Right rips op-ed on abort vs. adoption

Critics on Saturday ripped the “sheer viciousness” of a guest essay in The New York Times by Democratic consultant Elizabeth Spiers who argued that abortion is a potentially less traumatic alternative for a mother than adoption.

“Adoption is often just as traumatic as the right thinks abortion is, if not more so, as a woman has to relinquish not a lump of cells but a fully formed baby she has lived with for nine months,” Spiers wrote in the Friday piece.

The incendiary article landed like a bomb among anti-abortion activists.

“Each and every human life is precious, including the lives of unborn children. It is absurd to say adoption is less humane than killing an unborn child,” Dr. Mehmet Oz, the TV host and Republican Senate candidate in Pennsylvania, told The Post.

Conservative author Dinesh D’Souza said the piece reflected “the sheer viciousness of the left’s pro-choice stance.”

DailyWire publisher Ben Shapiro tweeted a 17-point thread denouncing Spiers: “Glad you’re here to resent things. You know what would have prevented that? You being aborted.”

TV host Meghan McCain, speaking of her sibling, Bridget, who was adopted from Bangladesh, “I can assure you my sister prefers being alive than dead. Of all the grotesque woke commentary to emerge in the past few years — the antiadoption fringe intellectuals are by far the most vile and sick.”

Spiers piece appears to be a response to Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s suggestion last week during oral arguments in an abortion case that adoption was an alternative.

“As an adoptee myself, I was floored by Justice Barrett’s assumption that adoption is an accessible and desirable alternative for women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant,” Spiers wrote.