John Whitehead's Commentary
Roe v. Wade: Human Beings Caught in America's Killing Fields
The 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade was marked by demonstrators from both sides showing their respective support in the streets of Washington, DC, where the U.S. Supreme Court's redefinition of human life altered the course of history. Accepted by most of today's judicial, executive and legislative authorities, the ruling that granted one woman the right to abort her unborn child has now become part of the American cultural worldview.
Nevertheless, a hope persists among the pro-life community that Roe might someday be overturned. Yet after years of so-called conservative presidents who paid lip service to the right to life, there is no end in sight for abortion-on-demand. Perhaps little more can be expected from the current administration. Certainly, after two years in office, President Bush has done little to advance the debate apart from denying funds to international groups that support abortion and declaring Jan. 19 National Sanctity of Human Life Day.
Calling on all Americans to "reaffirm the value of human life and renew our dedication to ensuring that every American has access to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," Bush proclaimed that "[e]very child is a priority and a blessing, and I believe that all should be welcomed in life and protected by law."
Heart-warming words perhaps, but they pale in comparison to the more than 40 million unborn babies who have been put to death in the U.S. alone since abortion was legalized. If we continue to wait for a political solution to this tragedy, it is certain that many more unborn children will suffer premature deaths.
It is unfortunate that we allowed abortion to become a political issue in the first place. Despite its political implications, abortion is a human life issue. By focusing on politics, we have lost sight of what the debate is really all about. It is about human beings--men and women struggling with life and death issues that will impact them all the days of their lives.
The debate is about whether we can reclaim our lost humanity, because abortion is not humane. The methods involved in aborting a child underscore this point. For example, saline abortions kill the unborn baby from salt-poisoning dehydration and hemorrhages of internal organs. Another method, vacuum aspiration, relies on the use of a powerful suction tube inserted through the woman's cervix and into the uterus. The unborn child is often torn apart by the force of the suction, as its body parts and the placenta are sucked into a jar.
RU-486, or the "abortion pill" as it is commonly known, causes an abortion by interfering with the function of the placenta and starving the unborn child to death. A second drug is then administered to expel what remains. And then there are the gruesome D&X (dilation and extraction) or partial birth abortions. They are used to kill second- and third-trimester unborn babies and involve the use of specially designed tools to dismember the baby and crush its skull (all, of course, without fetal anesthetic).
The very act of aborting an unborn child is violent, and no one can walk away unscathed--certainly not the mothers-to-be. Information that is never mentioned in the rhetoric about a "woman's right to control her body" is that abortion adversely affects a woman's health--physically and mentally. A great deal of respected medical literature exists documenting the negative consequences to women who "choose" abortion over life.
For example, research shows that abortion increases a woman's overall risk of breast cancer by 30 percent. One report on women's health after abortion released by the deVeber Institute for Bioethics and Social Research indicates that subsequent pregnancies are negatively affected by induced abortion. The main complications are: cervical incompetence leading to future miscarriages; uterine perforations and placenta previa with serious implications to the health of the woman and her child(ren) in later pregnancies; and ectopic pregnancies which, if undiagnosed and untreated, can lead to a woman's death.
If those on either side of the abortion debate really cared about women and children, the focus of the debate would be on human needs and not on politics. This choice is not about whether a woman has the right to abort her unborn child but whether we human beings will act humanely.
Change cannot be forced through violence or political machinations. It is unlikely that any president--Republican or Democrat--will ever make an unqualified commitment to ending abortion. The stakes are too high for any politician to make such a drastic move.
Even the expectation that drastic changes can come through the courts must be put to rest. Perhaps people have forgotten that Richard Nixon, a pro-life president, appointed Harry Blackmun to the Supreme Court. But there is no overlooking the fact that it was Justice Blackmun who wrote the opinion in Roe v. Wade. If only those concerned about the inhumanity of abortion would turn their primary attention from attempting to overturn Roe v. Wade to the real issue of the religious, spiritual and moral health of this nation, we might begin to see some real changes.
Pro-lifers must realize that Roe is, in many ways, like prohibition. The people of America manufactured, sold and consumed alcohol despite--or to spite--the law. There was no widespread moral imperative supporting prohibition. So it is with abortion. In today's moral climate, even if Roe v. Wade were overturned, there is no question that abortion would still continue in this country. Thus, for a humane approach to human life to triumph it will mean that cultural support for the Roe philosophy of individual rights even over the lives of others must be discredited.
