Written by L. Brent Bozell III

Over the years, Oprah Winfrey has seemingly evolved into America’s mom. After her TV career, she sounds like an evangelist preaching a feminist substitute to replace religion in her monthly Oprah Magazine. Her August issue carries this motivational nugget of Oprah wisdom on the cover: “We all want to feel radiant, joyful, and alive. It starts with choosing love — in any form.” No mention of faith, but no surprise there.

How do you feel “radiant, joyful, and alive”? Winfrey has the answer. In this very issue, she devotes a full-page ad to promote — ready? — the hashtag ShoutYourAbortion. According to Oprah Winfrey, a good way to show you’re “choosing love” is to murder your unborn baby.

This is a major reason most women don’t accept the term “feminist.” A new poll by the feminist site Refinery29 and CBS News found 54 percent of millennial women do not describe themselves as “feminists.” Of women over 36, only 34 percent identify as feminist. If you’re not a radical leftist, you decline the term. Only someone truly evil feels joy about an abortion, regardless of her (or his) position or predicament.

But Oprah Magazine editors put this under the category of “Inspiration.” Amelia Bonow was so horrified at the prospect of taking taxpayer funding away from the Democratic Party underwriters at Planned Parenthood that she touted and shouted her abortion, and now the hashtag has been “tweeted more than 300,000 times.” Ironically, that’s about a tweet for every life ended before it began in an average year of Planned Parenthood business.

This is not just a hashtag but an entire Twitter account and a website with video testimonials. One video is headlined “My abortion was gentle, irreverent, and empowering.” Gentle … for whom? Gentle, irreverent … for whom?

A woman from Seattle with badly overdone makeup and green hair discusses her three-day pharmaceutical abortion as not just “gentle” and “spiritually empowering” but “loving” and “joyful,” and, of course, “badass.” She explains how during this drawn-out procedure, she got drunk and had “brutal, metal sex,” which “you’re not supposed to do.” Somehow it wasn’t in the headline that she summarized it all as “female power-witchy s—-.”

The viewer is also treated to 10 gallons of the usual “pro-choice” boilerplate. It’s “like going to the dentist.” It’s not a difficult decision when a woman is “very single,” so she avoids ever getting “emotionally complicated.” When you’re “very spiritual, but … not religious,” an abortion is “something of a sacred act” of “taking one’s power,” a “sacred taking of agency.”

It’s sacred. Ponder that.

After these vague declarations of feminist dogma, the woman documents the entire abortion process. She shoves her urine sample into the camera but doesn’t show her ultrasound. “I didn’t look at it. … I didn’t look at the little speck,” she declares. They told her the pregnancy wasn’t far along — four weeks, six days. “I caught it really early,” she says. “I say it like a disease!”

At the end of the video, you hear the woman humming, and this text comes on screen: “I never did think of the cell cluster as ‘my baby,’ nor the sperm donor as ‘the father.’ … My whole view on the thing was quite neutral. Scientific.” Somehow it’s “neutral” and “scientific” to deny the humanity of “the thing.”

But behind this “science,” emotion dribbled out — and a sense of gravity. The video ended with this text: “It was a full moon, and I’m a sentimental, spiritual type. … So I sang a song to the spark.” She whispered, “I let go of you with love tomorrow.”

George Orwell, call your office. An abortion is letting go of the baby “with love.” That inspirational message of “female empowerment” is brought to you by Oprah Winfrey and her magazine.

We cannot avoid this truth: It is satanic. And if you think it’s not, then please tell us what is.

L. Brent Bozell III is the president of the Media Research Center. 

This article was originally published by Creators Syndicate.

Some pro-family organizations are rankled at the latest attempt by a liberal media outlet to co-opt two of America’s most beloved children’s pop culture icons on behalf of the pro-homosexual movement.

The Muppets Bert and Ernie, perhaps the most recognized characters of the popular U.S. children’s television program Sesame Street, have been used to commemorate last week’s landmark Supreme Court rulings on same-sex “marriage.” The latest issue of The New Yorker magazine shows the duo cuddling on their sofa as they watch a television featuring members of the United States Supreme Court.

The illustration, titled “Moment of Joy,” suggests the two characters were joyfully celebrating the recent rulings overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage.

Dan Gainor, vice president of business and culture for the Media Research Center, believes children are the ultimate losers.

“What happened to the idea that we could have the innocence of youth?” asks Gainor. “Where children are not abused this way? Where the characters they grow up with and learn from are made gay?”

Gainor cites the move to reverse the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, a “Was Jesus Gay” article in the Huffington Post, and now the cover of The New Yorker magazine as examples of a major propaganda initiative to convince the world that a large number of the world’s population is “gay.”

“Literally, from pre-K all the way up to senior citizens, they use TV, they use radio, they use movies, they use news and entertainment and magazines,” says Gainor. “The whole goal is [to proclaim] that all male or all female friendships … must be gay. Their opinion is basically everybody must be gay. No, that’s actually not the case.”

Gainor is not alone in his criticism.

“It’s beneath contempt for a magazine of The New Yorker‘s stature to use Bert and Ernie to celebrate behavior which is immoral, unnatural and unhealthy,” says Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association (AFA). “The artist is just dead wrong. This is a tragic day for kids who will wind up in same-sex households.”

Wildmon notes a study by University of Texas researcher Mark Regnerus that concluded children raised in same-sex environments fared worse in 77 out of 80 outcomes when compared to children raised in intact homes by a mother and a father.

“The Bible has had it right from the beginning: marriage is between a man and a woman, and it’s the optimal nurturing environment for children. The New Yorker ought to be ashamed of itself,” concludes Wildmon.

On Friday, columnist Bryan Fischer accused the magazine of promoting “child endangerment” and “child abuse” by using the images of Bert and Ernie. Fischer also cited the findings of Mark Regnerus.

‘Great for our kids’?

The Ernie and Bert characters have lived together for several years in an apartment in the basement of 123 Sesame Street. Although they sleep in separate beds, they share a bedroom, which has led some to speculate the characters portray a homosexual relationship.

In 2011, after an online petition asking for Sesame Street to have Bert and Ernie “wed” went viral, the shows producers’ refuted that claim. That same petition also asked producers to add a transgender character.

“Bert and Ernie are best friends. They were created to teach preschoolers that people can be good friends with those who are very different from themselves,” Sesame Workshop said in a statement at the time. “Even though they are identified as male characters and possess many human traits and characteristics (as most Sesame Street Muppets do), they remain puppets, and do not have a sexual orientation.”

Jack Hunter, the artist who designed the cover and first posted his image on a Tumblr account, said: “It’s amazing to witness how attitudes on gay rights have evolved in my lifetime. This is great for our kids, a moment we can all celebrate.”

Originally posted at OneNewsNow.com.