The LA Times is marking the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade with an op-ed piece by Frances Kissling (formerly of Catholics for a Free Choice) and Kate Michelman (formerly of NARAL Pro-Choice America).
In “Abortion’s battle of messages” Kissling and Michelman assert:
Twenty years ago, being pro-life was déclassé. Now it is a respectable point of view.It’s still déclassé in Boston – but we grant their point.
“How did this happen?” That’s the very apt question Kissling and Michelman tackle in their piece. And they make startling admissions:
Science facilitated the swing of the pendulum. Three-dimensional ultrasound images of babies in utero began to grace the family fridge. Fetuses underwent surgery. More premature babies survived and were healthier. They commanded our attention, and the question of what we owe them, if anything, could not be dismissed … Advocates of choice have had a hard time dealing with the increased visibility of the fetus.We frankly don’t know what to make of that, especially since Kissling and Michelman have always been and remain emphatically pro-choice. But we're even less sure how to take this:
If pro-choice values are to regain the moral high ground, genuine discussion about these challenges needs to take place within the movement. It is inadequate to try to message our way out of this problem. Our vigorous defense of the right to choose needs to be accompanied by greater openness regarding the real conflict between life and choice, between rights and responsibility. It is time for a serious reassessment of how to think about abortion in a world that is radically changed from 1973.The world has changed a lot since 1973. If Kissling and Michelman are any indication, the pro-choice movement has finally begun to think about change, too.
|