SF Chronicle Op-Ed On “Dual Pool” Abortion Compromise
December 2nd, 2009 by Al Lewis (alewis)http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artlist.cgi?key=ED&d=%2Fc%2Fa%2F2009%2F12%2F02
Remember, this is a COMPROMISE to convince a few of the 60 Senators to set aside their objections to an abortion rider fait accompli to support health reform. (Curiously, I myself am quite ambivalent about health reform itself– but if it dies, it should be on merit and not due to a solvable issue left unaddressed because no one was thinking outside the box.) Since I am proposing a middle ground, I do not expect plaudits from either the hyperChristians who think abortion is like shooting a patient in the hospital (a real comment I received), or the radical feminists who liken “dual pools” to “separate but equal” even though abortion coverage is not restricted.
To the former group (1) I say: “If you want to repeal Roe v. Wade, you don’t do so by sneaking a rider onto semi-unrelated legislation. You simply pack the Supreme Court. After all, that worked so well last time. The problem is that judicial candidates, once they become Justices, tend to act responsibly. Does the name Harry Blackmun sound familiar?”
To the latter group (2) I say: ” You need to respect the opinions of people who genuinely feel that life begins at conception, and don’t want to pay for YOUR abortions out of THEIR premiums. And while we’re on the subject, it wouldn’t kill you to shave under your arms. If not regularly, then at least for special occasions, such as the discovery of a new planet.”
Have I offended everybody yet? The problem with moderation is that it is hard to offend people, but I’m trying.
