But How Come - in All Manner of Contexts - Selfsame Media Give Sod/Stuff All of Coverage to Allowing Those with Politically Incorrect Views Which Selfsame Media Abhors to Have the Proper Chance/Opportunity to Clearly Explain the Rationale Behind Their Stance - In This Instance, Letting The 8 National MPs Who Voted Contrary Articulate Their Own Doubtless Well-Founded Views...

 For you can't convince this particular trooper that the likes of Simon Bridges, Shane Reti, Todd McClay and Michael Woodhouse aren't actuated by perfectly valid and genuinely held conscientious principles in their opposition to that particular measure...

...as likewise National's new leader Christopher Luxon was quickly ramroaded - successfully in his case, or he'd have been instant roadkill on the political landscape and on the refuse heap of former National Party leaders - into *not declaring his conscientiously-held view - shared by many throughout our world still - that abortion, constantly championed as a woman's choice, is actually killing (some would even say murdering) a living being - a child very much 'alive and well', if unborn - till 'it' is snuffed out of existence...in this life, anyhow...

*I say that, however, not to criticize or condemn National's new leader, for in a very real sense he successfully negotiated the media scrum (if of but an individual reporter or two on the particular occasion) by neither acquiescing in their baited attempt to out him as someone who names and shames abortion as flat-out, outright murder and yet simultaneously resiling not one iota from his own heartfelt conviction that life is life and all life is sacred and sacrosanct...

Admittedly - read: the U S Republican Party (especially in decades past, anyhow) - those espousing the virtue and value of 'life' will sometimes support that belief/conviction in instances of abortion and euthanasia and at the same time vigorously oppose the same by championing capital punishment and war.