It’s hardly a news flash.

But it bears reminding all the same.

We single evangelicals live on the front lines of the war against sexual purity. Our society wants fornication to be a civil right, as unfettered as religion. And if there’s any doubt, just look at how America’s pro-choice lobby is changing its dialog on abortion.

By now, perhaps you’ve seen the shockingly sexist commercial by the Center for Reproductive Rights “celebrating” the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, with former Calvin Klein underwear model Mehcad Brooks flaunting his uninhibited lust at women’s expense.

Then there was the brazenly inhumane op-ed by editor Mary Elizabeth Williams, entitled “So What If Abortion Ends Life?” Williams tried to turn the tables by agreeing that life begins at conception, but maintaining that until a human comes out of her uterus, its mother should still have the right to kill it.

Historically, the pro-choice movement has cloaked its dastardly objectives behind arguments about preserving the life of the mother, or protecting women who’ve been sexually abused. Sure, we’ve known all along that abortion-rights advocates – of both genders – really mostly want the ability to have irresponsible sex. They don’t want to be held accountable for any consequences from one of biology’s most basic activities.

We’re told only wild animals have sex and are forced to accommodate its results. Human beings should be able to take advantage of tools at our disposal to, well, dispose of what nature produces. That’s the thinking behind abortion advocacy, but it hasn’t been quite as blatant.

Until now.

Instead of taking the standard line where abortion is all about women, the Center for Reproductive Rights had Brooks revel in how abortion frees up guys like him to get all the sex he wants by objectifying women. How bizarre for the same feminists who years ago emasculated men via Madison Avenue to commission something so chauvinistic! It's as if the female empowerment we're told is so crucial to society, and for which abortion plays a crucial role, really is the charade America's powerful, accountability-phobic men have secretly contrived it to be.

Then there’s’s Williams, who, at the end of her barbaric editorial, attempted to make the murder of pre-born children virtuous: "I would put the life of a mother over the life of a fetus every single time,” she crowed, “even if I still need to acknowledge my conviction that the fetus is indeed a life. A life worth sacrificing."

Doesn’t her hubris send chills up your spine? What kind of mother "sacrifices" what she readily concedes is life inside of her – just so she can accommodate what Williams blithely defends earlier in her article as her "circumstances?" When a pro-lifer identifies abortion as a mechanism of convenience, we’re called “intolerant.” When a pro-choicer does it, however, she gets lauded for her bravery.

Talk about your double standards!

And to whom do you think is marketed all of this increasingly brazen propaganda about how abortion frees us up to have uninhibited sex lives?

Consider that 83% of women getting abortions are unmarried. And don’t assume that Planned Parenthood and other abortion provides have written-off the evangelical demographic among American women. The Alan Guttmacher Institute says twenty percent of women seeking abortions identify themselves as born-again or evangelical.