby is a human baby, whether it’s one cell or a billion. Regardless of the stage of development, we don’t classify humanity by stages of development; or at least, we shouldn’t. You don’t look at a two-year-old and say they are less worthy of life than an eight-year-old just because they are less developed, or less intelligent, but that is the kind of faulty logic that is used to justify the murder of the unborn by pro-abortion activists.

Hathaway goes on to say, “Some 16-year-old’s life has been irrevocably changed because of the current overturning of Roe v. Wade…. When you are a young woman starting out your career, your reproductive destiny matters a great deal.”

Of course, whether you get pregnant at a young age or not is a major determining factor in one’s financial outcomes, and perhaps one’s mental health too. No one is denying that. But that has nothing to do with what is morally right. That has nothing to do with our obligations to the laws of morality that God has pressed into our hearts.

If the killing of unborn children is wrong, then it is wrong. If you get pregnant at sixteen (yes, even in the horrific case of rape), the baby doesn’t deserve to die for the sins of its father. The father deserves to die, but not the child. It didn’t do anything wrong. It is an innocent life, a human being, ingrained with the right to life endowed to it by its Creator and the Constitution, in that it is made in the image of God Himself, regardless of its size or level of development, or how it was conceived.

While obviously it is very important for a young woman to not get pregnant in order to focus on their career, it doesn’t mean you should murder an unborn child to pursue your career if you accidentally get pregnant. If you do abort your baby, you are acting selfishly, and self-centered people who idolize their careers above all else (including human life itself) should not be honored.

No one should be given praise for terminating human life at the altar of success. It is a demonic altar at the foot of the culture of death that can only bring brokenness and pain.

Hathaway goes on, “This is not a moral conversation about abortion. This is a practical conversation about women’s rights.”

But it is absolutely a moral conversation. The whole reason abortion is a controversial topic at all is exactly because it is a moral question. To say it is not a moral question or “conversation” is complete incoherent Newspeak.

The question is whether an unborn child in her mother’s womb is a living human being with the right to continue living. That is a moral question anyway you cut the cake. It is unavoidably so. Just look at a sonogram, is it any surprise that billions of people recognize the humanity in what they see on the other side of a woman’s belly? Look at what an abortion procedure is: where helpless, voiceless infants try to wiggle away from tongs that are used to rip their limbs off, or in the older methods where they squirmed in the chemicals that were used to destroy them, or the way they evade the suction tube that is often used to suck their brains from their soft skulls. Anne, is this a moral conversation or a “practical” one? Maybe she should ask one of the hundreds of abortionist doctor who have changed their minds on this topic, especially the one who murdered a baby that was far enough developed to kick him before he was able to finish killing it. It was that kick that changed his mind on abortion, he knew he was ending an innocent life made in the image of God.

But to Anne Hathaway, all of this is a “practical” conversation about women’s rights. None of this has anything to do with morality.

She goes on, “Without going into too many details, my own personal experience with abortion… and I don’t think we talk about this enough… abortion can be another word for mercy.”

Live Action and other organizations have posted documented results from what Hathaway calls mercy: incinerated, brain-sucked, boiled, ripped limb-from-limb, infant-human carcasses. To use that word with regards to abortion is Newspeak. It is folly. It is an untruth of the highest order.

Many would say that for the woman who has the abortion, that abortion is mercy to them. While there are small examples where abortions might have positive outcomes for a woman, such as in the case of the mental health of a rape victim, or in case of short-term financial outcomes, these benefits pale in comparison to the larger issue, an innocent human life is being murdered. It is not mercy for the unborn. These “benefits” do not gloss over the foundation of the issue, that the moral law has revealed to us that the murder of innocent human life is absolutely morally wrong. While some suppress that truth, as Romans Chapter One tells us they do, it does not remove the reality of the moral law, and that we ought to respect it and fight for the lives of the unborn.

Hathaway continues, “How can we have a law, how can we have a point of view on this, that we must treat everything the same. And where I come at it from, is that when you allow for choice, you allow for flexibility.”

I don’t think she understands how laws work in the first place. We have laws for all sorts of things, and our judicial system attempts to determine appropriate consequences for breaking the laws we have agreed to establish. That doesn’t mean that various violations of the same law are treated or punished the same. A judge and a jury determine how justice will be served, but of course we need laws pertaining to actions that harm other people, otherwise, there cannot even be an attempt to reach justice in the first place. There is nothing wrong with having a law that says murdering unborn children is a punishable crime. And then, depending on the context, a judge and a jury can attempt to judge righteously those who harm innocent unborn children. We already prosecute people who attack pregnant women and harm their unborn children. In America today, we have some laws that reflect the moral law written on our hearts, and we have others that reflect our sinful desire to go against those moral absolutes in the name of self-worship.

Towards the end of the interview, Hathaway moves from her discussion of abortion to a discussion of a film she acted in. In the film, ironically, she plays a mother. And not only this, she has children of her own that she loves and adores. So all this talk about the importance of being able to terminate pregnancies, while she found that it was more valuable to keep her children than kill them. So why doesn’t she encourage others to do the same? If she herself found that it was much more valuable to keep her children, why not attempt to make a world of laws and incentives that give others that blessed experience as well?

I also wonder about her statement where she mentioned her “experience with abortion”. If this means that she had an abortion (which I’m not sure if that’s what she was implying, but if it is), this means she traded being an actual mom at one time in her life, for simply the opportunity to act like one later. While I know she has two of her own children and is happily married to Adam Shulman, in some spiritual way I feel she may have traded a former child for a future opportunity to play the role of a mother on a telescreen. This type of trade, life and responsibility in exchange for death and prosperity, it is the bargain performed at the altar of the culture of death, where money and narcissism are the stone statues to either side, and the life of a helpless and voiceless God-image-bearer is slain as the blood sacrifice. Can you imagine how much the Devil loves abortion?

Jesus Christ says in John 10:10 (KJV), “The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.”

While the spirit of the Devil is to steal, kill, and destroy, the Spirit of God is to bring life. Abortion is the complete antithesis of the Gospel and to everything Christianity represents. For this reason alone, all Christians should be unanimously opposed to its practice, and should be united in our condemnation of its legality. May God work through the Salt as we continue to call out abortion for its stark violation of the moral law that God has pressed upon our hearts, and may He regenerate the mind of Anne Hathaway and others who sympathize with her views.

Cite: Faucett, D. (2022). The View Features Anne Hathaway’s Newspeak. Science Faith and Reasoning. Retrieved from ​https://www.sci-fr.com/articles/the-view-features-anne-hathaways-pro-abortion-newspeak