Blog | Subscribe | Free Trial | Contact Us | Cart | Donate | Planned Giving
Log In | Search
facebook
rss
twitter
  • CURRENT
    • Winter 2025 PDF
    • WINTER 2025 HTML
    • THE HUMAN LIFE REVIEW HTML COLLECTION PAGE
    • NEWSworthy: What’s Happening and What It Means to You
    • Blog
    • Pastoral Reflections
    • About Us
  • DINNER
    • GREAT DEFENDER OF LIFE DINNER 2024: NEW MEDIA ADDED!
    • Great Defender of Life 50th Anniversary Dinner Ticket 2024
    • Great Defender of Life 50th Anniversary Dinner TABLE for TEN Ticket 2024
    • Great Defender of Life 2024 Young Adult / Pregnancy Center Staffer Tickets
    • HOST COMMITTEE Great Defender of Life Dinner 2024
    • DINNER JOURNAL ADVERTISING 2024
    • ARCHIVE: GREAT DEFENDER OF LIFE DINNER 2023
  • ARCHIVE
    • Archive Spotlight
    • ISSUES IN HTML FORMAT
  • LEGACY
    • Planned Giving: Wills, Trusts, and Gifts of Stock
  • SHOP
    • Your Cart: Shipping is ALWAYS Free!

BLOG

1 Comment

The Crossword Puzzle as an Instrument of Propaganda

Dr. Donald DeMarco
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Crossword puzzles are said to be the most popular and widespread of all word games.  Typically, they are free of controversy—all the correct answers are facts that respond to questions such as “what is the longest river in Egypt?” or “who was the second president of the United States?” In this way, every player has a fair chance. It had never occurred to me that the crossword puzzle could be used as an instrument of propaganda until I picked up a student newspaper from our local university. In its crossword feature, one of the clues referred to “a local anti-choice organization.” The presumed answer was “Birthright.” Here was an instance of propaganda pure and simple.

My dictionary, which is not an instrument of propaganda, defines the term as “information or ideas deliberately spread to harm a group or movement.” The truth of the matter is that Birthright is not an “anti-choice organization.” In fact, it affirms a woman’s choice to carry her pregnancy to term by offering her the support she needs. It is slanderous to distort the nature of this charitable organization so that it can be squeezed into a politicized pigeonhole. Was this a bit of left-wing levity, or liberal larceny? It was not difficult for me to decide that it was the latter.

Propaganda works effectively when it is grounded in something that people trust. I recall our local TV station reporting on the alleged vocation crisis by showing an empty chapel. When the viewer sees that none of the pews are occupied, he is prepared to believe the voice-over that interprets the situation for him. People trust their eyes; they believe their ears. But suppose the video were taken at 3 o’clock in the morning, when all the seminarians are in bed, instead of at 9 o’clock Sunday morning, when they are all at Mass?

We have built up a certain trust in crossword puzzles. We do not think they are trying to deceive us. But our naiveté can make us vulnerable. Apart from the propaganda, and the slurring of a good and worthy organization, the message fails miserably on a philosophical level. Is anyone truly “anti-choice”? If one were, he would be opposed to all choices, whether they be for life or for abortion. Such a condition—the inability to choose—is pathological.

Neither Birthright nor any other pro-life group is anti-choice. Ironically, it is precisely because they choose to be visible and reasonable advocates for the unborn that their opponents want to silence them and make them go away. In this regard, pro-abortion people are anti-choice in the sense that they reject the right of pro-life people to choose to be themselves and express their convictions. And how far does this censoring go? Can a woman who is carrying a child refer to herself as an “expectant mother”? “No,” says the British Medical Association, since that appellation could offend transgender people. Moreover, according to BMA guidelines, “pregnant people” is preferred because, in the future, “intersex men” and “transmen” may achieve pregnancy.  Is a pregnant woman allowed to smile in public? “No,” state certain feminists, because that could dissuade other women from having abortions. Who, we ask, is placing unreasonable limits on choice?

