On the "redefining rape" story...

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice blogs are going bonkers over claims that Republicans are trying to "redefine rape" in the name of limiting abortion funding. Pro-Choicers are claiming it an attempt to force victims of rape to prolong their suffering. First, the relevant quote.

"This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible," Nick Baumann of Mother Jones wrote recently.

He continued, "For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion."

If the bill becomes law, parents of minors would also be banned from paying for pregnancy termination for their daughters with tax-exempt health savings accounts. Also, the cost of the private health insurance that covered the treatment would not be able to be deducted as a medical expense for tax purposes.

Second, a few Mod-Blog middle-of-the-road reality checks. Please note, I am ardently Pro-life, but am also a reasonable person.

1. This bill DOES NOT limit the RIGHT of women to get an abortion. It merely limits the ability of these women to have FEDERALLY-FUNDED abortions.

2. These limits would do LITTLE to stop the VAST majority of abortions, at the expense of the MOST controversial kinds of abortion cases. This is like trying to stem the tide of obesity in America by limiting Happy Meals for teenagers.

This bill is clearly overreaching by a newly-elected zealous House. It is time to put this one back on the shelf and examine ways to reduce the really horrible abortions happening out there - those done for no other reason than birth control by mature adults. And to ensure alternatives are easy and cheap to find - especially adoption.

Breaks my heart.

Political cartoon by Lisa Benson from Townhall.Com.

39% of Pregnancies in NYC End in Abortion?!

I really, really, really hope this is a case of a statistic taken out of context and misunderstood. Because the idea that almost 40 out of every 100 fetuses in NYC are aborted is just monstrous. Whether you're Pro-Choice or Pro-Life, can we all agree that abortion should be a last resort and not commonplace?!

In 2009, there were 225,667 pregnancies in the City with 126,774 resulting in live births and 87,273 resulting in abortions. In addition to those abortion numbers, there were 11,620 spontaneous terminations.
Forty-six percent of all births in the Bronx result in abortions—the highest among the five boroughs, according to the report.
Blacks had the highest number of abortions with 40,798 with Hispanics having the second highest at 28,364, according to the report.

Abortion Issue may derail Health Care Reform Bill

Most supporters of the Democratic Health Reform Bills would claim their concerns are purely practical - budgetary savings, expanded coverage, and improved survival rates. But it appears that the Bills' passage may instead come down to a single moral/ethical/philosophical issue - abortion. While the House was willing to compromise in the name of practicality, the Senate is not ready to do the same.

Efforts to find such a common ground failed in the House.

Women's rights groups were caught off-guard by the provision that passed the House and are now vowing to keep similar language out of the Senate bill. Hundreds of activists organized by Planned Parenthood and other groups rallied Wednesday, holding signs reading "Listen up senators: Women's health is not negotiable."

Several House Democrats spoke, vowing to oppose final passage of any health bill with the tough abortion restrictions already approved by the House. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., called it "a devil's bargain" that she couldn't accept.

But the House language is just what Nelson wants to include in the Senate bill.

In reality, for all of President Obama's talk about this being a practical choice, these debates prove this is all about philosophy. Which is why they are happy to pass ANY bill - however flawed - so long as it is ideologically pure.

Anti-abortion Protester Killed in Michigan

There are many who say that the abortion debate is only an emotional issue for the anti-abortion forces. But clearly, it is an emotionally-charged issue for both sides, with extremists on either end willing to cross the line. Today, an anti-abortion activist appears to have been murdered for his views and a protest he was mounting outside a local high school. To the credit of everyone in the area, witnessed took the license plate of the killer's car and quickly called the police.

Here is hoping both sides condemn this action and the police can quickly make the case against the killer.

Religion is no protection for the unborn

It is said your character is defined NOT by what you do in public, but what you do when alone with no one watching. Most of us put on a mask of righteousness and morality in church, at school, at work, and when out and about. But what happens when no one is watching.

A new study suggests despite much noise amongst religious folks against abortion, when alone with their decision, religious women decide to abort their babies as often as non-religious ones. Church affiliation - even overt practice - appears to provide no protection to the unborn.

"This research suggests that young, unmarried women are confronted with a number of social, financial and health-related factors that can make it difficult for them to act according to religious values when deciding whether to keep or abort a pregnancy," she said.

The results of the study did not reveal a significant link between a young woman’s reported decision to have an abortion and her personal religiosity, as defined by her religious involvement, frequency of prayer and perception of the importance of religion.

Is it any surprise that Pro-Abortion groups call Pro-Life groups hypocrites? We need more groups like Hopeline who provide alternatives to abortion, while maintaining absolute confidentiality for those ashamed to bring a baby to term. And we need to make a greater effort to teach our children that a baby is a bless - even though it makes life very difficult - even outside of wedlock.

Most Americans Now "Pro-Life"

A new poll released yesterday found that for the first time over 50% of the American people describe themselves as Pro-Life when asked about abortion. This is the first time that the number has gone above 50%. Let's hope this is a result of peoples "hearts and minds" changing on this issue and not just an anomaly in polling.

