By now you’ve all read Andrew Coyne on the abortion debate. Good piece and I appreciate it. I’m all for a debate. “The debate is over” is a pretty constant refrain amongst abortion supporters. Translation: “I personally enjoy–and agree with–the status quo.”
When are issues truly “over”? Perhaps we can declare certain issues to be decided and done-like-dinner with the benefit of hindsight–I’m talking the benefit of decades, maybe a century. But nowadays we seek resolution within 22 minute sitcoms and anything longer is protracted, unwieldy, divisive–or “over.”
Now reopening what was never actually broached would be great. But it’s not the debate I look forward to. It is the moment when we all unify in our civilized society to understand that killing babies in the womb doesn’t solve our problems. Reopening the debate is certainly a step in the right direction, don’t get me wrong. But it’s certainly not a pro-life thing to do or say. The United Kingdom–they debated indeed, and couldn’t manage to limit the killing to a point when we’re sure the child isn’t fully sentient and doesn’t experience pain (their abortion limit is 24 weeks, some fetal pain experts argue a baby suffers his or her own death at 20. I’m not a fetal pain expert, and that’s not my point.)
So what is my point this cranky Wednesday? My point is this: The debate is not the point. It’s killing babies in the womb (abortion) that’s the point. I will never agree that killing babies in the womb is a solution. So as long as I’m living, there will be at least one girl to counter this here current status quo. There are of course, many more like me. That means an ongoing debate, and one that one round of legislation couldn’t possibly solve. Get ready. Rome wasn’t built in a day.