In a blog regarding technology one might wonder how on earth the topic of abortion would be addressed, especially with the premise that the pro-lifers have lost the case. Read on.
It was about 1903 that the pro-life lobby lost the case. This was before the pro-life lobby was even started as we know it, so how can that be? Simple. The argument was lost before it began, and it lost when the Wright brothers flew their plane. Their wonderful invention opened up opportunities, including air travel for the masses. The invention of the jet and the coming age of widespread, inexpensive jet travel sealed the deal. Anywhere on the planet was reachable quickly. But… how is this relevant?
Simple answer: let’s assume that the pro-lifers manage to get abortion banned. How much is a ticket out of the country to a clinic elsewhere? Cheap. Currently it’s about $300 to $500 if you buy an advance ticket. A clinic visit is not expensive either. