Action Alert!

keeping women safe to pay their obstetricians

By Diogenes (articles - email) | Apr 22, 2007

Kenneth Edelin begins his Boston Globe op-ed in a very unusual way: By acknowledging that he was convicted of manslaughter 32 years ago after performing an abortion. Edelin does not provide details about the case. Suffice it to say that the unborn baby did not die on schedule, and thereafter Edelin was known to his critics as "the Boston Strangler."

Now I wonder if you can guess how Edelin responds to the Supreme Court's decision on partial-birth abortion? You're saying he might not like it? Good for you. Lucky guess, maybe.

But why does Edelin think the decision is dangerous? That's only a slightly tougher question. You can probably call this one in, too:

This burden would fall disproportionately, as it did before Roe, on the poor women of our country. We must never return to those days of horror.

Hmm. Now in Edelin's own case, was it the woman-- the mother-- who was prosecuted for manslaughter? No; it was the doctor. And was it the mother whose conviction was overturned, by a court ruling that the Roe v. Wade decision essentially barred any complaints about the doctor's methods of eliminating the unborn child? No. It was Edelin who beat the rap.

Now if American jurisprudence follows the logic of the latest Supreme Court decision, medics like the Boston Strangler would be held responsible. Tell me, please: How does that endanger women?

Richard Cross holds a doctorate in psychology, who has taught at the university level, including at Franciscan University. He is currently an educational researcher and consultant in the field of psychology and related disciplines.
Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

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!

Show 4 Comments? (Hidden)Hide Comments
  • Posted by: samuel.doucette1787 - Apr. 02, 2010 8:22 AM ET USA

    robert.bennett, I'm ashamed of you for using exclusive patriarchal sexist language when referring to Satan as "he." In the spirit of inclusivity, let's refer to Satan as "she" half the time at least.

  • Posted by: Defender - Apr. 01, 2010 12:24 AM ET USA

    Okay, by this logic I'll take a poll of my 7th and 8th grade religion classes to determine if it's true...oh, never mind I already have - they do AND they also believe in purgatory, too! (Notice that this is not a Catholic university where I teach - the answers might be different there.)

  • Posted by: - Mar. 31, 2010 9:33 PM ET USA

    Satan measures his progress by the number of people who believe he doesn't exist. In our world today he hasn't has so much success since the day before the Deluge.

  • Posted by: Christopher_Johnson - Mar. 31, 2010 1:40 PM ET USA

    People regularly pronounce themselves appalled by Jonathan Edwards' "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." But if you saw your very young children running full speed toward the edge of a cliff and you knew that a 500-foot fall on to jagged rocks would be their fates if they jumped, would you ignore it, confident in the knowledge that your kids would stop? Or would you say something quite loudly and harshly?