Was Rabbi Bernard Mandelbaum being anti-choice when he wrote his 1968 book Choose Life? Should both the title as well as the book have been suppressed? Furthermore, the author had the chutzpah to dedicate his book, “To Judith, the wisest choice of life for myself . . . and for Joel, Dasi, David, Debra, and Naomi.” How can the choice for life not be a choice, whereas the choice for death is a choice?  Life is certainly an object of choice. It is astonishing how, being cloaked in a shroud of political correctness, a university student, especially one writing for a student newspaper, cannot grasp the meaning of a word. “Anti-choice” would also be opposed to a woman choosing an abortion.

The truly great choices in life—marriage, children, one’s vocation, one’s form of education—require both faith and courage. We do not know exactly what sequence of events will flow from our choices. Only God is in a position to know. Organizations such as Birthright are not only pro-life, but also pro-faith and pro-courage. They should not be reduced to a political stereotype. Justice, too, demands their fairer appraisal.

Nonetheless, the crossword puzzle as an instrument of propaganda fascinates me. Its degree of cultural acceptance suggests, at least in the student newspaper, that the abortion issue is settled, and opponents of abortion are, indeed, anti-choice. It is now presumed to be a crossword puzzle fact—like the “the world’s tallest mountain” or “the name of the person who invented the phonograph”—that agencies such as Birthright are “anti-choice.” Education, of course, should enlighten, not enshroud. In opposing abortion, one is also opposing certain aspects of culture. To teach the fundamental importance of the triad of life, faith, and courage is a daunting task.  Education, however, does not proceed from the left-wing slant of student newspapers.

551 people have visited this page. 1 have visited this page today.
About the Author
Dr. Donald DeMarco

Dr. Donald DeMarco is Prof. Emeritus/St. Jerome’s University and Adjunct Professor at Holy Apostles College & Seminary. He is a regular columnist for the St. Austin Review.  His latest book, The 12 Supporting Pillars of the Culture of Life and Why They Are Crumbling, is posted on amazon.com.

Social Share

  • google-share

One Comment

  1. Wonda Dollard December 25, 2024 at 7:34 pm Reply

    Now review Universal Crossword or the USA Today’s daily. Full of propaganda, so much so after 10 years of doing them almost everyday I quit. To radical for me.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Comments will not be posted until approved by a moderator in an effort to prevent spam and off-topic responses.

*
*

captcha *

Get the Human Life Review

subscribe to HLR
The-Human-Life-Foundation
DONATE TODAY!

Recent Posts

RFK Jr, Autism, Eugenics--and Pro-Life Silence?

09 May 2025

IVF: The Frozen Sleep Evading Time

07 May 2025

Report: "The Abortion Pill Harms Women"

05 May 2025

CURRENT ISSUE

Alexandra DeSanctis Anne Conlon Anne Hendershott Bernadette Patel Brian Caulfield Christopher White Clarke D. Forsythe Colleen O’Hara Connie Marshner David Mills David Poecking David Quinn Diane Moriarty Dr. Donald DeMarco Edward Mechmann Edward Short Ellen Wilson Fielding Fr. Gerald E. Murray George McKenna Helen Alvaré Jacqueline O’Hara Jane Sarah Jason Morgan Joe Bissonnette John Grondelski Kristan Hawkins Madeline Fry Schultz Maria McFadden Maffucci Marvin Olasky Mary Meehan Mary Rose Somarriba Matt Lamb Nat Hentoff Nicholas Frankovich Peter Pavia Rev. George G. Brooks Rev. Paul T. Stallsworth Rev. W. Ross Blackburn Stephen Vincent Tara Jernigan Ursula Hennessey Victor Lee Austin Vincenzina Santoro Wesley J. Smith William Murchison

Shop 7 Weeks Coffee--the Pro-Life Coffee Company!
Support 7 Weeks Coffee AND the Human Life Foundation!
  • Issues
  • Human Life Foundation Blog
  • About Us
  • Free Trial Issue
  • Contact Us
  • Shop
  • Planned Giving
  • Annual Human Life Foundation Dinner

Follow Us On Twitter

Follow @HumanLifeReview

Find Us On Facebook

Human Life Review/Foundation

Search our Website

Contact Information

The Human Life Foundation, Inc.
The Human Life Review
271 Madison Avenue, Room 1005
New York, New York 10016
(212) 685-5210

Copyright (c) The Human Life Foundation.