Your coverage of the proposed new abortion law commented repeatedly on the
"restrictions" it contained. It's interesting, and perhaps revealing, that the
word "protective" was never part of your vocabulary.
The fact is: anti-pollution laws inevitably seem restrictive to some businesses, but
protective to environmentalists; laws against the bait-and-switch tactic are restrictive
to unscrupulous salesmen, but protective of consumers; laws against underage drinking seem
restrictive to teenagers, but their parents see them as protective.
I guess whether something is "restrictive" or "protective" is
determined by which side of the fence you're on. Protection for a victim is only viewed as
"restrictive" by those who would victimize. From your insistence on calling a
law that protects small children "restrictive," we can gather that you side with
In her op-ed piece yesterday, a spokeswoman from an
abortion advocacy group wrote about how wonderful it is to have a state full of abortion
mills. She made it sound as if her state is a veritable smorgasbord of options for
pregnant women. However, she conveniently overlooked the fact that all the choices are the
same choice: abortion.
I will believe the spokeswoman's rhetoric about
supporting "choice" when I see her addressing the women who don't want abortion
but feel they have no choice: those whose husbands, parents, boyfriends, bosses, and
"options counselors" browbeat, threaten, or otherwise coerce them into unwanted
I came across an interesting quote lately. See if
you can guess who said it.
"I am now speaking of rights under the
Constitution, and not of moral or religious rights. I do not discuss the morals of the
people favoring abortion, but let them settle that matter for themselves. I hold that the
people who favor abortion are civilized, that they bear consciences, and that they are
accountable to God and their posterity and not to us. It is for them to decide therefore
the moral and religious right of the abortion question for themselves within their own
Any ideas yet? Oh, by the way, I did make one small
change in this quote. I substituted the word "abortion" wherever the word
"slavery" used to be.
Give up? The speaker was Stephen Douglas, Abraham
Lincoln's pro-choice-on-slavery opponent in the presidential election of 1858.
Isn't it funny how the apologists for evil always
sound alike, regardless of the issue they're trying to defend. I wonder what that means?