Is There a Limit to Abortion Extremism?

When the Reproductive Health Act was passed in January, New York had the most extreme abortion laws in the United States, if not the western world. There are now virtually no limits on abortions even up to the moment of birth, and the bill even removed an obligation to provide medical care to babies who survived the abortion and were born alive. Our Governor has pushed through new rules that require all health insurance plans to cover abortions with no co-pay. Free and universally available abortion is the rule now in our State.

Our state is not alone in its rush to abortion extremism. Vermont and Illinois have already passed extreme abortion expansion bills. Rhode Island has one moving forward in their legislature. Virginia also has a bill pending that would strip survivors of abortion of the right to medical care. The Supreme Court of Kansas somehow managed to discover a fundamental right to an abortion in its state constitution. The rhetoric you can hear from the supporters of these bills are hair-raising — denying the humanity of unborn children, indifferent to the cruelty of the actual practice of abortion, and hostility to anyone who stands in their way.

When Alabama and Georgia passed strongly pro-life bills, the Culture of Death wasted no time in lashing back. Big business and the entertainment immediately announced that they would punish those states for making abortion less accessible, often arguing in Orwellian terms that limits on abortion make women less safe. Thousands of unborn women are not consulted about that.

The Democratic Party, which is the early stages of its presidential nomination process, has also moved to the extreme. Candidates are falling over themselves to show how much they support abortion. Even former Vice-President Joseph Biden, who has long been (inaccurately) considered a moderate on abortion, has knuckled under to the pressure and renounced his decades-long support for the Hyde Amendment, which limits federal funding for abortion. Repeal of the Hyde Amendment has become a matter of faith to the modern Democratic Party.  Apparently that’s not even enough for some New York City public officials, who have proposed setting aside a special fund to pay for abortions.

The extremist mindset of the pro-abortion crowd is perhaps best seen in the (perhaps unintentional) candor of the junior Senator from New York, Kirsten Gillibrand. She is running a hopeless and hapless campaign for President. In an interview the other day, she had this to say about her promise to require any nominee for a federal judgeship to commit to defending abortion rights:

I think there’s some issues that have such moral clarity that we have as a society decided that the other side is not acceptable. Imagine saying that it’s okay to appoint a judge who’s racist or anti-Semitic or homophobic. Telling– asking someone to appoint someone who takes away basic human rights of any group of people in America, I don’t think that those are political issues anymore… There is no moral equivalency when you come to racism and I do not believe there is a moral equivalency when it comes to changing laws that deny women reproductive freedom.

This, from a woman who claims to “identify” as Catholic but who has publicly stated that she believes the Church is wrong on abortion, gay rights, and other points. Apparently it’s not enough to be President, she also wants to be Pope.

Michael Gerson, the columnist for the Washington Post, reacted to the Senator this way:

To summarize: Opposing abortion, by definition, is a form of bigotry. And this bigotry comes from religion. And religion can’t be the basis for law. Therefore, in Gillibrand’s view, pro-life people are not only wrong; they are bigoted theocrats who threaten democracy.

It’s hard to take such a person seriously, but we would be wrong to dismiss her views as being merely another example of senatorial silliness. They are actually extremely dangerous, because the Senator’s view is not isolated. It is becoming more and more common in the far left wing of the Democratic Party. It’s worth remembering that our Governor has stated that pro-lifers “have no place in New York”. Pro-abortion advocates routinely say that we are “un-American” or even “anti-American”.

We are being cast out of polite society, and being told that we cannot even air our views, because we actually dare to believe that unborn human beings have rights that born people are bound to respect.

This kind of extremism and intolerance calls the question to the floor – whose views are more in line with actual Americans? The answer is clear – ours.

Polls continue to show that regardless of whether people call themselves pro-choice pro-life, most Americans are nowhere near as extreme as New York’s law or the Democratic orthodoxy on abortion. In fact, most Americans favor far more restrictions on abortion than are present in current law. For example:

  • Only 18% think abortion should be available to a woman any time she wants at any time of pregnancy
  • 61% think significant restrictions should be placed on abortion.
  • 23% believe abortion should be permitted only during the first three months of pregnancy
  • 11% felt that abortion should only be permitted during the first six months of pregnancy.
  • 29% favor legal abortion only in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother.

Fewer than one out of five Americans support the extreme law on abortion that has become dogma for the Senator Gillibrands and Governor Cuomos of the world, along with their sponsors in Hollywood, Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and the rest of the abortion industry.  A solid majority of American favor restricting abortion either completely or partially.

So who’s the extremist? And is there any limit to abortion extremism?

Tags:

Comments are closed.