Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, April 20, 2007
Kathleen Parker :: Townhall.com Columnist
A Supreme Test of Human Sanity
by Kathleen Parker
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


WASHINGTON -- From the clamor following the Supreme Court's ruling to ban partial-birth abortion, one might assume that American women have been robbed of choice.

In fact, women can still render themselves unpregnant, in the vernacular of choice-speak, by several means. They can ``disarticulate the fetus'' and even ``reduce'' or ``separate the fetal calvarium.''

If the vocabulary is confusing, that's the point. Using Orwellian language to sanitize the issue, so to speak, is a time-honored tactic of the ``pro-choice'' arbiters. If we don't say what it is, we can pretend what it isn't.

Herewith, a brief translation:

Disarticulating a fetus, which sounds like suspending a pre-born's instant-messaging privileges, means to dismember it. Reducing a calvarium -- a thoroughly desirable-sounding procedure, like lancing a boil -- means to suck the brains from the baby's head. Separating the calvarium means to sever the head with scissors.

Paying attention to the language of abortion -- or anything else for that matter -- is instructive when trying to consider right from wrong. If you have to dress something up to obfuscate the truth of what's in play, you can probably assume it's wrong.

When a man murders his wife, we don't say, ``Mr. X rendered his wife unalive by efficiently evacuating her cranial cavity with an instrument customarily associated with construction.'' We say, ``He bashed her brains out in a brutal attack with a claw hammer.''

We apparently have no stomach for similarly descriptive (honest) terminology when it comes to the unborn. But then, one might argue, Mrs. X -- unlike a fetus -- was a completely alive human being when Mr. X committed the deed.

With its ``partial-birth abortion'' (PBA) decision, the Supreme Court took a step toward defining the aliveness of not-quite-born human beings and drew a bright line between abortion and infanticide.

Until now, a baby whose head was still inside the mother's body was not alive enough to be protected under the laws of a nation that calls itself civilized. Understandably, it's easier to kill a baby -- sorry, ``terminate a fetus'' -- when you don't have to see its face.

Now, if a baby's body has been partly delivered from its mother, it is alive enough to be protected.

Opponents of the ruling assert that this is a dark day for Americans' constitutional rights and women's right to choose. They say this ruling is merely part of the pro-life strategy for gutting Roe v. Wade, one ruling at a time. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kathleen Parker is a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Kathleen Parker's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
xxooxxxo
i think this is the end. you say "no drew you're wrong" and i say "no D57, you're wrong."

it was destined to end this way. to part on a friendly note, thanks D57 for an interesting conversation. i even learned a thing or two.

JJ, thanks to you too.

Dissenter57
I'm just wondering, idly, whether this is the sum total of the size of your mind after all that "law school"??? Are we reduced to THIS?

Jezzzzz. What a waste of an education. You may have memorised a lot of disconnected facts, and scraps of law knowledge, but you havent learned much. At all.

When you arent copying long tracts of law references to post, you dont make ANY sense. you also seem completely incapable of actually grasping anything new. Same old same old...
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.