Aha, I think I was using a different set of terminology than you were. By IDE, I mean the one of the two procedures where the fetus is intact post-abortion, in contrast to DE which is where the fetus, uh, isn't intact.
I guess that's probably enough to explain what I meant... the problem is that it's hard to differentiate the two without giving details, which aren't too pleasant regardless of the procedure.
Anyway, I do agree that there is a concern about the slippery slope concept, but I think it may help distinguish things a big more clearly than they are right now.
To use an analogy, this procedure was like a man wanted in both Mexico and the USA standing on the border with one leg on one side, and one leg on the other. If the Mexican police grab him, it sets a precedent that makes the USA angry, and vice versa... but as long as he's still straddling that border, he's an active point of contention.
Pro-life says while the baby is half-out, it's murder. Pro-choice says that while the baby is half-in, it's the woman's right. By removing the partial-birth method, the grey area gets turned into a very simple divide. Inside the woman's body, it's her choice, outside the woman's body, it's not. Looking at it from a different perspective, it firms up the mother's rights in regards to her own body. (Not a Womb Bill of Rights, of course, but it's a strong legal precedent all the same.)
Of course, since it's much harder to force an unwanted baby out and alive than it is to terminate in the womb, the power still remains pretty solidly with the mother.
I guess that's probably enough to explain what I meant... the problem is that it's hard to differentiate the two without giving details, which aren't too pleasant regardless of the procedure.
Anyway, I do agree that there is a concern about the slippery slope concept, but I think it may help distinguish things a big more clearly than they are right now.
To use an analogy, this procedure was like a man wanted in both Mexico and the USA standing on the border with one leg on one side, and one leg on the other. If the Mexican police grab him, it sets a precedent that makes the USA angry, and vice versa... but as long as he's still straddling that border, he's an active point of contention.
Pro-life says while the baby is half-out, it's murder. Pro-choice says that while the baby is half-in, it's the woman's right. By removing the partial-birth method, the grey area gets turned into a very simple divide. Inside the woman's body, it's her choice, outside the woman's body, it's not. Looking at it from a different perspective, it firms up the mother's rights in regards to her own body. (Not a Womb Bill of Rights, of course, but it's a strong legal precedent all the same.)
Of course, since it's much harder to force an unwanted baby out and alive than it is to terminate in the womb, the power still remains pretty solidly with the mother.
Reply
Leave a comment