Thursday, February 21, 2008

Reducing the "tragedy" of abortion

Former President Clinton's recent verbal attack on a group of anti-abortion demonstrators included a claim that the policies he pursued, and those his wife would pursue save many more lives than would the policies the demonstrators favor.

"Safe but rare" is the phrase used by some politicians who insist that they are "pro-choice" but against abortion. This proposal would test their sincerity. Trevin Wax:
I encourage the Democrats who are pro-choice and find abortion “tragic” to back up their rhetoric with substantial legislation. 90% of women who see their unborn child on an ultrasound choose to keep the baby and refuse to go through with the abortion.

If Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (and even John McCain) are truly serious about reducing the “tragedy” of abortion, why don’t they propose legislation requiring a woman to have an ultrasound before an abortion? After all, a woman should be informed about any medical procedure, especially one that may have emotional repercussions. An argument against the ultrasound law is ultimately an argument against science, against better medical advice, against the idea that a woman should be able to make a well-informed choice.

Let’s redirect some of the money that goes to paying abortions into paying for ultrasounds. We could substantially reduce abortions in no time, and without touching Roe vs. Wade. Then, President Clinton can indeed boast about resolutions that are more than “hot air.”
Clinton Lashes Out at Pro-Lifers « Kingdom People

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated. I will gladly approve any comment that responds directly and politely to what has been posted.