Pro-Roe Senators
The latest effort of the pro-abortion forces to deflect attention from the
horror of Partial-birth Abortion, which the Senate voted last week to ban by
nearly a two-thirds majority, was to introduce a resolution affirming that Roe
vs. Wade was rightly decided. That passed by the slimmest possible majority.
We need to keep a spotlight on partial-birth abortion until it is banned. It
is also worthwhile, however, to point out a few implications of the pro-Roe
resolution.
For the Senators who believe that Roe was rightly decided, a few reminders
are in order.
1. The way Roe envisioned the provision of abortion has little or
nothing to do with how it is actually performed in the United States today. The
Court said the following:
"The decision leaves the State free to place increasing restrictions on
abortion as the period of pregnancy lengthens, so long as those restrictions are
tailored to the recognized state interests. The decision vindicates the right of
the physician to administer medical treatment according to his professional
judgment up to the points where important state interests provide compelling
justifications for intervention. Up to those points, the abortion decision in
all its aspects is inherently, and primarily, a medical decision, and basic
responsibility for it must rest with the physician. If an individual
practitioner abuses the privilege of exercising proper medical judgment, the
usual remedies, judicial and intra-professional, are available" (Roe at
165-166).
The website of the "pro-choice" Alan Guttmacher institute lists the major
reasons women get abortion as follows: "On average, women give at least 3
reasons for choosing abortion: 3/4 say that having a baby would interfere with
work, school or other responsibilities; about 2/3 say they cannot afford a
child; and 1/2 say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems
with their husband or partner." None
of these is a medical reason.
Our experience with post-abortive women indicates that they do not have any
meaningful consultation with the abortionist ahead of time. They usually don't
even know his name.
And as far as abusing the privilege of exercising proper medical judgment,
abortion malpractice attorneys have been trained by the hundreds to deal with
the cases of abuse coming to light. The book Lime 5, published by Life
Dynamics, gives us some idea of the extent of the tragedy. Are the pro-Roe
Senators willing to apply Roe's words about the need for the state to regulate
abuses by abortionists?
2. Roe did not endorse the position that many abortion-defenders
embrace, namely, that of absolute privacy and no regulation of abortion at all.
Here are the words of the Court:
"The Court's decisions recognizing a right of privacy also acknowledge
that some state regulation in areas protected by that right is appropriate. As
noted above, a State may properly assert important interests in safeguarding
health, in maintaining medical standards, and in protecting potential life. At
some point in pregnancy, these respective interests become sufficiently
compelling to sustain regulation of the factors that govern the abortion
decision. The privacy right involved, therefore, cannot be said to be absolute.
In fact, it is not clear to us that the claim asserted by some amici that one
has an unlimited right to do with one's body as one pleases bears a close
relationship to the right of privacy previously articulated in the Court's
decisions. The Court has refused to recognize an unlimited right of this kind in
the past. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) (vaccination); Buck v.
Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) (sterilization).
We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the
abortion decision, but that this right is not unqualified and must be considered
against important state interests in regulation" (Roe at 154).
3. Jane Roe herself (Norma McCorvey) has renounced the Roe vs. Wade
decision and works full-time against all abortion. On March 23, 1997, she
publicly declared these memorable words: "I am Norma McCorvey. I became known
as Jane Roe on January 22, 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court released the Roe v.
Wade decision, which created a woman's "right to abortion". I am now a child of
God, a new creature in Christ; I am forgiven and redeemed. Today, I publicly
recant my involvement in the tragedy of abortion. I humbly ask forgiveness of
the millions of women and unborn babies who have experienced the violence of
abortion. In this place of healing, the National Memorial for the Unborn, I
stand with those who honor the worth of every unborn child as created in the
image of God. I will strive, in the name of Jesus, to end this holocaust."
