The tragedy of abortion absolutism and how the pro-life movement can respond

Demonstrators who support legal abortion gather outside the U.S. Supreme Court during the 46th annual March for Life Jan. 18 in Washington. (CNS photo/Gregory A. Shemitz) 

The stark reality of abortion entered public consciousness this week to a degree not seen in years. Americans were just beginning to understand how radical New York’s Reproductive Health Act, passed on Jan. 22, really was. At the same time, a Virginia state delegate acknowledged, during a legislative hearing, that the bill she had proposed to loosen regulation of late-term abortions would in fact allow abortion up until the moment of delivery. The governor of Virginia, himself a pediatric neurosurgeon, addressed the same issue on a radio show. He explained that it was more likely that such a case, involving a baby with severe deformities or who was expected to be nonviable, would result in a delivery but that the child would only be resuscitated if the mother and family desired. His clinical discussion of choosing to allow an infant to die shocked many. And while it did not attract as much attention, the governor of Rhode Island vowed to sign a similar bill in her state.

As we pointed out earlier this month, with Roe v. Wade under potential threat at the Supreme Court, pro-choice activists are pushing to have its effects codified into state law—and sometimes trying to expand access to abortion at the same time. This challenge calls for careful discernment from the pro-life movement. The fact that some consciences are being woken to recognize the tragedy of abortion is an opportunity for pro-lifers to broaden the circle of those who are willing to support pregnant women and be concerned for unborn children.

Advertisement

Here are three ways to engage this challenge constructively:

First, take great care to be clear, accurate and fair in describing the bad effects of these laws. They are shocking enough without any exaggeration. Also, veterans of pro-life work are not surprised that the controversies over these laws are already being described in terms of “attacks” on the politicians arguing for them. While there is no easy way to achieve fair media coverage of the moral concerns about abortion, it is still important to do what is possible to avoid the most predictable media bias. Some commentators immediately equated the Virginia governor’s remarks to “infanticide,” which the governor described as a bad-faith interpretation—and that allowed the news cycle to turn to parsing the criticism of the governor rather than keeping the focus on the moral question.

Second, be proactive about acknowledging and engaging the best possible motives behind even these very bad laws and resist the temptation to demonize those who support them. Many pro-choice advocates point out—accurately—that the late-term abortions to which these laws expand access are rare and usually connected to tragic diagnoses of fetal abnormality, maternal risk or the expectation that a child will die shortly after birth. Instead of relying solely on blunt, accurate descriptions of the violence of late-term abortions, pro-lifers should give even more emphasis to compassionate care for both mother and child in these terrible circumstances. Options such as perinatal hospice, which provides support and care for the mother, infant and family in situations where a child is expected to die before or shortly after birth, should be much better known. Efforts need to be made to guarantee that they are presented as part of the standard of care and resourced well enough to be available wherever needed. Too often, silence about these possibilities leads to the false choice between late-term abortion and “forcing” a mother to give birth.

Third, legislative efforts to defeat and reverse these laws should be paired with opportunities to reach across the aisle and work for reforms that will help expectant parents and make it easier for them to choose to bring their children into the world. This is not a retreat from the effort to protect unborn children in law—it is a recognition that pro-lifers should be willing to use every practical means to support and defend the dignity of life. If legal limits on abortion are connected to increases in support for parental leave and protections against pregnancy discrimination, they can potentially attract a much wider base of support. Such an approach is not only a chance for real policy improvements, but also a potential opening to win minds and hearts to recognize the value of every human life at all stages of development.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
Judith Jordan
5 months 1 week ago

Tim O'Leary---
Please explain this to me. I am serious. Pro-birth people criticize women for getting an abortion for “mere economic” reasons. When it is pointed out that

we must give much more governmental support to poor women, children, and pregnant women, the pro-birth people lash back in anger and insist economics is not an issue. In other words, they do not support these programs because they don’t want to pay more taxes... economic reasons.

Please do not go into the common defense of pro-birth people that we should support women and children through our individual charity. That is good and should be praised, but it should also be recognized that it is not enough. Major charities in the country, including Catholic Charities, have testified before Congress that we need more government money for women and children, as private charities do not have enough resources for them. Yet, Republicans vote against increasing these programs. That is one of the reasons that those who oppose these programs are not pro-life; they are pro-birth.

