I try to avoid media coverage of the March for Life (which is easy...it's ignored or downplayed as much as possible) because it makes me crazy! I've seen attendance estimates of 300,000 to 400,000 this year, but my local paper in print and online continues to write "tens of thousands."
And the pictures and interviews with counterprotesters (usually a few dozen at the Supreme Court) overemphasive their numbers and impact on the day. So.
In a column in today's Washington Post, Robert McCartney (a Roe supporter) acknowledges what I've noticed the past few years: the movement is young. Some quotes:
"I went to the March for Life rally Friday on the Mall expecting to write about its irrelevance. Isn't it quaint, I thought, that these abortion protesteers show up each year on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, even though the decision stilll stands after 37 years."
"How wrong I was."
"...I was especially struck by the large number of young people among the tens of thousands at the march. It suggests that the battle over abortion will endure for a long time to come. 'We are the pro-life generation,' said signs carried by the crowd, about half its members appearing to be younger than 30."
(He also numbers the abortion supporters as "fewer than 100.")