A third-generation pro-life activist said she's "outraged" that her image is being used to promote abortion in an ad shared by California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Hillary Clinton.
The ad, shared by Newsom and Clinton earlier this month, promotes California’s Proposition 1. The ballot measure would enshrine abortion into California’s constitution, if a majority of voters approve, following the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 24 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which also overturned the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide. The court's decision returned the power to decide laws pertaining to abortion back to the states.
Macy Petty, the pro-life activist seen in the Prop 1 ad, publicly shared her reaction to seeing it in an Oct. 20 post on Twitter, writing: “Hey Hillary, I’m the girl crying in this video. I am pro-life and those are HAPPY tears because I just witnessed a MIRACLE!”
The video shows scenes from the nation's capital and across the U.S. after the court’s decision. Four seconds into the ad, which has already been viewed on Twitter nearly 170,000 times, shows Petty kneeling on the ground, sobbing outside the Supreme Court building with the word "SAD" imposed above her. The ad wrongly presumes that Petty was crying uncontrollably because the court had overturned Roe. In reality, she was overcome with joy at the court's decision.
In an interview with The Christian Post, Petty explained that she first saw the video last week, and it reminded her of the gratitude she felt toward the Lord for bringing about the decision.
“I’m part of a generation of pro-life activists,” she said. “My mom worked at a pregnancy center, and my grandma started one. So it’s in my blood. And I was just so grateful to be there to witness it because there are so many people who were in the fight before me who didn’t get to witness it.”
The pro-life activist said she was “outraged” when she saw her image and how the emotions she felt that day were being twisted and misused in an attempt to convince people to vote for abortion.
Petty also responded by writing a letter to Newsom, Clinton and the Prop 1 campaign, requesting they remove her from the video and apologize.
She believes the campaign received the letter because her image has been removed from its most recent ad. However, the original video that featured her and was shared by the former secretary of state and Newsom is still available and being shared on social media.
The pro-life activist said she has yet to receive an apology.
In a follow-up tweet also shared on Oct. 20, the pro-life activist insisted that in the full video of her, before it was edited for the pro-abortion ad, she was clearly “crying tears of joy” over Roe’s reversal. Petty added that she was also standing with friends and holding a sign made by the pro-life group, Students for Life.
She maintained that Newsom, Clinton and the creators of the Prop 1 campaign video portrayed her in an “evil light” and “distorted [her] emotions as part of [their] political game.”
“You selected the portion in which I fell to my knees in tears. At this moment, I witnessed a miracle,” the pro-life activist added. “I was overwhelmed.”
“As I continued to witness history, I pondered how lucky I was to witness such an event. I thanked the Lord for this decision and for opening my eyes to the evil of abortion. This is what brought me to tears.”
Petty accused those responsible for the video of “disrespecting her as a woman and an engaged member of society.” She added that even though it was clear that she was pro-life, the people behind the campaign video edited the clip of her to make it appear as if she supported abortion.
“Could you not find an early 20 year old who was truly sad about the Dobbs decision?” Petty asked. “You must manipulate the film of an obvious opponent of your campaign? Perhaps this is the indicator that America is truly pro-life.”
The pro-life activist demanded that the people responsible for the ad remove the clip of her from all campaign videos and promotional materials and apologize for using her image against her wishes.
In an interview with the pro-life California Family Council, Petty repeated her claims that the people behind the Prop 1 campaign were manipulating her emotions to advocate for the killing of children.
“I’m pro-life. Yet they’re using my face to say, ‘Look, 20-year-old girls have their rights stripped away and are so upset about it!’” Petty said.
“No. Don’t include me in your ‘we.’ Don’t say that ‘we’ are mad or ‘we’ are sad and ‘we’ want you to vote for this. We don’t. Don’t include me in that.”
The video promoting Prop 1 notes that many states have outlawed or banned abortion, urging Californians to vote this November to “protect the right to reproductive freedom for generations.” The video contends that Prop 1 protects “personal medical decisions,” including abortion and contraceptives in addition to preventing interference from politicians.
“No matter where a person lives or how much money they have, women — not politicians — should be able to make decisions about their own lives,” Clinton wrote in a tweet sharing the video. “That includes abortion care and miscarriage management.”
Clinton stressed that Californians should vote “YES” on Prop 1, claiming that their vote would protect “fundamental rights.” In a similar tweet, Newsom called on Californians to “send a clear message to the entire nation” by voting in favor of Prop 1 in November.
Public opinion polling indicates that a majority of California voters are likely to approve Prop 1. A poll of 1,216 likely California voters conducted by Rasmussen Reports on Oct. 12 showed 59% of Californians planned to vote in favor of the proposed constitutional amendment, while 33% planned to vote against it. A survey of 1,060 likely California voters conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California from Sept. 2-11 found that 69% of respondents supported Prop 1, while 25% opposed it.
Last month, the state passed over a dozen bills dubbed “historic” by the corporate press as California furthered its efforts to become a “reproductive freedom” state.
One bill in particular, AB 2223, removes the requirement for a state coroner to investigate deaths related to self-induced or criminal abortions. It also prevents charges or civil actions from being brought against those involved in the abortion based on statements made by the coroner in the fetal death certificate.
Mary Rose Short, director of outreach for the pro-life advocacy group California Right to Life, told CP in a previous interview that the bill “erases the idea of an illegal abortion.”
In September, California launched a $1 million website through a $200 million budget package intended to increase abortion access in the state. The website informs residents and non-residents about abortion facility locations and where to obtain abortion pills.
It also informs underage girls that California law allows them to “independently consent to their own abortion care” without their parents' consent. The state’s website also informs illegal immigrants seeking an abortion that they can obtain Medicaid coverage for an abortion.
Samantha Kamman is a reporter for The Christian Post. She can be reached at: email@example.com.