News |   Obits |   Sports |   Business |   Opinion |   Things to Do |   Life |   Blogs |   Photos |   Video |   Data |   Jobs |   Homes |   Autos |   Buy/Sell


Riveting? No

But is it time to seek common ground on abortion? Yes

  • Follow Editorials

Of all the issues you could inject overheated rhetoric into, you wouldn’t think abortion would be one of them. The issue has been a boiling pot of hyperbole for decades. How much more overstatement is possible?

But lo and behold, about the Texas abortion law battle the Los Angeles Times wrote that a recent legislative vote there “riveted the nation.” Politico.com added that it “captivated the nation.”

Really? You mean families gathered around the morning paper to see what happened in Austin on the abortion issue?

Good grief. This isn’t hyperbole now, it’s hysteria.

Besides, this country has seen the Internal Revenue Service used as a jackhammer against conservative groups and has learned in recent months that everyone is being spied on – and life has gone on as before. And we’re supposed to believe a legislative vote in Texas “riveted the nation”?

What it did was provide the national media with another opportunity to take its liberal bias out for a spin. They’re characterizing the Texas bill as some kind of draconian assault – and they’ve jumped at the chance to make the bill’s most prominent opponent, Democrat state Sen. Wendy Davis of Fort Worth, a superstar for her recent filibuster against the bill.

As for the liberal spin, it’s positively dizzying: Political commentator Bill Maher derisively called Republican U.S. Sen. Rand Paul’s filibuster over the use of drones against Americans a “quiet coup” – but called Davis’ filibuster “heroic.”

And now the media are cheerleading speculation that Davis can parlay her battle for abortion into a gubernatorial bid in the Lone Star state.

Of all the issues to base a political career on, preserving the ability to exterminate babies in the womb at any time for any reason is a dubious one.

In truth, the bill – which passed the Texas House on Wednesday and could be up for a vote in the state’s Senate as early as today – would merely set a limit of 20 weeks on abortion.

It’s interesting that many of the same political stripe that would love to dump the Second Amendment right to bear arms – which actually is in the Constitution – nonetheless bitterly fight any restrictions on abortion – which is not in the Constitution.

Having said that, isn’t it time both sides started working together to reduce the number of abortions, particularly late-term? Rather than everyone running to the Alamo to make a stand, can’t we find some common ground?

We find it difficult to believe Ms. Davis or her supporters
actually would celebrate the death of an unborn baby. Or that they favor killing a 21-week-old fetus out of sheer convenience.

For that matter, it’s beyond us how pro-choice advocates can’t bring themselves to the only logical conclusion about what that fetus is. Does it ever turn out to be anything but a human being?

This page is unabashedly pro-life. We believe that human life is a gift from God, and therefore is sacred. But surely there are some things that fair-minded liberals could agree with us on. We would suggest that the horrors of late-term abortion and partial-birth abortion are a couple of them. And that babies born during botched abortions should be protected from being murdered – as they were so coldly and gruesomely killed at the late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s Philadelphia clinic.

We hardly think the Texas debate has riveted a distracted and complacent nation. But it has made for great political theater. All the while, innocent lives are being snuffed out.

No one should be in favor of that.

Comments (27) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 07/12/13 - 03:29 pm
3
3
KSL...I don't expect ANYONE
Unpublished

KSL...I don't expect ANYONE to agree all the time. I thank you for being respectful in your disagreement, unlike so many others.

David Parker
7923
Points
David Parker 07/12/13 - 03:54 pm
2
0
"Plan B"

No age limit, no script. Problem solved. Move along nothing to see here.

Bizkit
29343
Points
Bizkit 07/12/13 - 04:04 pm
2
1
Cameron Poe why should woman

Cameron Poe why should woman have all the choice? If man impregnates the girl he has no choice in her decision which is fine (why should he as it is not his body), yet if she keeps it then she can then lay all the responsibility on him to pay for said child the rest of its life. I've always supported abortions but if a women decides to keep it then it should be solely her responsibility-unless the man "chooses" to support the child. I just think it is unfair for a man to support an unwanted child just as much as unfair to tell a woman whether to keep it or not. But that doesn't seem right either for children to have no support or another proposal would be both parents have to sign off which doesn't sound workable either. I guess the man gets screwed either way-some irony eh. I guess while it takes two to make it, it only takes one to bake it, but then it really takes two to set em up on a pan.

KSL
122171
Points
KSL 07/12/13 - 04:05 pm
4
1
HA, thank you.

I suspect you are much younger than I am. Safe methods of birth control are so much more available now. Nothing available at the time worked for me, a married woman.

dahreese
4674
Points
dahreese 07/12/13 - 04:18 pm
4
2
"And Dahreese, yes you stated
Unpublished

"And Dahreese, yes you stated your position very clearly, yet despicably. You stated that it is better to be killed than to have to struggle through life."

I didn't say any such thing.

Learn to read.

Bizkit
29343
Points
Bizkit 07/12/13 - 04:35 pm
3
1
Well it's been a long time

Well it's been a long time since Roe vs Wade and now we have a significant population of people who are survivors of botched abortions. It would be interesting to hear their thoughts on this matter-but of course they maybe biased.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 07/12/13 - 05:23 pm
2
3
At 4:18 pm I was reminded to
Unpublished

At 4:18 pm I was reminded to thank you again, KSL, for being respectful.

myfather15
50323
Points
myfather15 07/12/13 - 07:01 pm
2
1
The OVERWHELMING majority of

The OVERWHELMING majority of families looking to adopt are financially STABLE and most are fairly wealthy!! Since the average adoption costs somewhere around 25k, they need to have financial assets to even begin!!!