Tim O'Leary
5 months 1 week ago

Judith - the Pro-life movement and anybody pro-life I speak to is in fact fully supportive of every financial need to deter abortion, via private or public sources. You only bring up this lie to keep on killing. Let me repeat - we are willing to pay the ransom to save the lives. We will pay for every single child threatened by abortion. We will find parents who will gladly adopt the children women do not want. One thing we should all agree on right now is to divert the hundreds of millions that go to Planned Parenthood to Birthright, who are already doing what you claim you want to do. here are some resources
https://birthright.org/
https://pregnancy.lovetoknow.com/financial-help-pregnant-women
https://www.growingfamilybenefits.com/financial-assistance-while-pregnant/
https://www.scholarshipsforwomen.net/pregnant/

Judith Jordan
5 months 1 week ago

When and where are women receiving money for having an abortion?

Tim O'Leary
5 months 1 week ago

Judith - the argument Brookbank made is that women are motivated to SAVE the costs of caring for a child by aborting her. It is Planned Parenthood and the actual abortionists and for-profit clinics who make the money. Remember Gosnell. http://www.gosnellmovie.com/

J Jones
5 months 1 week ago

Tim, you do run amock.

Tim O'Leary
5 months 1 week ago

Brookbank - AMOCK is an acronym for Abortion is Murderous Organized Constitutional Killing. Unless your are just mocking, I think you mean amok (which excludes the constitutional part).

J Jones
5 months 1 week ago

You ARE a clever little thing, Tim, even when you are running amock.

Tim O'Leary
5 months 1 week ago

Brokebank - A.M.O.C.K. could also refer to Abortion Murder by Organized Criminal Killers, since the Constitutional part is unsettled.

Crystal Watson
5 months 2 weeks ago

I don't think just upping social programs for poor women will end abortion. Contraception help would be better. The majority of women who get abortions are already mothers and just don't want more children. Despite what the pope seems to believe, most women don't want to spend their lives birthing as many babies as humanly possible.

James Murray
5 months 2 weeks ago

I must admit to a new struggle in this debate and the whole question of Church defined morality. I have written for guidance to the Bishop of Arlington, Virginia, seeking an answer. He referred my question to a spokesperson who ignored it. The question is simple: how can bishops claim some superior moral insight when they have now proven themselves as incapable of seeing immoral and criminal conduct of their own clergy as the reference here is to the child sex abuse conducted by priests? The bishops became criminal co-conspirators in child abuse by knowingly shielding criminal conduct; yet, somehow these bishops claim moral insight. No woman wants an abortion; yet bishops declare it immoral who conspired with criminals to harm children. Who are bishops to tell us anything morality? That question was not responded to by Bishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington, as I said, deflecting it to Fr. Tom Ferguson who did not respond to it. Who was it who said "Love God and do as you wish" -- maybe that is the best moral guide with Christ's one commandment.

Terry Kane
5 months 2 weeks ago

Does anyone here realize that DNA proves that the unborn baby is actually a different body within the mother?
The NYS law allows the viable baby to be slaughtered in the birth canal by a non-doctor. The VA proposed law goes even further and would allow infanticide after the mother and doctor discuss the murder. Rhode Island & VT proposed laws may do the same.
Surely everyone can agree that a viable baby should not be put to death - these are the most vulnerable of all of us.
To say that we have no right to an opinion unless we are in the situation is akin to saying we have no right to say murder is wrong unless we are the victim. Wrong is wrong.
Morality is not difficult to understand; late term/partial birth abortion is immoral.

Vince Killoran
5 months 2 weeks ago

That #3 is really the sticking point because the vast majority of pro-life activists and politicians are conservative, free-market types who are opposed to social welfare measures, and to expanding economic and social citizenship rights. They've had forty-five years to do something in these areas and have failed to act. It's all just a posture.

J Jones
5 months 2 weeks ago

Yes. One year of daycare for one child, in New York City in 2015, was $16,000. But ask these people to vote for tax-funded daycare? "That's not my problem! I didn't have a baby I can't afford! No! I will not support socialism!"

