|
'08 Walk for Life * PICTURES FROM 2006 MARCH FOR LIFE * Pregnancy Centers          About Us Volunteer Donate Home |
First, the facts. The president's solution to the
stem cell dilemma does nothing more than permit
federal funding for research on existing stem cell
lines from embryos that have already been
destroyed. Not a single dime of federal money will
be used to grow new embryos or harvest their
cells. Nor will federal dollars be used in
research on frozen embryos that have been
discarded or abandoned.
If that's not enough, the pessimists should
consider the totality of the Bush record before
they write him off. This wasn't the new
president's first test on human life, and it won't
be his last. The glass is definitely half full,
not half empty.
From the very outset of his run for the White
House, Mr. Bush made it clear in word and deed
that he would be different -- different than his
predecessor, who was so beholden to the abortion
lobby that he refused even to outlaw infanticide;
different than his father, who joined the pro-life
cause late in his political life and always seemed
a bit uncomfortable with the decision.
Instead of arrogance or awkwardness, the younger
Bush offered a humble but unmistakable promise to
build "a new culture of life." He chose a pro-life
vice president to give meaning to his words, and
he appointed a fleet of pro-lifers to key Cabinet
posts to put those words into action.
Then, on Jan. 22, [2001] he reinstated the ban on
federal assistance to international abortion
providers. It was exactly eight years earlier that
his predecessor lifted that ban and in the process
spread the scourge of abortion into every corner
of the earth. Thanks in part to Mr. Clinton's
executive order, the annual worldwide abortion
toll is a staggering 46 million.
By April, Mr. Bush's Health and Human Services
Department had notified states that Medicaid would
no longer cover the abortion pill RU486. In July,
Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy
Thompson drafted a new policy allowing states to
provide medical coverage under CHIPs to unborn
children.
The stem-cell decision is just the latest
indication that a new "culture of life" is indeed
taking root, but not just in Washington.
The number of abortions and abortion providers is
falling. In 84 percent of U.S. counties, there are
no abortion providers at all. Nineteen states have
waiting periods in force. And they are having an
immediate and dramatic impact. After a waiting
period went into effect in Mississippi, the number
of abortions fell by 22 percent.
The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a range of
safety regulations and licensing requirements at
South Carolina abortion clinics, putting 17 other
states with similar laws on firmer constitutional
ground and effectively closing down scores of
clinics. Forty states allow mothers to sue
doctors, drivers, druggists or anyone whose
negligence has contributed to the death of a
fetus. In the U.S. House, 53 Democrats joined 198
Republicans in making it a federal crime to harm a
fetus during an assault on a pregnant woman.
And after two terms with Bill Clinton in the White
House, it is the abortion-rights activists who
have drifted out of the mainstream and into the
fringe. Just as pro-lifers once warned of a
slippery slope downward to infanticide, abortion
supporters now fear the slippery slope in reverse
-- to the piecemeal dismantling of Roe vs. Wade
itself. And they're expressing those fears with
the shrillest of rhetoric.
Lambasting a bill that would do nothing more than
grant legal protection to infants who escape the
womb, a recent press release from the National
Abortion Rights Action League howled against the
measure as an "anti-choice assault" and accused
the bill's supporters of interfering with the
"sound practice of medicine."
In an Orwellian disregard for reality, Rep.
Jerrold Nadler argued that the fetus-protection
bill was designed not to protect women and their
babies from violence, but "to label an unborn
fetus or zygote or blastocyst as a person."
However, defending pre-birth battery and
post-birth feticide doesn't sit well with most
Americans. And the numbers are bearing this out: A
1995 Gallup poll found 56 percent of Americans
called themselves pro-choice; only 33 percent said
they were pro-life. Today, the numbers are even.
In fact, 62 percent oppose abortion for
convenience, down from 50 percent 10 years ago.
And only 15 percent of the public supports
abortion after the first trimester.
There may not be a pro-life majority, but there's
definitely no longer a pro-choice majority. As
NARAL president Kate Michelman recently conceded,
"The other side's gaining ground."
We gained a little more with the stem-cell
decision. By drawing a line between the possible
and the ethical, the president has reminded
Americans that even the weakest among us, even a
frozen embryo, has rights -- if not to life, then
at least a right not to be disturbed in his
petri-dish tomb, a right not to be harvested for
our benefit or comfort.
President Bush is trying to lead this country away
from Roe vs. Wade's dead-end. It's a journey that
will be measured not in long strides, but in baby
steps. If the pro-life pessimists refuse to
understand that and instead walk away from Mr.
Bush, they will do irreparable harm not only to
his presidency, but to their own noble cause.
By Alan Dowd
[Note: Alan Dowd is a freelance writer based in
Indianapolis.]
Source: Washington Times; August 15, 2001, and the
Pro-Life Infonet
Be a TLC Lifeguard
Before You Leave...
|