While some criticize the partial birth abortion ban and the Gonzales v. Carhart ruling, it seems that the ban itself served a useful purpose - it got society talking about abortion. It shifted the debate in the favor of those advocating life and put those advocating death on the defensive.
Since 1993, the issue of the partial birth abortion has helped to spur dialog and debate over abortion in general. The debate was framed in such a way as to cause people wake from their numbness over abortion and reconsider the issue.
The debate may or may not have resulted in a change of attitude towards legal abortion, but it is a strong possibility that it may have resulted in a change of behavior - and a reduction in abortion. In other words, it helped to make abortion became less of an option for some, which might be reflected in the decline in abortions (among many other reasons).
Certainly this tactic used to debate this procedure can, and should, be used with the D&E abortion method, an arguably more heinous abortion procedure. It will further the effects that the PBA ban has possibly had on changing hearts and minds on abortion. Of course it won't change everyone's hearts and minds, but it could change enough to form a majority in favor of aborting Roe itself.
The parital birth abortion ban, far from being perfect, has demonstrated that aborting Roe one "limb" at a time may well prove to be the most effective strategy to aborting "legalized" abortion alltogether.
To those who are publicly focusing on NRLC and Dr. Dobson - please, keep the divisiveness behind closed doors and fight it out in private. This public controversy only serves to detract from moving on to talking about the horror of D&E abortions.
You're spot-on that the whole PBA ban thing has forced abotionists and their supporters to talk at length about exactly what an abortion entails, in venues where they'd far rather not bring it up.
"She never shoul have messed with a real harpy, or a real unicorn either, because the truth melts her magic. Always."
Amen! Thanks for the thoughtful analysis. The age-old "incremental" vs "purist" debate in the pro-life movement should be keep in the family. We don't see the pro-aborts fighting in public, do we? Of course, not. They know better, and so should we.