Lisa M
5 months 2 weeks ago

J Brookbank- Canada has a similar abortion rate as the US despite having daycare rates as low as $9 a day (Quebec), and a minimum of 1 year maternity at 60 % of your salary ( plus some company benefits bring that up to 80%). Generous family allowances for children up to 18 years old as well. Fear is the driving force for abortion, and that's universal. We need to strive to end that.

J Jones
5 months 2 weeks ago

Interesting info re: Canada. I live in the US. This discussion is about US law.

I agree with your final sentences.

J Jones
5 months 2 weeks ago

Duplicate

Tim O'Leary
5 months 1 week ago

Brookbank - you really have a strange way of conducting a conversation. It doesn't matter if you are in the US, the point is that the Canadian example undermines your claims. I am for everything that will actually take away any financial incentive for abortion, including a safety net that works.

J Jones
5 months 1 week ago

Tim, I am grateful to read your last sentence. I believe that is the very first time I have seen you state that position, and I am grateful to see it. When that position becomes a commitment by the anti-abortion movement ----- when it is backed backed by votes, policies and funding ---- that movement will begin to develop a credibility it lacks now. American citizens have exactly *zero* obligations to respond to or even acknowledge your religious beliefs and your dishonest, manipulative rhetoric.

"The Canadian example" is relevant to the Canadian context and citizen. American domestic law and policy is relevant to the American citizen and context.

It is not strange, Tim, to refuse to follow you and others down rabbit holes.

Tim O'Leary
5 months 1 week ago

Brookbank - notice the provisional language you put for the "anti-abortion movement" to gain credibility with you - thanks for being so condescendingly kind (even if it's still all about money for you). And your evident disgust for religious beliefs? Zero? Really? I would show much more respect for your religious beliefs, even though they are strange and idiosyncratic. What can the pro-abortion movement do to gain credibility? Perhaps, by acknowledging that every abortion stops a human heart beating, that health professionals should have their conscientious objections and religious beliefs respected above zero, and that once a child is born, she must be protected by law (Roe v. Wade required that protection begin at the 3rd trimester, how quaint that seems now). That would be a start but they have a very long way to go.

J Jones
5 months 1 week ago

Tim, the thing of it is that in the United States, religious beliefs --- yours, mine, theirs --- are relevant only to you, me, them, respectively. When it comes to public policy, I am wholly uninterested in your religious beliefs. You however want to impose your religious beliefs on all citizens and it just isn't going to happen. No one is obliged to obey you, Tim.

- That abortion terminates developing human life is a fact of science.
- I don't have any issue with conscientious objectors, albeit I do believe they should be exempt from public funding in pregnancy care.
- Children born alive ARE protected by law everywhere in the United States. What is being hysterically and purposefully called "infanticide" is nothing more than the retention of the right of parents to choose end-of-life medical care when medical professionals diagnose health incompatible with life at birth. (Hint: the RCC long ago accepted that end-of-life care is NOT the same as denying care or euthanasia).

Tim O'Leary
5 months 1 week ago

Brokebank - we agree then that it is a scientific fact that abortion terminates human life, its just that you don't accept that these humans deserve human rights. Your last sentence is an Orwellian euphemism. It is only end-of-life care if the child is ripped from its healthy environment. A.M.O.K. indeed.
As to reasons for abortions after the 20th week, a study (link below) found that “most women seeking later terminations are not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment.” The estimated number of these abortions is 12,000 a year, or more than all gun homicides. For those enamored by a seamless garment argument, compare this to 25 executions for murders in 2017. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1363/4521013

J Jones
5 months 1 week ago

Duplicate

Al Maloney
5 months 2 weeks ago

It wouldn’t matter what the law says if no one chooses to have an abortion. So, why not work on changing the minds of the people? on providing support where needed?

Al Maloney
5 months 2 weeks ago

It wouldn’t matter what the law says if no one chooses to have an abortion. So, why not work on changing the minds of the people? on providing support where needed?

