Chuck Colson

Warning: The descriptions in this commentary are graphic.

You may recall that after President Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban into law, pro-abortion groups immediately challenged it in court. Those cases are now being tried in New York , California, and Nebraska. But abortion advocates may have gone too far this time, because in those courtrooms the ugly truth about partial-birth abortion is coming out for everyone to hear.

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American  Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), is attending the New York  trial and posting his notes on the ACLJ website. Jay has recorded some incredibly revealing exchanges between Judge Richard Casey and the witnesses for the abortionists. For instance, Judge Casey asked one abortionist whether the fetus felt pain during the procedure. The doctor responded, ?I have no idea.? When the judge pressed the question, the doctor admitted that he had never seen any studies on fetal pain and never wondered during a procedure whether the fetus might be in pain, but that now that he came to think about it, it must feel some kind of pain. The judge asked other abortionists the same question and even heard testimony from an expert on fetal pain.

It appears that Judge Casey was insistent on getting an answer to this question because he had been well informed about the procedure. Under intense questioning by the judge and the government?s attorneys, the abortion doctors described the partial-birth procedure in detail. At one point, a doctor told the judge that the fetal skull is crushed by forceps that are ?like an end of tongs you use to pick up a salad.? Judge Casey said, ?Except in this case you are not picking up a salad; you are crushing a baby?s skull.? He then asked whether the baby?s hands or feet were moving during the abortion. The doctor answered that the feet were moving until the skull was crushed. It?s small wonder that the judge was so sure that this procedure means terrible pain for the fetus.

According to press reports, similar facts are coming out in the California and Nebraska courts. And that?s not all that?s coming to light. Over and over again, abortionists admitted that they could not think of any cases where partial-birth abortion was necessary to preserve the health of the mother. In fact, as Sekulow points out in his own reflections on the case, in 1999 in Kansas?the only state that requires a report on the reason for a partial-birth abortion?in every case of a partial-birth abortion the reason given was ?mental health.?

What will happen as the trials end is anybody?s guess. After all, Judge Casey and his fellow judges in California and Nebraska are the same ones who originally blocked enforcement of the partial-birth abortion ban. A favorable ruling may be too much to expect from them. But whatever happens with the ruling, something truly remarkable has already happened. In the most public of settings, the truth is finally being told by the very people who perform this ghastly, heinous procedure. Now we can only hope that the truth will set us free from it once and for all.


For further reading and information:

Jay Sekulow, ? Protecting the Ban on Partial-Birth Abortion: A Trial Notebook ,? American  Center for Law and Justice. Updated frequently.

Cathy Cleaver Ruse, Esq., ? Forum: Abortion trials and tribulations ,? Washington Times, 25 April 2004 .

Joseph A. D?Agostino, ? Partial-Birth Abortion Trial: Babies Feel Pain ,? Human Events Online, 30 April 2004 .

Susan Saulny, ? Justice Dept. Drops Demand for Hospital?s Abortion Files ,? New York Times, 27 April 2004 . (Archived article; costs $2.95 to retrieve.)

David Kravets, ? Language causes abortion issues ,? Detroit Free Press, 21 April 2004 .

?ACLJ: Medical Experts Testify Partial-Birth Abortion Never Medically Necessary ,? BusinessWire, 16 April 2004 .

BreakPoint Commentary No. 030312, ? Offending Human Dignity: The Partial-Birth Horror .?

BreakPoint Commentary No. 031106, ? Never Give Up: Banning (Finally) Partial-Birth Abortion .?

BreakPoint Commentary No. 030121, ? Dismembering the Law: The Rise of ?Antijural Jurisprudence.? ?

BreakPoint Commentary No. 040422, ? A Little Too Much Reality TV: Televising an Abortion .?

Peggy Noonan, ? ?Raisin? and Falling ,? Wall Street Journal, 29 April 2004 .

John Dawson, ? Painfully unaware ,? World, 24 April 2004 .

Read President Bush?s remarks at the 2004 March for Life.

Charles Donovan , ? Good Things to Life ,? BreakPoint Online, 15 April 2003 .

?A Right to Know ? is a helpful booklet from Stand to Reason that provides current abortion law for the U.S. and Canada, describes the pro-life position and why it is sound, discusses four dishonest ways people argue for abortion, and provides great resources if you?re in a crisis pregnancy.

The BreakPoint Culture of Life Packet  includes a booklet from Family Research Council that helps you see what you can do to change our culture, and a ?BreakPoint This Week? CD interview with William Saunders of the Family Research Council discussing how to ?build a culture of life? today.


Chuck Colson

Chuck Colson was the Chief Counsel for Richard Nixon and served time in prison for Watergate-related charges. In 1976, Colson founded Prison Fellowship Ministries, which, in collaboration with churches of all confessions and denominations, has become the world's largest outreach to prisoners, ex-prisoners, crime victims, and their families.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Chuck Colson's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.