While eating my late breakfast here I’m watching CNN and they’ve dedicated about 5 minutes (long in the news world) to Live Action, the anti-abortion group. The protest group has released videos of conversations behind closed doors with abortion providers trying to catch them breaking the law or, rather, advocating breaking the law. Policymic.com has a nice article relaying Live Action’s message, factoids on abortion and any rebuttals.
The location is Washington D.C. and the law in question says (and I’m loosely summarizing) that if during an abortion procedure a fetus (or unborn child if you prefer) is born during or before the abortion can complete, the doctor must save it. Live Action is maintaining that some of their recorded conversations indicate the doctors would not abide by that law.
The law may be well-intentioned as abortion is full of gray areas, but it seems to me that an abortion doctor would be pretty incompetent if a baby was born during an abortion. I believe the idea of the law is if the mother went into labor while waiting for an abortion, then the procedure would have to be called off unless her life was at risk. Otherwise, imagine the issues with delivering a half-aborted fetus? Late term abortions also fall into about 1.4% of all performed abortions and are not done lightly; usually they are due to pregnancy complications or complications with the fetus.
The only reason I’m pointing this CNN story out is that “pro-lifers” feel underrepresented when it comes to the media. Live Action received a good spot on a major news channel. The reporter clearly stated their side, showed the video footage and then simply ended the story with a rundown of any remaining questions on Live Action themselves. Live Action got their airtime by being creative, albeit questionable as it was undercover (though nothing I haven’t seen done on 20/20), instead of the usual whining about the liberal media we hear from protest groups who carry the same old signs.
A majority of atheists and unbelievers are pro-choice and could care less about Live Action, a minority are not such as the late Christopher Hitchens (who I saw in a couple of debates had mentioned he thought abortion to be wrong, but didn’t know what policy or law would make sense). I believe the irony, in relation to pro-life Christians, is that we will not end abortion by force or “God’s will,” but eradicate abortion by way of medical technology. Women of the future will have more control than ever over their bodies and when they will conceive. This, unfortunately, is what Christians have been fighting against when they won’t allow for easy access to contraception methods by both teens and adults (as contraception smacks of promoting sex before marriage). More irony, if you ask me.
SIDENOTE: And when I say women will have more control over their bodies I don’t mean traditional contraception. I mean they could actually, for lack of better phrasing, flip an internal switch off when they want to have sex for pleasure or flip a switch on when they want to conceive. Abortions due to pregnancy complications will be minimized to almost nothing due to medical techniques. Concerns over aborting a fetus because they may be mentally retarded or inherit a disease could also be eliminated due to genetic engineering (which scares a lot of people who think everything should be left up to nature). This is the stuff of science fiction right now, but science fiction is quickly becoming reality.