THE CHRISTOFFERSONS
5 months 2 weeks ago

The law is a blunt instrument, and is ill suited to promoting life in these circumstances. That may sound like heresy to those who see in the law an opportunity -- nay, even a duty -- to affirm the principle of life. Allow me to explain.

It is one thing to state a principle -- life is sacred -- and teach its connection to the Spirit that lives within the human heart. We live not by bread alone but by cultivating a relationship with that Spirit. This relationship enables ownership of the "love of the other" that is the source and root of the stated principle.

It is another thing entirely to so emphasize legal enforcement of the stated principle that cultivation of a relationship with the Spirit is preempted or given insufficient attention. In such circumstances it is not Christ's "new covenant" of love but the law that looms large. It is in such circumstances that we become separated from the Spirit of Christ and become susceptible to our more primitive inclinations. There is some irony here. Emphasis upon enforcement of the law breeds this very susceptibility. It is better to teach the principle and cultivate the rooting of the principle in the love that Jesus preached.

It is tempting -- but futile -- to suppose that turning a principle into law will discharge our responsibility as a community. The law doesn't work that way. The relationship between a woman and the child in her womb is a joy to be supported. When law rather than love looms large, that support is compromised.

We should be a teaching church, not a proxy for law enforcement. There are good and faithful Catholics on both sides of this controversy, all asking the wrong question. It's not about law. More is required of us all, and making the law the center of the controversy is a distraction from the good that needs to be done, including the humility to recognize that the law cannot make our society perfect.

Tim O'Leary
5 months 2 weeks ago

To the Christoffersons - do you hold that it is a great evil when an innocent human being is killed by legally approved abortion? The reason I ask is it is unclear from your posts.

Terry Kane
5 months 2 weeks ago

Has no one else noticed that this Catholic Magazine has editors who couldn't wait to throw Bret Kavanaugh under the bus? The magazine didn't wait a split second to denounce Trump supporters and Catholic school boys. Now, the editors want to be conciliatory to pro-abortion activists.

The outrageous comments of deranged, bloodthirsty abortomaniacs on this site is shocking.

It is like the rabid wing of the DNC has set up shop in, and completely taken over, the Society of Jesus.

Our religion teaches us to respect human life - ALL human life!
Our nation, in the Declaration of Independence, tells us that we are endowed by God, to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Founders, in agreement with Christianity, put life first - we should, too

Bev Ceccanti
5 months 2 weeks ago

Terry Kane. I notice with all my heart and soul and I'm so sickened and dizzy with shock I can't respond. Thank you for your persistent defense against this unholy horror.

Terry Kane
5 months 2 weeks ago

Bev -
It is as if our religion has changed in a very short time. The Lord's Prayer has changed, the Latin Mass, the Catechism... For thousands of years, Catholics have been doing it wrong apparently.
One wonders how long the Church will remain, or if it will be replaced with a new, up to date faith which few will follow, but at least it won't be offensive, or racist, or homophobic, or xenophobic, or misogynist or something.

Bev Ceccanti
5 months 2 weeks ago

Terry Kane ( Bishop Stowe appears to be of the same mindset as James Martin. He endorsed him in 2017 and seems to weakly address pro-life as a sidebar to his favorite issues..)There's great apostasy but the Church is destined by God to remain till the end.. The Church will always have Her saints. We'll pray and seek out leaders who resist Satan in the Church. Lucifer was created by God and was His most beautiful and intelligent angel. The Jesuits were established by St. Ignatius as the most educated order of priests of the time, for the purposes of defending the Church against heresy . Bishop Sheen warned us the' smoke of Satan' had already crept in during his lifetime. (and I have vague memories of other predictions consistent with this. I think as many as one third would go into apostasy ), God is still with us in His Church and I've been entering the names of various dioceses on the internet to read the positions of various Bishops..... I found Bishop Stricklund of Texas today. I think my Bishop Sartain is Ok too but a little quiet for my taste. I'm looking to find those who are loyal to critical Church teaching and I will disregard the others. I will never leave the Church and I will receive the Sacraments even from those that may be in serious sin if I can't receive them otherwise, because, as you know, the Sacraments are good regardless of the state of the Priest's soul, They are from Christ. Don't worry. I'm a bit on the 'old' side of the fence and I've seen a slice of evil, even from my own fault, but I knew in my heart if there is Satan, there is God, and God is always stronger than Satan. He will prevail. Thank heaven for you and Tim O'Leary and Tim Donovan and Cosgrove and the other good Catholics who share our solid Catholic education. Maybe we can be of assistance somehow.

