By Diogenes (articles ) | Nov 30, 2003
Today's New York Times carries a profoundly dishonest editorial pretending to "disheartening" misgivings about the future of women's health care occasioned by the debate over partial birth abortion:
Abortions always mean ending a potential human life. But most people do not regard terminating a pregnancy that is only a few hours old, or a few weeks old, in the same light as ending one in the seventh month. Drawing a clear line about when an abortion can be performed is a difficult and divisive problem. The wisest line, in our view, is the one laid down by the Supreme Court 30 years ago in Roe v. Wade: Government should have the right to step in only when the fetus has developed fully enough to be able to exist on its own.
Take special note of the phrase "ending a potential human life." In 1998 George Will wrote.
Twenty-five years [after the Roe v. Wade decision] the Supreme Court has not yet explained how a life that is merely "potential" can be ended.
Neither has the New York Times.
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!