Removing the Moral Dilemma to Stem Cells

When George W. Bush announced a freeze on Federal support for Stem Cell research in 2000, he was roundly condemned by the medical establishment who accused him of "wanting Alzheimer's patients to suffer." But at the time, Pro-life advocates were already pointing to sources of stem cells which did not require the death of an embryo - fetal cord blood, for example. Now, scientists have announced they have found a way to produce stem cells without embryo death from any patient! A mere 8 years - when added to a little political pressure - was enough to completely free the way for future stem cell experimentation.

In a breakthrough that could have huge implications, British and Canadian scientists have found a way of reprogramming skin cells taken from adults, effectively winding the clock back on the cells until they were in an embryonic form...

Because the cells can be made from a patient's own skin, they carry the same DNA and so could be used without a risk of being rejected by the immune system.

So, not only is it a morally-defensible solution for Pro-Lifers, it is actually a better solution medically because it uses the patient's own cells and obviates the need for anti-rejection drugs (which suppress the immune system in general). In my ever-so-humble opinion, this justifies GWB's decision from 8 years back.

ND bans abortion... again

North Dakota has long been at the forefront of the movement to ban abortion at the state level. They have passed a number of laws which made abortion illegal, all of which have been struck down by state or federal courts. Now, they have tried it again with a law to "declare that a fertilized egg has all the rights of any person". Lawmakers feel this law will pass Supreme Court muster because it follows the language of Roe v. Wade by defining when life begins.

Personally, I doubt it will succeed. Although, it may be useful in defining the limits and boundaries of Roe v. Wade.

Hope is not for everyone

From here. I wonder how long until people begin to understand the potential impact of this.

Pro-Choice, but without the usual exceptions added

I was reading The Straight Dope website today and one of the questions Cecil Adams answers is "When does human life begin." Adams does not hide the fact that he is pro-choice, but he does believe that life begins before birth. The most interesting thing to me is that he does not believe that rape, incest or birth defect are good reasons to have an abortion. It is interesting to see someone on the pro-choice side who we can find some common ground with.

Obama's Gaffe Provides Fuel for Pro-Life Attacks

Barak Obama recently made a comment that should spread like wildfire throughout the Pro-Life community. Here is the report as retold in a recent column by Pat Buchanan.

Near the end of a town hall meeting in Johnstown, Pa., a woman arose to offer a passionate plea to Barack Obama to "stop these abortions."

Obama's response was cool, direct, unequivocal.

"Look, I got two daughters -- 9 years old and 6 years old. ... I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby."

I can't imagine any starker contrast than between this answer from from Obama and the response from Sarah Palin and her husband to the fact that their teenage daughter is pregnant. I'm sure this quote will be used to raise tons of money for Pro-Life causes and should cost Obama the support of those few Pro-Lifers who might have still planned on voting for him.

Why can't there ever be a DISCUSSION on abortion?

A "eureka" moment for me on the issue of abortion came on a high school trip to a museum. I sat with a good friend who shared my interest in model rocketry, and somehow our conversation turned to Roe v. Wade. We disagreed on the topic, and I carefully laid out the Pro-Life arguments that I had found so convincing. His response? He actually agreed with me, but "It is a woman's right to choose." OK. I laid out an argument for why I felt that particular argument was specious. He agreed 100%. But "It is a woman's right to choose." We spent the whole 3 hour trip having a "discussion" where he would not answer any of my points with a reasoned, logical, or even emotional response. It was simply the mantra "It is a woman's right to choose" with literally no intellectual backing.

This post on Digg.Com has the same ring to me, and reminds me that for much of the abortion argument while the Pro-Choice side accuses the Pro-Life side of being "ignorant and unreasoning", they themselves are not interested in a dialogue. Maybe it is the radicalism that has emerged on both sides, maybe it is the rise of political correctness, or maybe it is something I truly am not seeing. But I am still waiting for a GOOD Pro-Choice argument based on solid philosophical ground. I understand the concerns about rape/incest/life-of-mother. But most Pro-Lifers are willing to compromise on this. In fact, my own Pro-Life position is that this is a morality issue that should be decided on the STATE level and NOT the Federal level.

Is there any hope for a discussion on Abortion instead of an endless stream of invective and recrimination?

Buchanan on Obama and Abortion

Pat Buchanan's has up a new commentary that chronicles Barak Obama's ardent support of abortion rights through his career. The most interesting piece of information to me is that that 3 times while an Illinois state senator he voted for a bills that would allow doctors and nurses to either kill or neglect and let die babies who survive abortions and are born. Also, Obama voted against the ban on Partial Birth abortions and denounced the Supreme Court ruling that kept the ban intact. I don't mean to turn this into a debate on abortion, but this article lays out how extreme Obama's views on abortion are.

Teen Pregnancy and Abortion

An article about the upswing of student pregnancies at Gloucester (Massachusetts) High School has me thinking about pop culture and the current impact on abortion. Since Roe v. Wade, pop culture has been pushing the mantra, "pregnant and don't want to be, get rid of it". With the rise in celebrity pregnancies and movies about less than ideal pregnancy situations, could the upswing be that abortion becomes less tolerated by our nation? Or are we moving towards an era where teens get pregnant and have babies because they're "fun" and college+ adults get abortions because they're "convenient".

