Ruben Navarrette Jr. bravely wrote a refreshingly open article concerning his stance on abortion. He admits that he has spent the last 30 years being adamantly pro-choice, but after watching a series of videos released by the Center for Medical Progress, he’s been moved to rethink his position.

For those of us who are pro-choice, the Planned Parenthood videos are a game changer. As to whether that means I’ll change my view, I’m not sure. I’m on the bubble. Ask me in a few weeks, after the release of more videos.

Of course those who fight adamantly against the possibility of an open mind were none too pleased. How dare he step out of line and reassess his beliefs before consulting the militant Planned Parenthood following to see if such individuality was allowed, right? He shall now be hauled off to the gallows by self-proclaimed martyrs, where he will face the court of public opinion and be charged for his thought crimes.

@andreagrimes "And then the Planned Parenthood sting videos started coming out…" and I realized, nope, I'm just a gullible baby-man!

— Sara Byrella (@umbyrella) August 11, 2015

I award Sara zero points for creativity, because “gullible baby-man” is, quite possibly, the least offensive attack I’ve ever read. Like I actually found him more enduring after he was given that title, more so than when I just knew him as “that Daily Beast columnist.”

The gullible baby-man went on to explain how disconcerting it was to see the casual demeanor of the staff, as well as the alarming nature in which they described improved methods of extraction to preserve certain organs.

It’s jarring to see doctors acting as negotiators as they dicker over the price of a fetal liver, heart, or brain, and then talk about how they meticulously go to the trouble of not crushing the most valuable body parts. This practice is perfectly legal, and for some people, it is just a business. With millions of abortions each year in America, business is good.

Who could forget Dr. Mary Gatter, council president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s Medical Directors, when, in Video #2, she tells undercover investigators that it isn’t about the money—before she zeroes in on dollars and cents?

“Let me just figure out what others are getting, and if this is in the ballpark, then it’s fine,” Gatter said. “If it’s still low, then we can bump it up.”

Then, going for broke, she added: “I want a Lamborghini.”

I want a shower.

Ruben spoke on how he began to question the practices we see in the videos, and how his own side began to attack him for merely stating the obvious. He wasn’t attacking abortion as a whole, but merely the practices, lack of morals, and disregard we are now privy to. However, as he notes, that isn’t enough. You either support Planned Parenthood, every scathing view and decrepit detail of their organ harvesting, or you walk the plank.

David Daleiden, head of The Center for Medical Progress, issued an unsurprisingly stronger statement: “Planned Parenthood’s system-wide conspiracy to evade the law and make money off of aborted fetal tissue is now undeniable. Anyone who watches these videos knows that Planned Parenthood is engaged in barbaric practices and human rights abuses that must end.”

I agree with that assessment, and I’m pro-choice. At least I thought I was until recently. These days, each time, I express concern, outrage, disgust, or horror over another video—which should come with warnings that they may produce nightmares—some supporter of the organization responds by attacking me and insisting that I was never really pro-choice to begin with.

He even acknowledges that the bill to defund Planned Parenthood was not about removing money from women who need it, but about redirecting that money to those who respect both the mother and the unborn.

And in the Senate, a bill to defund Planned Parenthood and transfer the $500 million in federal funds it receives annually to women’s health clinics and other organizations was defeated when it failed to get the 60 votes needed to achieve cloture and move to a vote. Within hours of the defeat, supporters of Planned Parenthood sent out emails urging donors to “stand with” the organization in a craven attempt to use the failed vote to generate even more money in fundraising.

He notes in the article that he is still pro-choice, but that he is currently reevaluating his views. He, like many men, came to his views after being bullied by a narrative driven movement. The “you can’t speak on abortion unless you have ovaries” opinion has silenced countless men, and Ruben was no different.

I arrived there for a simple reason: Because I’m a man. Many will say that this is not a very good reason, but it is my reason. Lacking the ability to get pregnant, and thus spared what has been for women friends of mine the anguishing decision of whether to stay pregnant, I’ve remained on the sidelines and deferred to the other half of the population.

Over time, I made refinements—going along with waiting periods and parental notification laws at the state level, and coming out against the barbaric practice known as partial birth abortion.

As I’ve only realized lately, to be a man, and to declare yourself pro-choice, is to proclaim your neutrality. And, as I’ve only recently been willing to admit, even to myself, that’s another name for “wimping out.”

Of course, I personally wish this man was pro-life, and maybe eventually he will be. Until then, I’m pleased to see that he has bravely broken out of the box the pro-choice movement forced him in. So why do those on his own side attack him for being pro-choice, while also disagreeing with the organ harvesting business we see in the undercover videos? National Review has a theory, an incredibly solid theory.

From the beginnings, during the Progressive era, of the movement to legitimize and legalize abortion to our 40-years-post-Roe America, the story of abortion in this country has been one of two contrasting, but not always mutually exclusive, mainstream intuitions. On the one hand, a broad social stigma attaches to abortion, and especially to abortionists, and to varying degrees it survives to this day. On the other hand is a conviction, cultivated more or less successfully by abortion advocates, that widely available abortion is a social necessity.

The resulting tension has placed abortion and abortionists in a peculiar social position: on the margins of mainstream respectability, but fulfilling a role perceived to be essential. It’s not surprising, then, that abortionists, especially late-term specialists, are seen by the wider pro-choice movement (and by themselves) as living martyrs. They are the morally tough practitioners of a dark but necessary art on which the equilibrium of society depends.

The Pro-Choice movement has created a new breed of martyred heroes, and they’re not only the doctors holding the instruments, but also those that hold the veil that stands between you and the truth. People are finally getting a glimpse at what was sold, not what it has evolved to be, but what it has been from the beginning. Abortion, at its core, was never driven by the needs of women, but was simply a vehicle for those with an agenda. Our society was sold a lemon disguised as a Lamborghini, it was never an honest sell and they know that. It was always faulty, always a poor choice, and always the result of sales tactics that led you away from the truth. Now it’s broken – exposed – and for them to admit it is a lemon now would be to admit it was a lemon then, and the movers and shakers in the regime have no intention of letting that happen.

But then there was Alan Guttmacher, after whom Planned Parenthood named its research arm, who succeeded Sanger as president of Planned Parenthood while serving as the vice president of the American Eugenics Society. Even the widely popular book Freakonomics floated the idea that abortion may be effective at preventing crime by preventing criminals.

The system as a whole was never built upon the foundations of women’s health, but rather on eugenics, societal cleansing, and extortion. In their eyes, the child was a waste before it was ever a line item, before it was a wealth of spare parts, before it was waltzed through the clinic doors. They simply found a use for what they had already decided was disposable. The ends justify the means, and no matter how many severed hands you hold up, the deepest of followers have lived and died, and will always thrive, believing that ending the life of certain children is the greater good.

A life that cannot moan in pain, nor revolt in numbers, is free for the taking. Regardless of how brutal and grotesque the acts, as long as they’re done in a sanitary environment the militant leaders of the movement will not only continue to support genocide, but encourage it. There are no piles of cadavers in the streets, starving emaciated bodies, nor the broken mother clinging to her child as he is ripped from her arms. It is the mass disposal of the innocent, hidden by medical waste bins, pie plates, and white coats. The blood is washed off their hands before they clock out. Don’t expect them to change anytime soon, just embrace the open-minded “gullible baby-men,” and encourage them to continue searching for the facts. Help the fence walkers who lack the proclivities necessary for the industry, those who are thrown off their reservation for questioning why the gods they have worshiped for far too long have mislabeled “sacrificial lambs” as “donated tissue.”