The conservative approach to reducing the number of abortions is a “supply-side” approach. The idea here is to criminalize abortion providers, thus resulting in a reduction in the number of abortions. Unfortunately, eliminating abortion providers is much like trying to solve the drug problem by solely going after drug suppliers, but ignoring demand. It is a fact of market dynamics that as long as demand exists, there will be supply.
ed. note: Which is why, of course there were 1.5 million abortions a year before Roe. Not.
Pro-life moderates and liberals embrace the “demand-side” approach. This approach seeks to reduce the number of abortions by addressing the social issues that compel too many women to contemplate what would normally be unthinkable. If social conditions were changed so that women were empowered, and if we effectively addressed issues such as health care, child care, family leave, wage inequity, domestic violence and other women’s issues, we could reasonably expect a significant reduction in the number of abortions in the United States. For instance, 21 percent of abortions in the United States are a result of inadequate finances. This category of women, though not exhaustive, represents a very fixable opportunity. Consider the following simplified example. If a woman for whom inadequate finances were the primary reason to consider an abortion is confident that there would be assistance to compensate for her lack of finances, the lack of finances then weighs less in her deliberations.
Pro-life “conservatives” who are all about prohibition and not about creating a culture of life or offering alternatives: Straw Man, very boring, and unknown to people who actually work with pro-life groups, the vast majority of which spend most of their time, energy and other resources in direct assistance to pregnant women in need.
Secondly, what is most mystifying to me about this position is *how* promotion and fought-to-the-death legal protection of easily available abortion through all nine months of pregnancy fits into a “pro-life” vision or a “culture of life.” In other words, what is wrong with trying to limit abortion through legal means besides the others? Why the objection, if life is really what you’re all about – if you really and truly believe all those fetal remains are kids, individuals brought into existence by God because He loves them….why would you even for a second demean the effort to protect them by the law?
As the March approaches, stay tuned to the After Abortion Blog for informed commentary and links, including one to an article in the British press about reactions to the filmed abortion:
“Journalist Lauren Booth, a pro-choicer who has also had an abortion, said she recoiled when watching the film’s pivotal moment. ‘My hand flew to my mouth in shock,’ she said. ‘I swallowed. I didn’t want to say it, but the word “murder” came to my lips.'”
(Note: Comments will open on this in the morning. I don’t like waking up to a war zone.)
Read Previous Post