Saturday, October 16, 2010

40 Days, and extremism

A new law in Nebraska that bans abortions after 20 weeks, when science shows that unborn children can react to painful stimuli, has taken effect.

You would think that nobody would oppose this kind of law--but you'd be wrong:
"Planned Parenthood of the Heartland believes that LB1103 is a bad law for women. We will however, continue to serve the health and well–being of women within the confines of this regulation."
Pro-life Americans are accused of being "extremists" on abortion. But who, really, are the extremists here? The people who managed to build a consensus that abortions after 20 weeks aren't really necessary, or the people who see any restrictions at all on abortion as being "bad" for women?

Planned Parenthood stands in the way of any pro-life/pro-abortion consensus that might arise to enact reasonable restrictions on abortion. Many people who are not against abortion are in favor of sane, sensible restrictions, like parental notification for minors, waiting periods, mandatory offers of ultrasounds and fetal development information, measures to ensure that women aren't being coerced into abortion, and outright bans on third-trimester abortions. Planned Parenthood, along with most pro-abortion politicians, opposes all of these possible restrictions to abortion and more. They really seem to think that it should be easier for a scared, pressured fifteen-year-old to get an abortion than it is (in many states) for her to have her ears pierced.

The real extremists are the ones who won't accept any limits at all on abortion. While I, as a pro-life Catholic, would prefer for all abortion to be illegal, I am happy to work with like-minded people to decrease the number of abortions. Sadly, those who call for abortion to be "safe, legal, and rare," usually only want them to be legal--they aren't concerned about safety (because clinic health inspections are too burdensome to women!) and they certainly don't want abortion to be rare, either (not when they can make $350-$900 and up for every one!). They're not just "pro-choice;" they're rabidly pro-abortion, and they really don't care about fetal pain or maternal coercion, so long as the customers keep pouring in.


Siarlys Jenkins said...

I can't fault anything you say here Erin. The criteria are precisely the ones I have been advocating, and I suspect that those who are implacably pro-life, plus those who recoil from abortions performed after the fetus can unquestionably feel pain would constitute a substantial majority. I might have set the boundary at 21 or 22 weeks, but I can't argue against erring on the safe side.

I assume that there are exceptions when the life of the mother, or her long-term, clinically diagnosible, health are seriously threatened.

When Abbey Johnson left her Planned Parenthood job, it sounded to me like a big factor was being ordered to MARKET abortions as a good source of revenue. My mother, a life-long Republican and a long-time Planned Parenthood volunteer, who never had an unplanned child in her life, found that shocking as well.

It reflects, in part, the prevalent abomination that non-profits should adopt a "business model" for how they run. If business and commerce could take care of everything, we wouldn't need non-profits in the first place. This is a prime example that accepting a "revenue-driven" mode can deform what might have begun us a public service -- even from a pro-choice point of view.

priest's wife said...

I miscarried a 20 week old- that's a big baby.