Now, what were you saying about conservatives not wanting to give these babies financial support when born?

dahreese
4674
Points
dahreese 07/12/13 - 07:57 pm
3
1
"The OVERWHELMING majority of
Unpublished

"The OVERWHELMING majority of families looking to adopt are financially STABLE and most are fairly wealthy!! Since the average adoption costs somewhere around 25k, they need to have financial assets to even begin!!!

"Now, what were you saying about conservatives not wanting to give these babies financial support when born?"

What does your second sentence have to do with your first sentence?

CobaltGeorge
150917
Points
CobaltGeorge 07/12/13 - 08:35 pm
0
3
I Guess I Will Lose Some Points On This One.

I agree with Humble Angela on all her commits.

corgimom
28412
Points
corgimom 07/12/13 - 10:52 pm
2
1
First of all, medical

First of all, medical technology has not advanced to the point where all fetal problems can be detected by 20 weeks.

It is also possible for the mother to develop life-threatening conditions after 20 weeks of pregnancy; are you saying that the mother should die?

And even though technology has advanced a lot, it is very common for a woman to be told she is a certain number of weeks along and then that is revised later on.

It is a very slippery slope when anybody starts limiting abortions on an arbitrary number of weeks of fetal age. What happens if an abortion is performed and it turns out that the fetus is more than 20 weeks along?

My sister in law has Crohn's Disease. She was more than 20 weeks pregnant when her bowels perforated in several places, and in order to save her life, the pregnancy had to be terminated and she was given an ileostomy, where all of her intestines were removed. There was no possibility of her carrying the pregnancy to term.

So she should've died? Who would think that's the right choice to make?

corgimom
28412
Points
corgimom 07/12/13 - 10:59 pm
2
1
"With the hundreds of

"With the hundreds of thousands of people, WAITING to adopt children; you would think a civilized society would not be killing unborn children!! "

Sure, let's birth more unwanted children. Let's put more children in foster care, there are only about 500,000 up for adoption at any time. And lets talk about how if a child isn't adopted by age 2, the chances are that they will never be adopted.

Do you ever wonder how it is, if there are all of those mythical parents out there waiting to adopt, that there are close to a half million children that aren't being adopted?

If a child is black, mixed race, or has any type of disability, their chances of adoption are very low.

Facts don't lie. No, there aren't near enough parents to adopt foster children, and the foster care system is about to collapse. But no matter, get those unwanted children born, so that people can then complain about WIC, food stamps, and free lunches at schools!

myfather15
50323
Points
myfather15 07/12/13 - 11:03 pm
1
2
My first sentence is stating

My first sentence is stating the families that want to adopt these children, won't NEED financial assistance from the government.

The QUESTION was about someone (can't remember exactly who) saying that conservatives don't want abortions but also don't want government entitlements going to help people raise these children; and we can't have it both ways. Well, if families adopt these "unwanted" children, the chances are they won't need the government assistance. But, then we go back to the old "You can't force a woman to bare the agony of carrying this fetus for 9 months." Absolutely NOTHING wins with these abortions advocates!! And the issue has SQUAT to do with a woman's right!!

myfather15
50323
Points
myfather15 07/12/13 - 11:07 pm
1
1
Corgi

The overwhelming majority of families who want to adopt, want NEWBORNS, not half grown children already!! It's factual, just look it up and do your own research!! NEWBORNS are rarely if EVER on a waiting list. Because the families want a newborn they can raise completely on their own, as their own!! So I agree with you about the 2 year old aspect. But what's that go to do with abortions? These babies aren't even born yet and when they finally are; I think they're called NEWBORNS and people even pay BIG money to get them!! There is even a HUGE financial black market for newborns!!

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 07/13/13 - 10:25 am
1
1
--
Unpublished

--

dahreese
4674
Points
dahreese 07/13/13 - 11:21 pm
2
1
"You can't force a woman to
Unpublished

"You can't force a woman to bare the agony of carrying this fetus for 9 months."

So...pregnant women who don't want the child in their womb should be forced to carry the child anyway, until it is born?

"These babies aren't even born yet and when they finally are; I think they're called NEWBORNS and people even pay BIG money to get them!!"

Once more;

So...pregnant women who don't want the child in their womb should be forced to carry the child anyway, until it is born, to either make money from that birth or else give it up to an adoption agency that will make money off of that birth?

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 07/15/13 - 06:57 am
1
1
Hmmmm....forced to bear the
Unpublished

Hmmmm....forced to bear the responsibility to carry the child they conceived, or kill it. Those are the choices. And as usual, the left chooses to kill it.

dahreese
4674
Points
dahreese 07/15/13 - 11:38 am
1
0
What you would personally do
Unpublished

What you would personally do is your choice. But have you not clearly said no one will tell you what to so with your body? And you now want to tell some other female what to do with hers?
----------------------------------------
And there is this little bit;

"And Dahreese, yes you stated your position very clearly, yet despicably. You stated that it is better to be killed than to have to struggle through life."

I didn't say any such thing.

Learn to read.

Back to Top

Top headlines

Frazier retires after demotion

Long-time Richmond County principal Wayne Frazier, known for his unorthodox approach to school reform, submitted his resignation Wednesday after being demoted to a teacher this summer.
Search Augusta jobs