http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/a-b/antle/2004/antle122004.htm
Life After Roe v. Wade?


December 20, 2004



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by W. James Antle III



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next month, Americans on both sides of the abortion debate will either
celebrate or mourn the 32 nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade. The occasion
will
be marked by pro-life promises that the Supreme Court decision will one
day
be overturned and pro-choice warnings that such a reversal is imminent
unless their supporters act now. But unlike in past years, there may be
more
to these predictions than fundraising-appeal hyperbole.


In the last election, pro-lifers gained in both houses of Congress and

with a popular majority. ...

James Pinkerton surveyed the pro-life gains and declared in Newsday,
"On abortion, the tide has turned." But writing later in Tech Central
Station, he sounded a cautionary note. If antiabortion laws were adopted, how
enforceable would they be in liberal jurisdictions? Would progressive
district attorneys prosecute abortionists and would juries in bluish
areas convict them?


After all, our country - with its more than 1 million abortions per
year -remains deeply divided over when human life begins.

http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/a-b/antle/2004/antle122004.htm
Life After Roe v. Wade?


December 20, 2004

by W. James Antle III

Next month, Americans on both sides of the abortion debate will

celebrate or mourn the 32 nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade. The occasion
will
be marked by pro-life promises that the Supreme Court decision will

day
be overturned and pro-choice warnings that such a reversal is

unless their supporters act now. But unlike in past years, there may

more
to these predictions than fundraising-appeal hyperbole.


In the last election, pro-lifers gained in both houses of Congress

President Bush, who opposes abortion in most cases, won a second term
with a
popular majority. These results, followed by the Senate GOP's

taming of Arlen Specter, will expedite the confirmation of judges who
believe Roe was wrongly decided. And the legislative momentum was
already on
the right-to-life side. In the last few years, Congress has passed

banning partial-birth abortion, making it easier for medical

to
opt out of participating in abortions, protecting fetuses that

abortion attempts and recognizing unborn children as separate victims
when
killed or injured during assaults on pregnant women.

This trend is not merely observed by conservative Republicans. No

a
liberal pro-choice advocate than Sen. John Kerry, fresh from his 2004
presidential-election defeat, has urged his party to moderate its
rhetoric
on abortion. In the next Congress, Senate Democrats will be led by a
pro-lifer. A pro-lifer is also a serious candidate to head the
Democratic
National Committee, with the support not only of incoming Senate
Minority
Leader Harry Reid but also pro-choice House Minority Leader Nancy
Pelosi.


A number of current events and technological developments have helped
increase pro-life sentiment. Improved ultrasounds show expectant
mothers not
blobs of cells or some amorphous product of conception, but images of
their
developing offspring that might as well be prenatal baby pictures. In
the
Scott Peterson trial, news watchers were regularly reminded that

were
two victims and that the loss of Laci's unborn son Conner was no less
real
to the family they left behind. Just last week, a pregnant woman was
slain
and her unborn child was taken from her womb by her killer. The
Associated
Press reported that the baby girl - not a ball of tissue - was found
and was
in good condition at this writing.


All of this has demonstrated the humanity of the unborn more

than
most political activism, and in the process has begun to change some
minds.
Even many who were once dogmatically pro-choice and still oppose
aspects of
the right-to-life agenda are starting to question some of their
certitudes.
Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen is among them. He recently
observed
that in the 1966 original production of the film Alfie, a woman close
to the
title character has an abortion. In this year's remake starring Jude
Law,
she does not. "Abortion is no longer seen as central to sexual
liberation,"
wrote Cohen, "but rather as much more troubling and problematic."


James Pinkerton surveyed the pro-life gains and declared in Newsday,
"On
abortion, the tide has turned." But writing later in Tech Central
Station,
he sounded a cautionary note. If antiabortion laws were adopted, how
enforceable would they be in liberal jurisdictions? Would progressive
district attorneys prosecute abortionists and would juries in bluish
areas
convict them?


After all, our country - with its more than 1 million abortions per
year -
remains deeply divided over when human life begins. Not everyone with
moral
concerns about abortion fully endorses pro-lifers' conclusions.


It's not merely a question of whether some pro-lifers would overreach
politically in the event that Roe finally fell. Some undoubtedly

just
as the case could be made that some pro-lifers might already be
overreaching
in response to what was simply a successful election cycle. But
ultimately,
the more important question is how we can most effectively protect
pre-born
life, in fact as well as law.

Cultural transformation is as essential to the success of the

cause
as political victories, if not more so. It's true that the law can be

teacher - as Robert P. George and Ramesh Ponnuru wrote some years ago
in
First Things, "culture and law do not exist in two separate,
hermetically
sealed containers." But law is a blunt and imperfect tool; rarely can
it
create a cultural consensus out of whole cloth where none exists.


"This is why the fight against legal abortion cannot stand alone,"

Christian writer Frederica Mathewes-Green once explained. "If we

padlock all the abortion clinics tomorrow, we'd see the next morning

line
3200 women long pounding on the doors." The idea, described by
Pinkerton in
his fascinating Tech Central Station essay, that "the best way to
guarantee
a cultural shift is to punish a few outlying miscreants" may have it
exactly
backwards. A cultural shift in which more Americans adhered to

views while pro-lifers themselves increased their support of
alternatives
for women in crisis pregnancies might make changes in the law more
workable.

Pro-lifers should be gratified by political advances and new optimism
in the
legal struggle against Roe. But they - we - should never forget that
much of
the work that remains to be done is outside the realm of law and
politics
entirely.