bobquasit | The abortion-go-round

Once again I've been drawn into a debate on abortion over on Askville.

Abortion is a troubling issue. It became even more so for me after my son was born; seeing that new life come into the world made me realize just how precious life, all life, is. I find it bitterly ironic that so many self-proclaimed "right-to-lifers" seem to have no concern at all about the life of a fetus after it's born, nor any problem with the death penalty or the murder of doctors and staff in clinics.

That said, there are a few points that I feel should be made here:

1. "It would wipe out every single restriction on abortion currently on the books." I'm sorry, but this is not true. Look up the bill for yourself, or read the Wikipedia entry: "(it) would abolish all restrictions and limitations on women in the United States to have an abortion prior to fetal viability, whether at the State or Federal level, or after the point of viability when the life or health of the woman is endangered." (emphasis added).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Choice_Act
http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.uscongress/legislation.110s1173
http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.uscongress/legislation.110hr1964

2. Most "right-to-life" groups would ban not only elective abortions, but abortions which are medically necessary to save the life or health of the mother.

3. "partial-birth abortions" is not a medical term. It's a horror-phrase made up by "pro-life" groups to frame the issue and scare the public. Late-term abortions are extremely rare, and are usually medically necessary. In such cases, the fetus is often not viable.

4. If the right-to-life movement succeeds in banning abortion throughout America, their next step will be to ban all forms of birth control other than the rhythm method (which, of course, doesn't work). That means they'd ban the Pill, condoms, depo-provera, and any other form of effective birth control. The Bush Administration has already moved to re-define some types of birth control in a way that effectively classifies them as abortion. I suspect that if Americans knew that the right-to-life movement was targeting their right to consequence-free sex, they'd be more than a little upset. It's worth noting that birth control was illegal in many parts of the United States until 1965 (Griswold v. Connecticut, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut).

5. Lastly, when so-called "pro-life" politicians run the government, the number of abortions does up - because such politicians inevitably eliminate or cut funding for sex education programs (except for abstinence-only programs, which don't work). Teen pregnancies also skyrocket. If "pro-life" people really cared about stopping abortion, they'd put more of their energy and passion into preventing unwanted pregnancies. But they don't. I have to wonder why.

Here's a link to balance out the four links that were given in the question. It gives the pro-choice side of the issue.

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/choice-action-center/in-congress/foca.html

Sigh...