Terry Kane
5 months 2 weeks ago

Bev
Reading your post has given me hope. Belief in the Church is something I will always carry with me, but I do get disheartened when I read what America Magazine publishes. I pray that what you say comes to pass.
Thank you!

Bev Ceccanti
5 months 2 weeks ago

Terry Kane et al : I found Msgr Charles Pope while surfing for some familiar grace and sanity that is clearly missing from these pages. I accidentally came across an August article in The National Catholic Register addressing homosexual activity among priests, political correctness and their devastating effects on the Church . This prompted me to look for a current issue and was grateful to find an strongly worded article regarding Cuomo and the bishops' scandalous hesitation to impose canonical penalties. Msgr Pope from Washington DC is a level headed voice.. I'm going to start reading that publication's articles on abortion, etc. in the hope of staying in touch with the real teachings of the Church. It's been a relief just to read the headlines and the thoughtful comments.. We're missing what the Pope is saying because the press, apparently including America Magazine, sculpts their articles to fit their narrative.

Terry Kane
5 months 2 weeks ago

Bev -
Thanks! I was not aware of that site.

I believe I will be spending more time at http://www.ncregister.com/ instead of having my heart (and faith) broken here.

Thank you again!

J Jones
5 months 2 weeks ago

In New York City in 2015 (four long years ago), the annual average cost of daycare for a single child was $16,000 dollars. But, ask some conservative pro-lifers about universal childcare? After the screaming stops, you will hear "That is socialism! I'm not the one who had a kid I can't afford. This isn't my problem. They shouldn't have kids if they can't afford them."

Vincent Gaglione
5 months 2 weeks ago

When I read this editorial’s heading my first reaction was to think that people forget that for every action, there is usually an equal and opposite reaction. The hard and fast attitudes of the legislation sought by the pro-life movement have given us the legislation proposed and/or passed in various states.

When I read the editorial I was pleased at both its comity and also its wisdom from a social, legislative and political viewpoint. I think the editors make great points. Too many comments to their points here only prove the rigidity of the pro-life movement to help explain my initial reaction to the heading.

This morning’s NY Times reports that the pro-life movement now intends to use the late-term abortion issue to brand the Democratic Party as the party of baby killers and make it again a major issue in the next Presidential, Congressional and local elections. This is exactly the opposite of what the editors suggest.

The distaste and chagrin that every human being has for the idea of late term abortions does not mitigate the fact that, among those Christians and others who do not believe as we do, among those who do not believe, and among that tiny minority of women and men whose pregnancies in late term may be personally self-destructive, while a horror of a choice, it is one that they medically consider as necessary. The editors speak to that with compassion and wisdom. To define them crudely, as the pro-life movement now intends to do, only re-intensifies the debate and does nothing to reduce the number of abortions, the most of which are first term.

Michael Bindner
5 months 2 weeks ago

I cover some of the same ground on my blog in response to an essay in National Catholic Reporter. Supporting this law has no effect at all on the legality of abortion. Roe nationalized the issue and no state law has any effect, either way. Roe itself was based on process, affirming Brown v. Board of Education's finding that Plessy was wrong, not only for its effects but for the theory of state power behind the decision. Overturning Roe would essentially bring back Plessy, which would be an abomination and a concession to mob rule over individual rights.

It would be good to reach across the aisle and take Milton Friedman't Negative Income Tax proposal to its logical conclusion, which Pius XI endorsed, that all families are entitled to a living wage and that government action , if necessary, must guarantee it. The current MAGA GOP would never go along with such radicalism nor with taking the wind out of the pro-life, nor the Democrats for the pro-choice movement, which would kill fundraising and participation in each party.

I do agree with a prenatal hospice to care for and baptize the child, although a merciful God does not require someone not yet born to be born again. Indeed, the Church does not really understand this teaching. Our Lord was talking about rejecting self-reliance (a key Republican belief) and embracing both mutual reliance and reliance on God.

