June 2, 2010

By Dave Andrusko

Parts Two and Three are winning pro-life essays which are as encouraging as they are succinct. At "National Right to Life News Today" (www.nationalrighttolifenews.org), you'll discover how badly pro-abortionists response to Gallup poll data showing that pro-life is the "new normal." Please send all and all of your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you like join all those who are now following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha.

I especially enjoy opinion pieces that frankly talk about what's beneath the surface. So much of what we read is (understandably) based on a set of assumptions that rarely get challenged because they are rarely stated.

Not so with "Normalising abortion ignores women's needs," an op-ed by Bonnie Lander Johnson that ran last week in the Guardian newspaper. (www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/26/abortion-marie-stopes-women). She puts her argument out on the table, in the process implicitly challenging pro-abortionists to lay out theirs.

The summary, presumably written by the Guardian, that begins the piece is quite good: "The Marie Stopes advert[isement] commercialises abortion and denies women the right to be treated like responsible adults."

The advertisement alluded to is one we talked about last week (www.nrlc.org/NewsToday/AbortionAdsUK.html) Stopes is the heavy pro-abortion hitter in England and apparently decided it was now time to advertise its abortion "services " on television.

They knew there'd be some blowback, so they tried some rhetorical tricks, saying the word "abortion" is never used and, besides, the public's "awareness" needed to be raised. Both are so silly even some pro-abortionists balked.

Johnson's op-ed goes to issues that are infrequently discussed, so it was no surprise that online responders tore into her. But look at how central are the concerns she raises.

First she points to one defender who said the language of the Stopes ads is "normalis[ing] free and frank discussion of reproductive issues." Johnson tartly responds that the ad simply shows three women in isolation, worried about their pregnancy, followed by the company's 24-hour hotline--hardly a real discussion.

Johnson was hammered for writing that a real discussion would involve (gasp!) "partners, friends, family and healthcare professionals, not [women] living alone with their 'problem.'" [I supposed we can't expect an abortion organization to talk about other "options," as Johnson suggests Stopes should in its ad, but we can hope.]

Johnson suggests something pro-life veterans in this country vividly remember--that the "liberalization" of abortion was (supposedly) not intended to introduce abortion on demand. But it has, in both nations. She asks in effect, is this what anybody wanted? (Answer: not the public, but surely the pro-abortion pioneers.)

Nowhere was Johnson more truly counter-cultural (especially in England) than when she patiently explains that "Laws create cultures of practice. This [abortion] law has made us so apathetic about unwanted pregnancies that we now accept abortion as a service that should be advertised to as many potential consumers as possible."

She adds, tellingly, "What angers me most is that the commercialisation of women's reproductive health is being justified in the name of feminism." At this juncture, the op-ed really picks up steam.

Johnson politely but firmly insists that "the language of choice around abortion is patronising." She says, "I don't want laws that protect my right to have absolute freedom to do whatever I choose with my body. I want autonomy."

And here is her key contention: autonomy is not merely the ability to choose among alternatives. "It means responsibility. It means being treated like an adult who is expected to know her own desires but is able to manage them and think beyond them and who feels that she is part of a society that needs her as much as she needs it."

And that is not having "a society that treats me with kid gloves: one that offers services that protect me from the unwanted consequences of my actions but that does not properly instill in me an understanding that my actions matter." (I think that falls under the category of cause and effect.)

In addition to the importance of telling women the consequences of an abortion for everyone, Johnson says, "I want to be part of a society that expects its men and women to behave like adults and to teach the next generation that love and sex are beautiful but have consequences young men and women must understand."

Her last line is, "Normalising abortion is not a good service to women, it's a way of further ignoring their needs."

A terrific essay that is well worth your time. It's found at www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/26/abortion-marie-stopes-women.

Part Two
Part Three