The flaw in the argument presented by the two young attorneys in their guest perspective starts with their title, “The womb is on trial.” They conclude with “a woman’s right to control her own body.” Yes, the uterus is part of the female anatomy but it is the contents of the uterus that is really on trial. There are people who believe that the fetus is a sentient being and the mother has a responsibility to care for it whether it is inside or outside of her body. Do people who share this belief deserve a seat at the table? The young attorneys would say no. Their world is winners and losers, and the result is we have a debate with no middle ground. The majority of Americans believe that abortions are reasonable in the first trimester. In the second and third trimester that number drops significantly.
Basically, Americans believe that there is a point during the pregnancy that the fetus is no longer is part of the female anatomy and is now a new life residing in the uterus. The abortion issue should not be a trial but rather a debate where all points of view are heard and respected. The goal should be to find that middle ground, that mythical point when the fetus is deemed to be a new life.
If we, as a country, can do that, then neither side will be entirely satisfied, but that is the usual result of all negotiated settlements.
Thanks for taking the time to write a sensible LTE on a topic that divides persons on the extreme right and left of the political spectrum. However, as you pointed out, most Americans agree on what could be a reasonable solution.
I posted yesterday morning in the comments following Albert Alioto's LTE on this same topic, "There is talk from the right side of the aisle about a 16-week national abortion ban, with exceptions in cases of rape, incest or risk to a mother's life." If such a plan was moved forward, it would be less restrictive and more liberal than abortion legislation typically found in the EU. While such a plan would not satisfy the extremists on either side of this issue, it could make abortion more of a health care issue instead of a political one.
The 16 week plan would be a good place to start. As you have mentioned, it wouldn’t satisfy the extremes on either side but as in any good faith negotiations both sides get some of what they want but neither side gets all of what they want. The big drawback as I see it is the extreme right controls the purse strings at the present time and they, being the Trump cultists, do what ever Donnie tells them. Just last week the Democrats and Republicans that are trying to make things work reached a bipartisan agreement to include funding for Ukraine and protection for the border. Neither side was completely happy but they came to an agreement. Unfortunately the Trump cultists, AKA the Republican eunuchs, voted it down because Donnie did not like it and protecting the border would look good for the Democrats if the border conditions improve. Not only did they vote against it, they also wanted to oust or censure the Republicans that worked on the agreement just because they talked with the Democrats. Hardly the way to unify the country and solve problems.
Back to the 16 week plan. It was widely reported that it was proposed by Donald Trump. I know, and you should know also, that unless it is a way to con someone or cheat someone, Donald didn’t think of it. I do believe that he does agree with it because the first two items, rape and incest are his specialty. The third item, risk to the mother’s life was added by someone else because it would make it look like he was concerned and cares about women. He does care about women, but only for his own gratification and pleasure.
I don't see a strong foundation for a comparison between the Ukraine and border debate and a plan to implement sensible abortion legislation which could ease a whole lot of divisiveness.
True enough, one of Trump's team could have whispered in his ear that a 16 week plan would be a good idea, but he chose to say it. Gosh, you don't think people aren't whispering in Joe's ear? Let's not forget... Trump was the first president to support the pro-life folks. This plan is consistent with that position.
I don't want to be Trump's apologist; I would still like to see another Republican get the RNC nomination... but that's not going to happen.
So, what we're left with is a way to possibly move forward a sensible abortion policy. A policy that an overwhelming majority of Americans would support. It's disappointing that our left leaning DJ colleagues have not contributed to this conversation. Is it because they are so far left that they will only accept a solution that conforms to a belief that abortions should be permitted at any time during a pregnancy for any reason or no reason at all? Or is it because some of those on the left won't accept the merits of a 16 week plan just because Trump is associated with the plan? Where is the bipartisan spirit in that position? They detest Trump so much they let hatred get in the way of trying to work through a solution that most Americans would welcome?
Snide comments are what they are, and I'm sure Trump supporters could fire a return salvo. I hope not. Let's keep the focus on potentially developing a policy that will make abortion more of a health care issue than a political one.
This is America. The presumptive RNC nominee has a plan... do you think we will hear a plan from the DNC presumptive nominee?
So many buzz words and so little time. "Right to control her body" is prime. Unless one is dead, our bodies are involved in everything we do. I was surprised when VP Harris asked during a hearing if there was a law that controlled a man's body. How about the draft for a starter.
The draft doesn't involve everybody, and isn't even always in effect. Besides, you can lie yourself out of, if you are shameless, like Trump! A woman's body is also much more often violated. Just ask Trump!
An abortion doesn't involve everybody, just women and a living child who is tortured by being suctioned out of the womb. Considering you are a father Jorg, your views are shortsighted
Not So Common: And what about the quite Common natural abortions, not initiated by any medication or anyone, and often to the potential mother's great dismay? Would you blame your fantasy figure way up high, or accept that certain fetuses aren't viable, or the mother not in shape to carry to terms? Nature takes care of some miscarriages; the woman has to step in herself where nature comes short.
The right side of the aisle uses its leverage to block common sense legislation, however, over the past 30 years, the left side of the aisle has controlled seven different congressional sessions and did not use its leverage to introduce legislation that would reflect Americans' prevailing belief that abortion should be legal. An overwhelming majority of Americans belief that abortion should be legal, and a nearly same majority of Americans belief that late term abortions should not be legal. Meeting in the middle is not a compromise solution as most Americans already support a rational approach to abortion.
