As we approach another election, the usual debates about abortion policies are again coming to the fore. On the one extreme, we have those like the Democrat national chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz who say that until birth, the decision of whether or not to abort should be up to the woman and her doctor with no state involvement. This view, which is parroted by NARAL and Planned Parenthood, finds that it is perfectly permissible for a woman to decide to abort her child even if that child could easily survive outside of the womb if he or she were delivered. These are the folks who think that Kermit Gosnell did nothing wrong when he delivered very late term fetuses and left them to die since they were unwanted.
On the other extreme, we have the people who say that no abortion at any time is ever proper. They would like to ban the procedure completely.
Fortunately, we already have a clear middle ground which, according to the Supreme Court, is mandated by the US Constitution. In simplest terms, the rule is that once a fetus is viable (it could live if removed from the mother), the state can ban abortion in cases where the ban will not result in the death of the mother. For the last 42 years, this has been the law.
The line drawn by the Supreme Court also happens to be the one that most of the public supports. Polls have shown that a majority of Americans support the right to abortion in the early days of pregnancy. A majority also support prohibition against late term abortion that results in the killing of viable babies.
Isn't it time that our political candidates understand the views of the majority and accept those views? Why should strident Democrats tell us that any limitation on the rights of a woman to have an abortion is an attack on women's health? It's not. Telling a woman who had months to decide about abortion that she cannot get the procedure in her ninth month is more common sense reality than anything else. There is no reason why an innocent baby should be put to death because his or her mother changes her mind about the merits of having a child. If that were to be adopted as a standard, why not give parents five years after birth to make the decision? Clearly, Americans as a people do not and will not accept infanticide; the politicians on the left should stop pushing it.
And as for those who seek to limit or prevent early abortions, why don't they decide to fight battles that can be won? Clearly, a state could pass a statute barring any abortions (aside from special circumstances necessary to prevent the death of the mother) during the last three months of pregnancy. In fact, with the advances in medical practice of the last few decades, it may be acceptable to bar abortion with limited exceptions during the last four months of pregnancy. Why must the political fight over abortion always be fought at the extremes?
Abortion is a serious issue, but it is an issue which has been essentially settled for more than four decades. There are too many problems facing this country right now for us to get tangled up into more fighting by extremists on both sides. Let's all push for the adoption of the reasonable policies of the middle: no abortions in the last four months of pregnancy with certain specified and strict exceptions, and no real limitations on earlier term abortions except as needed to protect the health and safety of the mother. Let's let the NARAL groupies tell America why it is okay to kill a baby girl who is four days from birth. Let's let the strident pro-life groups tell us how they can overcome the requirements of the Constitution so as to prohibit abortions during the first month of pregnancy. In the meantime, however, let's adopt reasonable rules and move on to bigger problems.
On the other extreme, we have the people who say that no abortion at any time is ever proper. They would like to ban the procedure completely.
Fortunately, we already have a clear middle ground which, according to the Supreme Court, is mandated by the US Constitution. In simplest terms, the rule is that once a fetus is viable (it could live if removed from the mother), the state can ban abortion in cases where the ban will not result in the death of the mother. For the last 42 years, this has been the law.
The line drawn by the Supreme Court also happens to be the one that most of the public supports. Polls have shown that a majority of Americans support the right to abortion in the early days of pregnancy. A majority also support prohibition against late term abortion that results in the killing of viable babies.
Isn't it time that our political candidates understand the views of the majority and accept those views? Why should strident Democrats tell us that any limitation on the rights of a woman to have an abortion is an attack on women's health? It's not. Telling a woman who had months to decide about abortion that she cannot get the procedure in her ninth month is more common sense reality than anything else. There is no reason why an innocent baby should be put to death because his or her mother changes her mind about the merits of having a child. If that were to be adopted as a standard, why not give parents five years after birth to make the decision? Clearly, Americans as a people do not and will not accept infanticide; the politicians on the left should stop pushing it.
And as for those who seek to limit or prevent early abortions, why don't they decide to fight battles that can be won? Clearly, a state could pass a statute barring any abortions (aside from special circumstances necessary to prevent the death of the mother) during the last three months of pregnancy. In fact, with the advances in medical practice of the last few decades, it may be acceptable to bar abortion with limited exceptions during the last four months of pregnancy. Why must the political fight over abortion always be fought at the extremes?
Abortion is a serious issue, but it is an issue which has been essentially settled for more than four decades. There are too many problems facing this country right now for us to get tangled up into more fighting by extremists on both sides. Let's all push for the adoption of the reasonable policies of the middle: no abortions in the last four months of pregnancy with certain specified and strict exceptions, and no real limitations on earlier term abortions except as needed to protect the health and safety of the mother. Let's let the NARAL groupies tell America why it is okay to kill a baby girl who is four days from birth. Let's let the strident pro-life groups tell us how they can overcome the requirements of the Constitution so as to prohibit abortions during the first month of pregnancy. In the meantime, however, let's adopt reasonable rules and move on to bigger problems.
No comments:
Post a Comment