Bill Mazzella
5 months 2 weeks ago

Political football. Repeat after me...The tragedy is not abortion. It is the luxury of bishops, pastors and Catholic academia. And the irrelevance of Catholic journalism to parish life.

Bill Mazzella
5 months 2 weeks ago

Political football. Repeat after me...The tragedy is not abortion. It is the luxury of bishops, pastors and Catholic academia. And the irrelevance of Catholic journalism to parish life.

Frank T
5 months 2 weeks ago

Oh for God sake, no side will ever win out. Leave women alone to choose whatever option works for them.

Christopher Minch
5 months 2 weeks ago

Jose, please understand, I am talking to all of you "Joses" out there, including the editors of this magazine. You make no sense at all in your replies or thinking other than your speaking as zealots or just loyal, follow the policy, Churchmen. You would absolutely make no decision about doing something in your households or lives without reference to the facts and figures of your income and the price to buy something. Even Jesus said in so many words, one is foolish if you build something without a proper foundation and if you realize your enemy is stronger than you then you better go out and negotiate terms. But if you're a zealot you are not going to care to be practical or work toward better solutions. Its win or lose, no holds barred. Life or death even if what you are doing doesn't accomplish what you want or even get you closer to what is needed. Do you not believe that God has his own time in these things as we figure this out? Sure more unborn are going to die while things get figured out but if it doesn't get figured out they will die anyhow and more will die too because you would just as soon be absolutely right and fight "the good fight" rather than be practical and aim for lower figures of abortions. I don't see Jesus advising that. Rather he says, love God and love your neighbor, as yourself. Even the neighbor who cannot absolutely see anyway of financially or otherwise manage this pregnancy and life over an 18 year period of time. Especially, if you are not able or willing to put your wallet or credit card or tax dollars to assure this woman/family and child can make it for the 18-19 years of food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, employment needs and education needs required. This is love in action in a supportive community. Jose, and Editors of America, Jesuit Review, that is why many or most don't care for your replies or thoughts until you get factually and concretely real and also compassionately understanding for the whole problem when you make simplistic comments or editorial guidelines that gets this Church, theologically or practically, no closer to a resolution of this terrible problem. In the end, if you want respect then you have to give respect also--a definite, give and take. And don't tell me theologically you can't change things. This Church had done so multiple times over the centuries, if there is a will there is a way and you will go into the storehouse of spiritual/theological ideas and insights and figure it out and even do greater things as Jesus challenged you to do if you would just do it rather than just maintain and conserve the status quo!

Terry Kane
5 months 2 weeks ago

Christopher -
Have you never heard of adoption? In NY, we are talking about 3rd trimester abortions - in VA, 4th trimester! - so the " 18-19 years of food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, employment needs and education needs" would not be borne by the birth mother/family, the adoptive family would gladly provide for the baby.
Human life is more valuable than some dollars, or it should be to Catholics.

Nora Bolcon
5 months 1 week ago

These late term abortion laws are not really designed to help women get abortions in the eighth month of pregnancy unless the mother will literally die if the child is not removed. The law is designed to deal with things like if a mother in her fifth or sixth month must abort because she has pre eclampsia which can cause womens blood pressure rise to the point of stroke and quickly. They don't want medical staff to not abort for fear of being charged with a crime, if the baby is born but without extreme medical measures will die too quickly to save and because they can't, due to the emergency situation, offer those life saving measures. Officially, the C section or abortion drug, to make the women miscarry may result in an actual birth and sometimes the baby comes out alive but is not developed enough to maintain life for long. The law prevents medical staff from being sued or jailed for murder because they were saving the mothers life. In these cases, if they didn't abort quickly the woman has a severe stroke or heart attack which kills the mother and would also inevitably cause the unborn fetus to still die anyway. Unfortunately, pre eclampsia is not that rare.

J Jones
5 months 1 week ago

Well stated, Christopher.

