Marking the 33rd anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision striking down virtually all state laws restricting abortion, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said the ruling “served to ensure the personal freedoms and rights of women all over the country to make decisions about their own health care and reproductive rights.”
“As a physician and former Planned Parenthood board member, I understand that the decision to have an abortion is one of the most difficult a woman can make,” he said. “We can all agree that abortion should be rare, but it should also be safe and legal. This difficult personal health-care decision should be made by a woman, in consultation with her physician, and not by politicians in Washington.”
Democratic leaders are working hard to improve women’s access to health care, and increase economic opportunities which will help to decrease the number of unintended pregnancies. And Democrats will remain steadfast in protecting the individual rights and freedoms of not only women but all Americans.
I think it’s safe to say that Dean’s comments reflect the thinking of most of his party’s politicians.
So, let’s examine his statements.
Notice he doesn’t reference the one critical document the U.S. Supreme Court is supposed to consider in making a ruling – the Constitution. Instead, he talks about “personal freedoms” and “the rights of women” to make decisions “about their own health care and reproductive rights.”
From where does this “personal freedom” to extinguish the life of an unborn baby come?
From where do these “rights” descend?
Do they come from the Supreme Court? Do they come from God? Are they unalienable rights like those referenced by the Founders? Is the taking of the life of an unborn baby when the mother’s life is not endangered really a matter of health care? Or is it a matter of selfish convenience and utilitarian ethics?
And then there’s the subject of “reproductive rights.” Do you know which countries and societies have violated the rights of parents to make decisions about reproduction and child-bearing? They are the countries and societies that emphasize abortion – countries like China that dictate to parents how many children they will be permitted to have.
Therefore, one could easily make the argument that government-approved and government-financed and government-subsidized abortion represent the gravest threat in the history of mankind to this notion of “reproductive rights.”
Dean notes for the record that he is a former board member for Planned Parenthood. That should surprise no one. Planned Parenthood is in the abortion business – big time. The organization has conducted 1.4 million abortions in the last seven years. At the same time, the organization’s own records show it has provided only 25,446 adoption referrals – with the number declining year after year.
Planned Parenthood is not about offering women choices. It is not about planning parenthood. It is about snuffing out the lives of as many unborn babies as it possibly can.
But it is always surprising to me to hear an abortion proponent like Dean tell us: “I understand that the decision to have an abortion is one of the most difficult a woman can make. We can all agree that abortion should be rare, but it should also be safe and legal.”
Why should it be so? Why is the decision to have an abortion so difficult? Why should it be rare?
The answer is simple: Because it is killing. It represents the taking of an innocent life by someone else. Dean knows that. Planned Parenthood knows that. Deep down in our souls, all of us know that.
And that’s why it is perfectly appropriate and moral to have laws restricting the practice. That’s precisely what our Constitution requires our federal government to do – to protect the lives and property of its citizens and their “posterity.” One definition of “posterity” is those yet to be born.
The Constitution is actually very specific about abortion. You don’t need to read between the lines. You don’t need to read the minds of the Founders. You can just read the simple, plain, English-language words they used in the preamble to the Constitution to see what they clearly meant.
The only way we can justify this practice as a “right” is to resort to Orwellian redefinition of the simplest, clearest terms. And that’s what Dean, most members of his party and too many members of the other party do to excuse abortion, to rationalize it – even to glorify it.
Dean also says: “This difficult personal health-care decision should be made by a woman, in consultation with her physician, and not by politicians in Washington.”
Yet, 33 years later, it is clear that is exactly what Roe v. Wade was all about – politicians in Washington, disguised in black robes as Supreme Court justices, making the decisions for Americans.
Special Offer: Get the amazing new expose by Kelly Hollowell, “Struggling for Life: How Your Tax Dollars and Twisted Science Target the Unborn.”