Abortion More Than Legal, Moral Issue

(Weekly Standard)  This column was written by Fred Barnes.

---

How do people become pro-lifers? What turns people into passionate foes of abortion and related issues like euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research? I'm not referring to those who supported the pro-life position because of their family upbringing or religious faith or because of a political requirement as, say, a Republican candidate in a red state. I'm talking about people who, as adults or mature teenagers, were either pro-abortion or basically indifferent to the issue. Then something changed their mind, prompting them to take up the anti-abortion cause. Perhaps they began defending the pro-life position without realizing they'd flipped. In any case, what caused the change? What happened?

The answer can be found in the experiences of five people: Ronald Reagan, Henry Hyde, Ramesh Ponnuru, Wesley Smith, and myself. And their stories, I think, are roughly representative of what a multitude of others went through as they came to embrace the cause of saving unborn children. The five experienced two things in common that should be easy to spot as we look at their five cases.

Let's begin with Reagan. In his first year as California governor in 1967, the legislature passed a bill to legalize "therapeutic" abortions. It was an issue Reagan hadn't thought much about and he was torn over whether to veto the measure. Many Republicans in legislature strongly urged him to sign the bill. So did aides on his staff, including conservatives Ed Meese and Lyn Nofziger, who later followed Reagan to Washington. Reagan was assured it would result in only a handful of abortions.

His instinct was to veto the bill, and the Catholic archbishop of Los Angeles urged him to follow that course. But he signed it into law. Reagan was disturbed by his decision, however, and continued to think long and hard about abortion. The bill, according to Lou Cannon in 'Governor Reagan," "permitted more legal abortions in California than occurred in any other state before the advent of Roe v. Wade." Reagan's worst fear was realized.

By 1980, Reagan had changed his mind and become a firm opponent of abortion. He insisted on a pro-life plank in the Republican platform for the first time. In 1983, he published a passionate pro-life essay, "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation." It turned out that signing the abortion bill in 1967 was the only political mistake that Reagan ever admitted.

• 1
• 2
• Next Page »

[hncarp00]

This article is less in depth than a High School paper's analysis of the week's lunch menu. The idea that the author would high-light "experience" implies that those experiences would come from personal encounters with the abortion debate. NONE of the men (and yes, men can be part of an abortion decision though not on the level than women are) actually were involved with women who were having to make this difficult choice. Instead, you present Men making political and professional choices based upon party pressure, political convenience, and the opportunity to jump on a band-wagon that would take them to higher office. The feminist notion that "the personal is the political" is true, but here you have MEN in office or in positions of power making the "political personal" by taking their greed for office/power into the lives of vulnerable citizens and challenging their rights to make medical decisions. I am greatly disappointed by this type of fluff journalism that seems to pervade most mainstream media outlets. Next time, you promise a "personal" view, try to find some actual "persons" not opportunistic figureheads.

[linfinster]

MizQue is MizTaken. It isn't that men have no right to an opinion about abortion (they do)and it certainly ISN'T about a woman and her Right to do as she pleases with her body, or understanding how she feels. Your "choice" is made when you engage in activity that can cause the creation of another living human being. That comes with responsibility, unfortunately MizTaken, you are neither resposible nor human.

[nchapmansf]

This article is meaningless. It offers no deep insight into abortion or anyone's decision to have one, or not to have one. I urge all readers to remember what abortion is really about: abortion is about individual choice and should never, ever have been twisted into being about anything else. This writer still does not get it: he is not a woman, and, therefore, it is not his business, although he obviously believes that it is. He is incorrect, and the title of his article is misleading.

[debaa-2009]

Does a life (no matter how little or underdeveloped) have value only if it is desired? Am I deserving of life only because my mother wanted me? Life is precious regardless of the feelings and desires of the woman carrying it. Just because it has been passed into law, doesn't mean it is right. It is clearly murder, no matter the stage of development, and God is keeping tabs.

[MizQue]

@ NevikPi

Your point is well taken. If someone is against abortion, then they won't have one - even if they are brutally raped. I have a different opinion. No one will force me to be a broodmare against my will. Simple really.

The writer of this article has come to an emotional conclusion on the subject that he fools himself into thinking is intellectual. In any event, abortion is a personal decision for a woman in which Mr. Barnes personal opinions and conclusions have no part.

[nevikpi]

blazercoach1,

As fervently as you feel abortion is wrong, there are others with a different world view, who feel as strongly that this is a decision which should be left to the individual(s) involved. It should NOT be the province of the government, nor should it be the province of religious fascists, who feel that they have all the answers for all of us, whether or not we want them! If you don't want to have an abortion, don't have one! No one is requiring you to do so -- and if you regret decisions made in the past, get professional help and get past it, but leave other people alone.

And, do you really think that outlawing abortion will prevent women from having them? Such a policy will force the matter underground, and will result not only in the abortion of more fetuses, but also in the needless death of young women. And for what? So that some self-righteous moralizing busybody can assert that the poor women "got what they deserved"?

Finally, do we really want a new generation of children born to mothers who are ill-prepared to raise them, or who simply don't want them? Can our nation really afford more sociopathic young people who will likely commit crimes, thereby ensuring that they will waste their lives in prison? What about the lives of those who would be adversely affected by children who might have been aborted? This matter is not as simple as you would believe, and this does not even consider the issue of global human overpopulation, which is also relevant!

[MizQue]

I thought this article was going to be about the "experiences" of five women, not five men. A man cannot have the "experience" of an unwanted pregnancy, or know what it's like to need an abortion in a medical emergency that threatens his life. No one has the right to tell me what to do with my body, especially not a man who has no idea of what a woman is going through!

[blazercoach1]

To NevikPi......would you argue that the decision to own a slave is a personal one and not one that should be made for you? How about the decision to physically abuse a child? I doubt it. Rather, I hope that you and I would simply disagree about when a human child exists in the womb. Once that happens...by definition..it is NOT "personal". I encourage you to research this...and not just from voices who say what you WANT to hear. LOOK for information that would challenge you on this issue.

[blazercoach1]

Oh yes...and to Frank Bowers...a complete Pro-lifer encourages and practices adoption as well. What do YOU do to help these women and children besides encourage them to not exist or simply die? How do you help the child who lives in the conditions you describe? Not "what do you think should HAVE BEEN done", Frank....WHAT DO YOU DO? Your statement that you "do not nor can" support or help these people and children says alot more about you than about the value of their lives. Pray about it.

[blazercoach1]

sorry for the multiple postings....hitting "publish" does nothing to let you know that you have sent your comment.