A Better Way on Abortion?

The pro-life movement is a miracle. It is a miracle that it even exists, given that it is opposed by every powerful institution and group outside the Church – the media, the universities, the philanthropic institutions, the powers who support people such as Doug Kmeic and “Catholics In Alliance For The Common Good,” etc. That it is a miracle is significant. As Blaise Pascal observes, in Pensee No. 842: “In a public dispute where the two parties profess to be for God, for Jesus Christ, for the Church, miracles have never been on the side of false Christians, and the other side has never been without miracles.”

It would be refreshing if Abortion were dropped as an electoral wedge issue, however I am not holding my breath - especially while some Bishops use it as a surrogate way to assert Magisterial authority (which backfires on them in most cases). I am very willing to go both the economic and legal routes to lessen Abortion - however too many conservatives believe living wage (as opposed to just wage) policies are socialistic while others won't cooperate on abortion limits for only the third and late second trimesters (where abortions are rare anyway). Finally, there is the fetish for overturning Roe. Many cannot separate their dislike for the result from the reasonability of the legal findings: 1. Federal Supremacy over states on equal protection issues (and the unacceptable consequences of repeal). 2. No legal status under the plain language of the Constitution for recognition of the fetus before birth - or implementing federal legislation changing that. 3. Barring such recognition, that women have a right to privacy in dealing with their doctors (medical privacy). One can argue that we SHOULD consider the fetus a person - however until this is actually done at the federal level, Roe must be considered tragic but correct. The burden on making that change is on those who would change the law. Pro-choice politicians and voters need not be held to account for opposing shadow proposals.

Michael Blindner: The fetus' personhood comes from God; not the federal government. Are you saying that the federal government should declare who is or who is not a person? There is none so blind as he who will not see.

One must ask why those groups who promote abortion and make money and live off of it being legal, fund groups like Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and donate to the political campaigns of those Catolics who defend the right to abort. If such groups were really a threat to voluntarily doing away with abortions do you really think they send them money? Follow the money. Any threat to the money being made by Planned Parenthood would be attacked, not funded by them. Do you think a drug dealer is going to fund the DEA?

Great to see people actually concerned about solutions.

This post is uncommonly frank about the challenges to the common ground effort, but as someone who works on it myself, I'm grateful for the clear assessment.

While personhood comes from God, the question of when that is recognized is entirely a legal and constitutional matter. It is not God's recognition of personhood that is the issue is Roe, but that of the State of Texas. Your comments are a good example of why the Right to Life movement is spinning its wheels. It will continue to do so until it abandons its electoral focus (elect the righteous, even if they do nothing on the issue) and shifts to actually working on how to gain recognition for the unborn within the confines of Roe and the Constitution. Show me a constitutional bill and I might take the Bishops seriously when they say that it is the most important issue.

"And when Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the Child leapt in her Womb." (from the Word of God)

It is just ridiculous to suggest that there can be "a better way" on abortion. Perpetuating the conflict raises funds and gets people elected to positions where they can enrich themselves and their friends. They will stand for no compromise. With regard to legal personhood, how will we make that determination conclusively? How will our government make sure that what is bulging underneath a woman's maternity clothes is not just a prop or fat? Will there be a penalty for looking pregnant and not bringing forth a child to show for it? Will all women be required by law to get periodic pregnancy tests? Will miscarriages have to be reported to the government to be kept in a file with the woman's name on it? The simple fact of the matter is that we can all agree to make abortion illegal and then not to impose any penalty on the woman who chooses to have the illegal abortion. That will stop the exploitation of this issue for the personal gain of anyone not directly involved in abortion. Of course, it will make abortion getting a more dangerous process and make abortion providing considerably more lucrative. Those who believe that being prolife is about making abortion illegal should think twice, or more, about that.

The Catholic Church seems to be the one social organization in the United States and developing world that could provide the organizational and moral force to implement steps that would greatly reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions, not to mention HIV/AIDS. Although church policy is against contraception as a means of doing this, the bishops would definitely admit that the greater ill is clearly abortion, and that steps that would reduce the number of abortions would be desireable. Unfortunately the powers that be have decided that keeping line with church doctrine is more important than offering realistic solutions to dealing with abortion and HIV/AIDS, including poverty, poor sex education, and lack of public access to contraceptives. Roe was a recognition by the Supreme Court that legal proscription was an unrealistic way of dealing with unwanted pregnancy. If only the Church would do the same and devote its considerable energy and resources to taking realistic steps to reducing abortion and HIV/AIDS, the world would be grateful, and ''glorify my Father in heaven''