I read the entire article and there was one particular quote at the end that caught my attention:
"[Obama's remarks] align him squarely with abortion advocates who view laws protecting unborn children as 'punishing' pregnant women by forcing them to give birth to the baby instead of taking the child's life through abortion."Now, given that this is a pro-life newsletter, nothing about this quote is surprising; they refer to pro-choice people as "abortion advocates" (although I don't think any pro-choice people would actually advocate or encourage abortion) and describe an embryo/fetus as a child (although it is clearly not a child yet.)
What I find ironic, though, is that they seem to take offense at the use of the word "punishment" to describe a baby. In my experience, the most oft-repeated lines against allowing abortions for women who simply don't want kids usually sound something like "Well, she shouldn't have had sex." When people say things like this to pregnant women who never wanted kids - that this pregnancy and the resulting child are a consequence of having sex and they should have to deal with it - how is that not punishing them? The way I see it, this attitude is exactly the opposite what having a kid should be: something that's welcomed and looked forward to, and even planned for, not a consequence to be dealt with.
I can't help but wonder how the writer of that article is rationalizing this, or if it's even occurred to them.