Martha Murray
5 months 2 weeks ago

One only has to know the story of Dr Gosnell to fear the reality of late term abortion. The Editors point out what the pro life community can do—what are they doing? When will or where is the cry for Cardinal Dolan and other priests to hand down a consequence to those Catholics in name only who publically celebrate the culture of death which is totally abhorrent to our Church? People are watching and waiting for true leaders to say enough is enough. I understand the Cardinal does not want to upset the apple cart but let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. The Church has an opportunity to stand up for human dignity even if it means leaving identity politics behind. Please pray, dear Editors for a change of heart within our own Church.

Frank T
5 months 2 weeks ago

Martha, your zealotry is not based on common sense. Terms like "culture of death" are despicable. Abortions are as much a part of the human condition as breathing. Outlawing abortion would only create an underground culture. I remember teenage girls going to Mexico for these procedures before we were honest about them in the U.S. Leave women to make their own choices, sand allow for disagreement.;

Lisa M
5 months 2 weeks ago

This notion of full support for 18 years in nonsense, and has little to do with why women choose to have abortions. Fear dictates this procedure, and for that reason alone, people should want to end this. Who, Frank chose to go to Mexico for an abortion? A teenage girl? Really? If I were a betting woman, perhaps her parents, the boyfriends parents, but not the girl. Lets at least call it for what it is. A fear driven, pressure filled decision that MORE OFTEN than not involves not just the woman, but her family or boyfriend or others who have made it crystal clear they don't want her to have the baby. That is not a real choice, far from it!

Martha Murray
5 months 2 weeks ago

If you are comparing abortion to respiration I fear you have no sense. Maybe The Editors can recommend a good biology class...

Terry Kane
5 months 2 weeks ago

Frank -
Is murder not, "a part of the human condition as breathing"? How about theft, perjury, and all the other sins? You seem to be suggesting that since humans do it, it should be allowed. Should we accept all the bad things people do and let the offenders keep on making those choices?
Is that what you meant?

Susan Arata
5 months 2 weeks ago

Injecting ham-handed, black/white morality, peanut-gallery-chattering human lawmaking into the decision to terminate a pregnancy has created monsters, but late-term abortion for fetal anomalies and/or mortal threats to the mother are not 2 of them. The CDC states that post 21-24 week abortions are performed due to lethal fetal anomalies /mortal threat to the mom, but, based on the commentaries I read below abortion articles, I doubt many "pro-lifers" believe that, b/c a lot of you call institutions like the CDC "satanic liars." So have any of you "pro-lifers" ever read a list of lethal fetal anomalies? Ever look into what the average gestation age is for their discovery/diagnosis? Ever studied the effect of fetal anomaly on the mother's physical health & survival? Even begin to understand what kinds of moment-by-moment decisions must be made when fetal life is not viable? I have. Those who place the value of fetal life over the value of a mother's life cannot be called "pro-life." A better word for your valuation is "misogyny." It went viral a long time ago, but most don't realize that they're carriers.

Martha Murray
5 months 2 weeks ago

What name would you give to someone who ends the life of the pre born baby girl? We don’t kill girls/boys with disabilities after birth. We are called to love and care for each other regardless of the situation. The pain of abortion dose not end with the procedure. It can’t haunt a women for the rest of her life. I know.

Advertisement

The latest from america

The role of caring for elderly family members is increasingly falling to mid-life adults. (iStock/kali9)
We can honor our parents by supporting a paid family leave program, one that is not limited to raising children but also recognizes the growing financial and physical burdens of caring for elderly family members.
Amy ZiettlowJuly 17, 2019
Fast food makes only one promise. That it is fast. Christ promises to feed us with food that will last.
Terrance KleinJuly 17, 2019
From left, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., respond to remarks by President Donald Trump after his call for the four Democratic congresswomen to go back to their "broken" countries, during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, July 15, 2019. All are American citizens and three of the four were born in the U.S.
The Editors: These comments need to be called out as racist, xenophobic and sexist.
The EditorsJuly 16, 2019
People wait to apply for asylum in the United States along the border on July 16 in Tijuana, Mexico. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull)
“It is contrary to American and Christian values to attempt to prevent people from migrating here when they are fleeing to save their lives and to find safety for their families,” Cardinal DiNardo said.
Kevin ClarkeJuly 16, 2019