Is this Headline a Freudian Slip?

Written on 12:10 AM by Jack B.

If you ask almost anyone, from politicians to doctors to even Planned Parenthood, the so-called "morning after pill" is not an abortificient. If you call it that they say you are not saying the truth and that you are misleading the public. According to the people who wish to make it available with or without a prescription over the counter and mandatory in hospitals (even Catholic ones), it is thoroughly wrong to equate the "morning-after pill" with either surgical abortion or the "abortion pill" RU-486.

So keeping that in mind how does one read this headline from the NY DAILY NEWS (which is not considered a "conservative" paper at all): Abort pill bill heads to gov.

THEY call it an "abortion" pill! The pro-pill person they quote is even from NARAL (the National Abortion Rights Action League). Now if the "morning-after pill" really has nothing to do with abortion and is not itself an abortificient, why call it that in the headline? And why get a quote from a group whose main focus is abortion (so much thats even in the name of their group)? Was this a does of honesty from the mainstream media or did someone screw up here (it could be both I suppose).

Hat tip to The Curt Jester for the link.