It’s time to take President Bush and his anti-choice
cronies seriously. In a move that will end an eight-year battle
split along party lines, Bush will soon sign a bill to prohibit
women from having a certain form of late-term abortions.
Bush has been waiting a long time for this opportunity: He made
abortion a priority even before he was elected. As he ran for
president, Bush said on Larry King Live that America should have
the goal that every unborn child be protected under the law. Since
his election, he has shaped a contentious abortion platform that
has put him at odds with international policymakers. His enthusiasm
for this bill does not come as a surprise.
The significance of his victory is mostly symbolic: It will
contribute heavily to the rhetoric of abortion foes, but it may not
leave a noticeable mark on policy. Experts on both sides of the
issue are already doubting it will pass Supreme Court scrutiny, and
many see Bush’s forthcoming signature as little more than a
nod to conservative voters.
But the anti-abortion camp should not be underestimated. Its
opposition to “partial birth” abortions is part of a
wider effort to undermine a woman’s right to choose, which is
currently protected by the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court
decision.
It isn’t afraid to use frightening rhetoric to advance its
cause.
For example, the name of the procedure is misleading. The
distinction between “partial birth” abortions ““
not a medical term ““ and abortions performed by dismemberment
is that in partial birth abortions the fetus is partially removed
from the womb before it is destroyed. Only a small percentage (by
some accounts, less than 1 percent) of abortions are performed in
this manner.
As they push their attack on abortion rights forward,
anti-choice legislators don’t always place enough emphasis on
health concerns. The text of the bill before Bush does not include
an exemption that would allow doctors to consider using the
procedure if a mother’s health was at stake ““ a fact
that doomed a similar law in Nebraska which was ultimately scrapped
by the Supreme Court. The lack of an exemption shows the
bill’s authors are ignoring what many medical groups think is
best. They are engaged in an ideological struggle framed as much by
religion as by rationality.
Far too many do not think of the abortion debate the way it
should be considered: in human terms. Women who choose to have
abortions do not do so for frivolous reasons. In most cases, it is
an agonizing decision. Though a ban on partial birth abortions will
not have a significant effect on abortions in the United States, it
does send a clear message ““ abortion is a privilege, not a
right.
This is the first time since Roe v. Wade in 1973 that Congress
has banned a method of abortion. This bill is the first step toward
eroding the integrity of Roe v. Wade. Thirty years after the
Court’s decision, it is clear the generation that has grown
up in its security can’t afford to take it for granted.
Through his court appointments and public statements, Bush has
made clear his stance on abortion. Those who care about a
woman’s right to choose should look at this bill for what it
is: The first step in what will likely be an ongoing attack on
reproductive rights.