The fact is that people have to be won over, heart and soul. Thus, although President Bush can appoint so-called conservative judges to the Supreme Court, that will not stop abortion. Only when we start to change the hearts of Americans by opening up a real dialogue about what abortion is can we put an end to these killing fields.
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.
Nevertheless, a hope persists among the pro-life community that Roe might someday be overturned. Yet after years of so-called conservative presidents who paid lip service to the right to life, there is no end in sight for abortion-on-demand. Perhaps little more can be expected from the current administration. Certainly, after two years in office, President Bush has done little to advance the debate apart from denying funds to international groups that support abortion and declaring Jan. 19 National Sanctity of Human Life Day.
Calling on all Americans to "reaffirm the value of human life and renew our dedication to ensuring that every American has access to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," Bush proclaimed that "[e]very child is a priority and a blessing, and I believe that all should be welcomed in life and protected by law."
Heart-warming words perhaps, but they pale in comparison to the more than 40 million unborn babies who have been put to death in the U.S. alone since abortion was legalized. If we continue to wait for a political solution to this tragedy, it is certain that many more unborn children will suffer premature deaths.
It is unfortunate that we allowed abortion to become a political issue in the first place. Despite its political implications, abortion is a human life issue. By focusing on politics, we have lost sight of what the debate is really all about. It is about human beings--men and women struggling with life and death issues that will impact them all the days of their lives.
The debate is about whether we can reclaim our lost humanity, because abortion is not humane. The methods involved in aborting a child underscore this point. For example, saline abortions kill the unborn baby from salt-poisoning dehydration and hemorrhages of internal organs. Another method, vacuum aspiration, relies on the use of a powerful suction tube inserted through the woman's cervix and into the uterus. The unborn child is often torn apart by the force of the suction, as its body parts and the placenta are sucked into a jar.
RU-486, or the "abortion pill" as it is commonly known, causes an abortion by interfering with the function of the placenta and starving the unborn child to death. A second drug is then administered to expel what remains. And then there are the gruesome D&X (dilation and extraction) or partial birth abortions. They are used to kill second- and third-trimester unborn babies and involve the use of specially designed tools to dismember the baby and crush its skull (all, of course, without fetal anesthetic).
The very act of aborting an unborn child is violent, and no one can walk away unscathed--certainly not the mothers-to-be. Information that is never mentioned in the rhetoric about a "woman's right to control her body" is that abortion adversely affects a woman's health--physically and mentally. A great deal of respected medical literature exists documenting the negative consequences to women who "choose" abortion over life.
For example, research shows that abortion increases a woman's overall risk of breast cancer by 30 percent. One report on women's health after abortion released by the deVeber Institute for Bioethics and Social Research indicates that subsequent pregnancies are negatively affected by induced abortion. The main complications are: cervical incompetence leading to future miscarriages; uterine perforations and placenta previa with serious implications to the health of the woman and her child(ren) in later pregnancies; and ectopic pregnancies which, if undiagnosed and untreated, can lead to a woman's death.
If those on either side of the abortion debate really cared about women and children, the focus of the debate would be on human needs and not on politics. This choice is not about whether a woman has the right to abort her unborn child but whether we human beings will act humanely.
Change cannot be forced through violence or political machinations. It is unlikely that any president--Republican or Democrat--will ever make an unqualified commitment to ending abortion. The stakes are too high for any politician to make such a drastic move.
Even the expectation that drastic changes can come through the courts must be put to rest. Perhaps people have forgotten that Richard Nixon, a pro-life president, appointed Harry Blackmun to the Supreme Court. But there is no overlooking the fact that it was Justice Blackmun who wrote the opinion in Roe v. Wade. If only those concerned about the inhumanity of abortion would turn their primary attention from attempting to overturn Roe v. Wade to the real issue of the religious, spiritual and moral health of this nation, we might begin to see some real changes.
Pro-lifers must realize that Roe is, in many ways, like prohibition. The people of America manufactured, sold and consumed alcohol despite--or to spite--the law. There was no widespread moral imperative supporting prohibition. So it is with abortion. In today's moral climate, even if Roe v. Wade were overturned, there is no question that abortion would still continue in this country. Thus, for a humane approach to human life to triumph it will mean that cultural support for the Roe philosophy of individual rights even over the lives of others must be discredited.
The fact is that people have to be won over, heart and soul. Thus, although President Bush can appoint so-called conservative judges to the Supreme Court, that will not stop abortion. Only when we start to change the hearts of Americans by opening up a real dialogue about what abortion is can we put an end to these killing fields.
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.
ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at staff@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.
Publication Guidelines / Reprint Permission
John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission.
