The Common Good
November-December 1996

Second Opinions

by Mike Gude | November-December 1996

ONE MIGHT THINK
from the "Letters" section of the September-October
issue that there was overwhelming opposition to Julie Polter's
commentary ("Outrage Over the Abortion ...

ONE MIGHT THINK from the "Letters" section of the September-October issue that there was overwhelming opposition to Julie Polter's commentary ("Outrage Over the Abortion Veto," July-August 1996) on partial birth abortions. I am writing, in part, to show that at least one reader appreciated her stance against Clinton's veto of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act.

I am also writing to disagree with some assertions made by the letter writers who supported Clinton's veto. One writer said he was glad Clinton listened to medical experts instead of clergy on this issue. However, not every medical expert would have given Clinton the same opinion. Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, for example, has stated that partial birth abortions "are not medically necessary." Dr. Pamela Smith, Director of Medical Education at Mt. Sinai Hospital in Chicago, has stated that "there are absolutely no obstetrical situations in this country which require a partially delivered fetus to be destroyed to preserve the health of the mother." The American Medical Association's Legislative Council, for its part, felt that "this was not a recognized medical technique."

Another letter writer expressed the need to focus on preventing abortions through non-legislative means. I agree with many of his solutions to help make abortions rare (including increased efforts to promote adoption, job creation, and child abuse prevention), and I agree that passing legislation is not always the most effective response to a problem. But I don't think you help make abortion rare by expanding the number of ways in which it can be performed. Restricting partial birth abortions would be an admittedly small measure toward making abortions less frequent, but it is, I believe, a necessary one.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

Like what you're reading? Get Sojourners E-Mail updates!

Sojourners Comment Community Covenant

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree, even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)