Wednesday, September 12, 2007

A Pro-Choice Journalist Argues for Stricter Abortion Laws

Amanda Platell is just one of the many "pro-choice" women who are having severe second thoughts about what their demands for legalized abortion have wrought. In this lengthy, sometimes very surprising article in the Daily Mail (U.K.), there are numerous points to ponder. Among them are the stark differences between the feminist goals of the 1960' versus today's, how the advances in technology have changed the debate, and how government sanction invariably influences individual actions.

Note too the photo of the preborn baby which accompanies the article (I show it a bit further down). Is not the willingness to buck feminist anger by publishing a photo like this one in itself an indication of a dramatic mood shift by some journalists and editors?

Platell, by the way, is an Australian journalist, now based in London, whose columns and television appearances have made her an influential figure. She was also Head of Media for the British Conservative Party from 1997 to 2001. Below is an excerpt from this very interesting column.

...I have not the slightest desire to see abortion made illegal, as some pro-life zealots do.

But, 40 years on (and 6.7 million abortions later), I do believe that the sheer ease and scale of abortion in Britain today necessitates an urgent revision of the Abortion Act.


In particular, I passionately believe the growing scientific evidence of a foetus's ability to sustain life at 20 weeks - and show signs of recognisably human behaviour as young as 13 weeks - must make us reduce the upper limit.


I also believe that we should be counselling women far more about the viability of keeping their child, and the real alternative of giving birth to your child then offering it up for adoption (especially in an age when so many infertile couples yearn to have a child and are forced to rely on the lottery of IVF procedures).

And, of course, I fervently believe we should be doing more to educate young girls about their contraception options so they don't get pregnant in the first place, but also placing that education in a moral context so that we are not afraid to teach that the best method of contraception of all is abstinence.


Yet such is the liberal elite's obsession with that old mantra "A Woman's Right To Choose" that shockingly few resources are devoted to any of these strategies, and those institutions that promote the alternatives - such as the Catholic Church and pro-life charities - are condemned as fanatically anti-feminist.


This is surely madness - all the more so in light of the latest figures that show how popular opinion is directly opposed to making abortion easier.


How much longer can the Government ignore that silent majority?


Just as we did 40 years ago, when the Abortion Act came into being, we are standing at a new moral watershed.


And just as we did back then, what we need is legislation that will protect the most vulnerable - and they don't get more vulnerable than a healthy, developing foetus...