In the wake of the 1973 Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision, the pro abortion movement launched a brilliant PR strategy complete with an official description: pro-choice. Now, apparently, the term “pro-choice” has run its course. Planned Parenthood officials say they’d prefer the words women’s health — or economic security — to describe the organization’s mission.
This coming from a group that derives more than half of its clinic income from abortions.
Why the change? Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood’s President, told The New York Times. “I just think the ‘pro-choice’ language doesn’t really resonate particularly with a lot of young women voters.”
She’s right. Surveys show young women are increasingly pro-life. We can now see into the womb and guess what? That’s a real baby in there that will die if the mother chooses abortion. Better, says Planned Parenthood to talk about choosing health.
But abortion isn’t healthy. It’s always lethal for the baby and can be dangerous to the mother. That’s why so many states are passing laws requiring that abortion providers have admitting privileges at a local hospital. In case of complications, which happen all the time during and after abortions. Texas passed such a law about a year ago and the number of abortion clinics has dropped precipitously.
Planned Parenthood, of course, always challenges these laws in court. Recently a panel for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that these regulations are perfectly constitutional in Texas. Mississippi falls under the same jurisdiction Yet, the 5th Circuit, more recently struck down Mississippi’s law which regulates clinics just the way Texas’s law does.
The reasoning: The law would result in the closing of the last remaining abortion clinic in Mississippi. Mississippi would be the first abortion-free state in the nation. And that’s somehow unconstitutional.
The panel said it imposes a burden on a woman seeking abortion not to have an abortion clinic in her state. Yet sixty percent of Mississippi women obtaining abortions traveled to another state for the procedure.
If this decision stands, substandard clinics could be left open. Michael New pointed out, in his recent National Review article on this decision, that “The owner of Mississippi’s lone abortion clinic, Dianne Derzis, was also the owner of the All Woman New Woman abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama.” That clinic was deemed unsafe and the state shut it down. Dr. New concluded, “It would be unfortunate if Mississippi’s Department of Health would be unable to completely enforce various health and safety rules because of this ruling.”
The abortion rights crowd wants to be thought of as protecting women’s health. But it’s fighting laws that do just that. The decision by the fairly conservative 5th Circuit Court of Appeal panel could result in a brand new right to have a functioning abortion clinic in your state. At a time when the public is becoming more pro-life, we should not be creating more rights to kill.