Deep Thought of the Day: Abortion and Gay Marriage

I may have posted this before, but the situation in California has brought it back to mind. In American history there have been a series of great compromises: the Connecticut compromise which created a proportionally-chosen House and a 2-per-state Senate, the compromise that cut off slavery at the Mason-Dixon line, etc. I am wondering if one more could be possible:

What if we were offered a compromise which would allow individual states to ban abortion, in return for allowing individual states to allow gay marriage?

Could it ever have a chance? Could a "new face" like Obama or a "maverick" like McCain propose such a compromise? Or would this simply radicalize both the Right and Left to make later compromise harder?

Okay, now it your turn to tell me how naive I am.

Seeing the other side: Why one abortion doctor does her work

It is important in any debate to truly understand the other side, so that you can (1) properly defend against their arguments, and (2) truly understand if you are right. This morning I came across this article which lays out one Canadian doctor's reasons for being an abortion provider. Frankly, I find some of her justifications disturbing, but others make some sense and are worth considering and understanding. Warning, there are a few sections which those with a weak stomach may find difficult.

The first month of my internship was spent on Ward 41, the septic obstetrics ward. Yes, it's hard to believe now, but in those days, they had one ward dedicated exclusively to septic complications of pregnancy.

About 90% of the patients were there with complications of septic abortion. The ward had about 40 beds, in addition to extra beds which lined the halls. Each day we admitted between 10-30 septic abortion patients. We had about one death a month, usually from septic shock associated with hemorrhage...

Today, in Canada and the U.S., septic shock from illegal abortion is virtually never seen. Like smallpox, it is a "disappeared disease."

This article did not change my mind at all, honestly, but it gave me a window into the Pro-Abortion movement and its proponents. And it reminded me yet again that the crazies who attack abortion doctors or bomb clinics do nothing to end abortion, and usually wind up creating even more dedicated proponents of the practice.

A Happy Trend - Abortion On the Decline

The article pretty much speaks for itself.

The number of abortions in the United States fell to the lowest level since the procedure was made legal some 35 years ago, according to a national study released Thursday.

The Guttmacher Institute... said there were about 1.2 million abortions in 2005 -- 25 percent fewer than in 1990, when the number of abortions was about 1.6 million procedures.

In 2005, the US abortion rate was 19.4 abortions for every 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 44, according to figures compiled from surveying abortion providers. The 2005 figure represented an eight percent drop from the number of abortions in 2000.

The finding underscores a continued a downward trend that started after the abortion rate peaked at 29.3 procedures per 1,000 women in 1981, according to the institute.

Of course, it would be better to see even fewer. But the continuing decline of abortions is an encouraging trend, and gives hope that one day they may be essentially confined to the hard cases: rape, incest, and life of the mother.

Abortion rates the same, regardless of legality

Part of being a "moderate" blog means posting stories you don't like. Take, for example, this one which cites a new World Health Organization study on abortion.

A comprehensive global study of abortion has concluded that abortion rates are similar in countries where it is legal and those where it is not, suggesting that outlawing the procedure does little to deter women seeking it.

Moreover, the researchers found that abortion was safe in countries where it was legal, but dangerous in countries where it was outlawed and performed clandestinely. Globally, abortion accounts for 13 percent of women’s deaths during pregnancy and childbirth, and there are 31 abortions for every 100 live births, the study said.

Readers know I am ardently Pro-Life and Anti-Abotion (choose your label, as you will). Honestly, I suspect this study is flawed as it is extremely counter-intuitive to me. However, I admit counter-intuitive does not always mean wrong. Quantum mechanics and man-woman social interactions prove that quite easily. And I wonder how different this study would look adjusted for moral and social outlooks.

I guess the next question IF the study is accurate is, does this support the Pro-Choice position? It certainly lends credence to the practical argument of those looking to never return to the coat-hanger days. However, it means little to the moral argument. And less to te spiritual argument. After all, it seems like adultery is a constant, despite legal or moral controls on it. But still, we recognize the detrimental effects of adulterous interactions upon society.

I hate to say "I told you so", but...

...the Republican party is finally starting to confront the Elephant in the Room for the Rudy Guiliani campaign. His pro-abortion past is catching up with him, as some Evangelical leaders are threatening to go Third Party.

For months, Christian conservatives have been escalating their warnings about the risk that nominating Mr. Giuliani could splinter the party. Dr. Dobson wrote a column declaring that he would waste his vote before casting it for either Mr. Giuliani or a Democrat who supports abortion rights like Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. Richard Land, the top public policy official of the Southern Baptist Convention, has said that nominating a Republican candidate who supports abortion rights would make white evangelical votes “a jump ball” between the Republicans and Democrats, with other issues taking the fore.

You may recall I said that I could not vote for the Mayor, despite my respect for him, from Day 1. I doubt that I am among the more extreme members of the anti-abortion wing.