Even if there is a right to an abortion for any reason, is that right absolute and unrestricted?
That's what a Clinton-appointed federal judge out of San Francisco seems to think, unilaterally striking down the federal ban on partial-birth abortions passed by our Congress and signed by our president last November.
Lord help us if she speaks for the entire country.
We have the right to free speech, too as cherished as any American birthright but there are limits even to it. Why is it incomprehensible that there should be the minutest restrictions on abortion?
Certainly if one does the least bit of research into partial-birth abortion, one cannot reasonably conclude that the procedure is not inhumane and barbaric and has no place in a civilized society.
All abortions are tragic, but partial-birth abortion is especially repugnant: In it, the baby is, indeed, partially born before its skull is cut into and the baby is unceremoniously put to death.
The only significant difference between that and the beheading that befell American Nick Berg in Iraq is the age of the victim.
Among reasonable, civilized adults, there can be no disagreement that partial-birth abortions are an abhorrent practice. It is, in truth, nothing less than infanticide.
Yet, U.S. District Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton has decreed it to be an absolute right. She has usurped the legislative and executive branches in ordering U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft not to enforce the law at 900 Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide.
Hysterical abortion supporters called the partial-birth abortion ban a "broad attack on abortion." Oh, please. The law would have prevented only the most heinous 2,200 abortions a year.
The law may not be perfect. Perhaps the wording could be better, as the judge suggested; and if it is lacking an exemption to protect a woman's health, maybe the law needs technical adjustment.
But the partial-birth abortion ban is not a "broad attack" on anything. It's terribly narrow, as a matter of fact and law. And its sole mission is to protect the unborn and what might be termed the "partially born."
This is a noble and necessary quest to protect human life that should not and cannot end at the bench of a solitary left-leaning judge in San Francisco.
This isn't over by a long shot.
Innocent, vulnerable lives depend on righting this wrong.