I regret to report it was pro-life dissidents who caused the defeat of the South Dakota abortion ban initiative and worsened the lopsided trouncing of the Colorado personhood amendment. According to Medical News Today:
The defeat of abortion ballot measures across the country... may have been the result of divisions among anti-abortion groups....Opposition to the measure in South Dakota came from the anti-abortion groups American Life League and South Dakota Right to Life....
In Colorado, the failed Amendment 48 measure... found opposition from Americans United For Life and National Right to Life....
Pro-lifers and pro-aborts on the same side? Hello?
The fact is groups at both ends of the pro-life ideological spectrum are actively sabotaging pro-life efforts with which they disagree, bound by a common fault: perfectionism....
Continue reading my column, "Pro-life movement: Both ends against the middle," on WorldNetDaily.com.
The absolutist position is immoral. It would sacrifice the 99% who can be saved because of the 1% who cannot be saved.
Quit compromising the moral, intellectual and legal basis for the pro-life movement, Jill, and we'll have unity.
The finest wine, mixed with lethal poison, is poison.
Where we can limit, we should limit. Currently, the Supreme Court has ruled abortion a Constitutional Right. We cannot over turn the Courts in the States, but we can limit by increments. Parental notification works in other States, I believe that the SD law would have stood a Federal challenge.
Each of these would have strengthened the evidence that women and girls do not "need" abortion, and that we actually do better without it.
The vote in SD and the failure of Prop 4 in CA is already being used against us in the media and pro-abort speech.
Thank you, Jill, for speaking up.
Pro-life absolutists must realize that when we try to put whatever roadblocks we can in the way of people killing their unborn children, anything from parental notification (very weak restriction) all the way up to prohibiting abortion violence 99% of the time (because we cannot as yet save rape and incest babies), we are NOT authorizing the killing of ANYONE or compromising in ANY way.
We still maintain that we MUST protect ALL human beings ALL the time as a fundamental moral principle. We are however saying that we will NOT sacrifice those who can now be saved because some unfortunate children are still beyond our ability to protect.
To sacrifice large numbers of children who can be saved because of the many who cannot be saved no matter what we do is profoundly immoral.
The absolutists would SACRIFICE all the children who can be saved now; the pragmatists would SAVE all the children who can be saved now.