.jpg)
The “choice” term is not new to politics. During the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858, the two were running for the Senate and both agreed the existence of slavery in existing states was a done deal but they debated the question of free or slave state for Kansas, Nebraska and future western territories.
Lincoln supported the western territories be declared free by Congress and Douglas argued for the individual territories to have the “choice” of being free or slave. Of course, the people most affected, the slaves, did not have any say in that choice!
Today’s “choice” argument is that abortion should be the woman’s choice. Again, the most affected, the unborn child, has no say in the choice decision or as Ronald Reagan noted, “I’ve noticed that everyone who is in favor of abortion has already been born.”
Abortion became a public issue late in the 19th and early 20th century with the new “science” of eugenics based on a line in Charles Darwin’s book Origin of the Species —“survival of the fittest.” Eugenics supporters believed in improving the quality of the human population by reducing or stopping the breeding of so called “inferior” persons like severely physically or mentally handicapped, or genetically diseased persons.
This was expanded to include race in the “inferior” category by racists like Margaret Sanger and Clarence Gamble. Racism against Blacks then was even supported by President Woodrow Wilson. Sanger started Planned Parenthood clinics in Black and poor neighborhoods of immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe with a goal of reducing “inferior” reproduction.
In 1938, Sanger wrote, “In the animal industry, the poor stock is not allowed to breed” and “In the garden, weeds need to be kept down.” Sanger concluded America should learn from Nazi Germany and get rid of “human weeds.”
Sanger’s hidden racist agenda was played down for years and she was even honored on a U.S. postage stamp but by 2015, her racist views became so well-known Planned Parenthood ended the long-established Margaret Sanger Award. In 2020, Sanger’s name was dropped from the organization’s New York City clinic and from most of the organization’s publications.
Views changed pro and con concerning abortions in the 1960s with the birth control pill and the “sexual revolution.” Abortion, still officially illegal, entered into public debate more openly.
The Supreme Court on June 22, 1973, in a 7-2 vote in the Roe v. Wade decision found an “implicit right to privacy in the 14th Amendment” making abortion legal in the first trimester of a pregnancy along with additional grounds for longer in the case of rape, incest or health of the mother.
It settled the question legally — sort of. What constituted the health of the mother and other legal questions were debated. The wide use of ultrasounds added new questions. Many parents’ first picture of their child was an ultrasound. Seeing the unborn move and respond to stimulus upset the argument that an unborn baby was just a mass of cells.
The so-called “morning after” pills that could prevent a pregnancy simply by taking it after sexual intercourse really added fuel to the fire.
Roe v. Wade did not stop the lawsuits filed and when Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health reached the Supreme Court. things changed rapidly. On June 24, 2022, on a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court voted to reverse the Roe v. Wade decision. The 10th Amendment said things not covered by the Constitution were left up to the states. Whether abortions would be legal or not or how limited or regulated was now up to the state legislatures to choose. This “choice” was not popular with pro-abortion supporters.
Politicians jumped in to defend or condemn the new “choice” decision. The statements and threats grew stronger like Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) saying certain justices “had sowed the wind and will reap the whirlwind.” The danger of this kind of statement became clear when a man intent on killing a Supreme Court justice, his wife and two young daughters was stopped.
The issue has moved to the states where political parties and individuals disagree on what action to choose. In Virginia, Governor Youngkin set as a plan to allow abortions for the first 16 weeks (slightly longer than the Roe v. Wade time frame) with allowances for rape, incest and the mother’s health.
This did not stop the Democrats from claiming the Youngkin administration had chosen to ban abortions in Virginia. When these false charges were disputed, Democrats moved on to say 16 weeks (four months) was not enough and chose six months or longer. Instead of debating when a fetus can survive out of the womb, Youngkin and Republicans had to fight the lies that they wanted to ban abortions.
The election is over but the abortion issue is not. The debate will continue in both houses of Virginia’s legislature next year. Former President Bill Clinton said, “Abortions should be safe, legal, and rare.” Today we need to add to his list where, when and by who the “rare abortions” can be performed. The last thing we need is more lies, misrepresentations, and other statements not based on fact used for political gain.
Thoughts for your consideration.