Interestingly, an item appeared in the NYT on Wednesday. There is talk from the right side of the aisle about a 16-week national abortion ban, with exceptions in cases of rape, incest or risk to a mother's life. This type of plan is less restrictive than abortion legislation typically found in the EU. Such a plan would not satisfy the extremists on both ends of the political spectrum, but it could make abortion more of a health care issue instead of a political one.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(12) comments
Good morning, Steven
Thanks for taking the time to write a sensible LTE on a topic that divides persons on the extreme right and left of the political spectrum. However, as you pointed out, most Americans agree on what could be a reasonable solution.
I posted yesterday morning in the comments following Albert Alioto's LTE on this same topic, "There is talk from the right side of the aisle about a 16-week national abortion ban, with exceptions in cases of rape, incest or risk to a mother's life." If such a plan was moved forward, it would be less restrictive and more liberal than abortion legislation typically found in the EU. While such a plan would not satisfy the extremists on either side of this issue, it could make abortion more of a health care issue instead of a political one.
Good evening Ray,
The 16 week plan would be a good place to start. As you have mentioned, it wouldn’t satisfy the extremes on either side but as in any good faith negotiations both sides get some of what they want but neither side gets all of what they want. The big drawback as I see it is the extreme right controls the purse strings at the present time and they, being the Trump cultists, do what ever Donnie tells them. Just last week the Democrats and Republicans that are trying to make things work reached a bipartisan agreement to include funding for Ukraine and protection for the border. Neither side was completely happy but they came to an agreement. Unfortunately the Trump cultists, AKA the Republican eunuchs, voted it down because Donnie did not like it and protecting the border would look good for the Democrats if the border conditions improve. Not only did they vote against it, they also wanted to oust or censure the Republicans that worked on the agreement just because they talked with the Democrats. Hardly the way to unify the country and solve problems.
Back to the 16 week plan. It was widely reported that it was proposed by Donald Trump. I know, and you should know also, that unless it is a way to con someone or cheat someone, Donald didn’t think of it. I do believe that he does agree with it because the first two items, rape and incest are his specialty. The third item, risk to the mother’s life was added by someone else because it would make it look like he was concerned and cares about women. He does care about women, but only for his own gratification and pleasure.
Hey, Tafhdyd...
I don't see a strong foundation for a comparison between the Ukraine and border debate and a plan to implement sensible abortion legislation which could ease a whole lot of divisiveness.
True enough, one of Trump's team could have whispered in his ear that a 16 week plan would be a good idea, but he chose to say it. Gosh, you don't think people aren't whispering in Joe's ear? Let's not forget... Trump was the first president to support the pro-life folks. This plan is consistent with that position.
I don't want to be Trump's apologist; I would still like to see another Republican get the RNC nomination... but that's not going to happen.
So, what we're left with is a way to possibly move forward a sensible abortion policy. A policy that an overwhelming majority of Americans would support. It's disappointing that our left leaning DJ colleagues have not contributed to this conversation. Is it because they are so far left that they will only accept a solution that conforms to a belief that abortions should be permitted at any time during a pregnancy for any reason or no reason at all? Or is it because some of those on the left won't accept the merits of a 16 week plan just because Trump is associated with the plan? Where is the bipartisan spirit in that position? They detest Trump so much they let hatred get in the way of trying to work through a solution that most Americans would welcome?
Snide comments are what they are, and I'm sure Trump supporters could fire a return salvo. I hope not. Let's keep the focus on potentially developing a policy that will make abortion more of a health care issue than a political one.
This is America. The presumptive RNC nominee has a plan... do you think we will hear a plan from the DNC presumptive nominee?
There is a very simple solution: while it should be a woman's right to control her own body, if she is against abortions, don't have one!
So many buzz words and so little time. "Right to control her body" is prime. Unless one is dead, our bodies are involved in everything we do. I was surprised when VP Harris asked during a hearing if there was a law that controlled a man's body. How about the draft for a starter.
The draft doesn't involve everybody, and isn't even always in effect. Besides, you can lie yourself out of, if you are shameless, like Trump! A woman's body is also much more often violated. Just ask Trump!
Doesn't "involve everybody." You are right. Only males
Yes, willalen, only men, and only when there is a draft, which we don't have now, so all are volunteers.
An abortion doesn't involve everybody, just women and a living child who is tortured by being suctioned out of the womb. Considering you are a father Jorg, your views are shortsighted
Not So Common: And what about the quite Common natural abortions, not initiated by any medication or anyone, and often to the potential mother's great dismay? Would you blame your fantasy figure way up high, or accept that certain fetuses aren't viable, or the mother not in shape to carry to terms? Nature takes care of some miscarriages; the woman has to step in herself where nature comes short.
Not So Common, Could you please compare and contrast the pain you felt with your last pregnancy with the pain you felt while a fetus in the womb?
Good morning, Jorg and Westy
The right side of the aisle uses its leverage to block common sense legislation, however, over the past 30 years, the left side of the aisle has controlled seven different congressional sessions and did not use its leverage to introduce legislation that would reflect Americans' prevailing belief that abortion should be legal. An overwhelming majority of Americans belief that abortion should be legal, and a nearly same majority of Americans belief that late term abortions should not be legal. Meeting in the middle is not a compromise solution as most Americans already support a rational approach to abortion.
Interestingly, an item appeared in the NYT on Wednesday. There is talk from the right side of the aisle about a 16-week national abortion ban, with exceptions in cases of rape, incest or risk to a mother's life. This type of plan is less restrictive than abortion legislation typically found in the EU. Such a plan would not satisfy the extremists on both ends of the political spectrum, but it could make abortion more of a health care issue instead of a political one.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.