A Baby by Any Other Name...

I must concur with James Joyner, while commenting on this Saletan piece. Writes James:

the anti-abortion side has a huge advantage in the debate because the pro-abortion side refuses to acknowledge something intuitively obvious: that the fetus is a human life.

The utter unwillingness for the pro-choice movement to acknowledge that a fetus in utero v. a child outside the womb is the exact same thing, especially as the pregnancy increases, is a serious case of cognitive dissonance, if not simply utter denial.

As such, it makes it difficult for them to make viable arguments for their positions, especially in such rather obvious cases as partial-birth abortion and the UVVA (Unborn Victims of Violence Act). To pretend that, say, a fetus in the eighth months of pregnancy is only a human being once the mother decided that it is, is an utterly ludicrous position and one that is difficult to sustain with logic.

It is clear with the debate on the UVVA (as it was with the partial-birth abortion ban) that the pro-choice side is utterly unwilling to yield even a scintilla of space in their argument concerning the sanctity of “choice.” Partially because they fear, understandably, that the right to abortion itself comes under logical attack if any fetus in any circumstance is actually defined as a human being. Further, I think that there is a recognition, that they will not admit, that their own arguments are built on a tenuous foundation, and therefore there really isn’t any room to give.

In regards to the extreme position that many in the pro-choice movement take, note this from NARAL:

President Bush is on the verge of signing into law his second odious piece of legislation in six months aimed at undermining Roe v. Wade. The U.S. Senate passed the deceptive "Unborn Victims of Violence" Act this week - the House passed the same bill last month - and the President has vowed to sign it. Bush has already earned the distinction of being the first president ever to sign a federal abortion ban and he now has a chance to extend his reputation in history as the most anti-choice president that this country has ever seen.

So, the idea that if a pregnant women is murdered that the assailant should be charged with an additional crime if the fetus dies as well, is “odious.” To put it mildly, this is an extreme position.

Further, if signing a law that makes doing violence to a fetus, and another one that limits a rare form a late-term abortion makes Bush the “most anti-choice president that this country has ever seen” then it shows how little any previous president has done on this topic. It further illustrates that to NARAL and their allies there is no such thing as a bad abortion.

One last comment: the bill and its signing may not make NARAL-ites happy, but I don’t think that they were going to vote for Bush in any event. However, both of these bills will no doubt help excite part of Bush’s base in November.

Posted by Steven Taylor at March 30, 2024 10:29 AM | TrackBack