The Associated Press follow up story on the partial birth abortion ban is a surprisingly even-handed treatment, even including a brief description of the procedure involved. I've noticed this has been the case with many newspaper and online reports -- much more than their TV counterparts.The gruesome description of what the abortionist does to the child in a partial birth abortion is, of course, shocking and sick to most Americans. Those schematic drawings illustrating the details of the procedure that were finally printed in newspapers had an outstanding impact, changing the minds of millions of Americans. However, the MSM has never used the same kind of honesty when dealing with other forms of abortion. That's a tragic case of irresponsibility because, let's face it, a preborn baby being dismembered by a suction machine or having his skin burned off by a deadly saline solution is certainly as barbaric and demented as what happens in any partial birth abortion.
Therefore, one of the lessons we should learn from the present matter is that truth, when given a fair hearing, does enlighten, liberate and even convert. And truth, as it has always been, is on the side of the sanctity of life.
A couple of other quick observations regarding the issue:
* Please make it a frequent theme of your conversation with others on this matter that it is Planned Parenthood who is the loudest, most zealous champion of partial-birth abortion. Let's use their devoted support of this brutality as leverage against them, emphasizing that Planned Parenthood is not the "apple pie charity" it claims to be but rather a cold-hearted, greedy, deceitful and very wealthy organization that kills babies, destroys innocence, corrupts culture, endangers women...all while receiving millions of dollars from taxpayers' pockets.
* Yesterday's Court decision naturally underscores the huge difference a genuinely pro-life President makes in re-establishing a culture of life. Roberts and Alito are good men and should be heartily thanked for their decision in this case. But it was President George W. Bush who overcame daunting opposition to put them on the Court. Congratulations, Mr. President!
*But on a second and less obvious front -- Could the partial birth abortion bans make any clearer how critical it is to have dedicated pro-life advocates in state legislatures? The SCOTUS would have had no chance to act unless principled men and women in politics had worked bravely, wisely and optimistically for such bans in the first place. So, please consider sending along thanks to your pro-life legislators as well.
* Note how desperately the leftists expound the legal philosophy of stare decisis -- but only after they have managed to overthrow precedents they don't like.
* Sandra Day O'Connor once described Roe v Wade as being on a collision course with itself. She was referring to how Harry Blackmun's arbitrary trimester system was already outdated by new information about fetal development and technology allowing babies to be born healthy at ever-earlier stages of development. But she wrote those words years before fetal surgery, 3D ultrasound and public opinion polls showing younger Americans to be significantly more against abortion than their elders. Yes, indeed; Planned Parenthood has good reasons to panic for technology has dramatically increased the awareness of the American public of just what legalized abortion really is: an unnatural, unnecessary, dangerous, immoral and extravagantly selfish act.
Finally, here's a few more articles I think you'll find of interest: Janet Folger's World Net Daily article; the Wall Street Journal's editorial; a piece from Catholic Online; Michael New's column over at National Review Online (there are others there); and a nice report from our old pals up at the Pro-Life Action League.
