It's a fascinating revelation. During the 1970's, my company, David Huck Advertising, was a major supplier of promotion materials and trade advertising for the Johnson & Johnson Baby Products Company in New Jersey. They are and continue as the unchallenged leader in the field of baby care products --- a reputation built on generations of astute and aggressive marketing professionals. It was during those years that Roe vs. Wade made abortion legal but moral opposition had slowed its acceptance. In 1976 the Democrats introduced the proposition that a woman had a right to choose. The marketing professionals at Johnson & Johnson saw that immediately as a brilliant but disastrous move that would change the abortion discussion from a moral issue to a fallacious woman's rights issue. They viewed the decision from a business perspective and recognized that Choice, as it would come to be known, would cause the loss of millions of potential customers. For a company with a vested interest in happy, healthy babies, it was a sad time. They believed that society and the churches would see through the deception of "a woman's right to choose" and refocus the discussion on abortion but, as we now know, the churches and society failed.

From the 1970's to Obama's first speech as President in which he defended "A woman's right to choose" and then to the health care debate in which the Democrats continue their support for free abortions, Choice has been and is now the primary facilitator of abortions. Unfortunately, while Choice is obviously an enticement to abortion, Right-to-Life and the Catholic Church just as obviously ignore it. Can they be less aware of the impact of Choice than the marketing people at Johnson and Johnson were? Of course not, they know, you know and I know that Choice facilitates millions of deaths. Why then are they not aggressively attacking Choice and revealing its influence on abortion?

The answer to that will come a little later. First, based on my conviction that Choice, as a concept, was a contributor and encourager of abortion and, helped by my marketing/advertising background, I developed and went online with Choicekills.com. It is the antithesis of all anti-abortion efforts. It asks for no donations but is self supporting through the purchase of anti-abortion materials. It graphically portrays the injustice of Choice destroying an innocent life. It is directed at the young women to enlighten them to the fact that Choice itself is a killer. It then encourages them to spread the truth to other young women. Unhappily, the website is barely a modest success.

Since I am more interested in Choicekills.com's usefulness to reduce abortions than in its ownership, I offered to give it to Cardinal Justin Rigali, Archdiocese of Philadelphia, Mr. David O'Steen, Director National Right to Life Committee and The Southern Baptist Convention in Nashville, TN. They were all uninterested and did not offer even the courtesy of a reply to my offer. How can it be that major organizations that publicly oppose abortion would decline an interest in a gift that would strike at the heart of Choice and help cripple its effect? Some Catholics, Baptists and contributors to Right-to-Life may be interested in knowing. What they will learn is that major organizations like the Catholic Church and RTL hesitate to expose themselves to the public pressure that would be brought against them. There is also the "above the fray" issue. Taking a stand on a subject communicates that your belief is right and others are wrong. This is confrontational and perhaps aggressive. In a humanist society where political correctness is replacing morality, large organizations cower in fear of being labeled "judgmental". The safe course is to direct their efforts toward programs that oppose abortion politely while avoiding a disagreement with what they and Johnson & Johnson have known to be their real adversary for thirty years.

Thus, we are left with the equivalent of a diabolic and unchallenged murderer roaming the streets of America hoping to mesmerize another million girls into thinking they have the choice to kill their baby. Who or what will stand in its way? Perhaps it's not the Choicekills.com program, but at least it is a place to start until a better idea comes along. If, as you read this and can help advance this effort in any way -- please do and accept my thanks.

David Huck, Choicekills.com LLC