Michael Gerson's Outlook on Abortion
TOOLBOX   Resize Text
 Save/Share +
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Michael Gerson, ostensibly pro-life, is startlingly cavalier about the lives of women when he attacks anyone who might oppose a ban on "partial birth" abortion -- the political term for intact dilation and evacuation ["Obama's Abortion Extremism," op-ed, April 2].
Restrictions on partial-birth abortions are one thing, but a large number of partial-birth abortions are performed when mothers' lives are in danger or when severe developmental problems have been detected in fetuses. To ban the procedure outright does nothing to prevent late-stage abortion but merely leaves non-intact dilation and extraction methods as the sole resort of women whose lives may be in danger -- methods that many doctors deem riskier and more likely to cause infertility.
KAREN FRANTZ
Policy and Advocacy Associate
American Humanist Association
Washington
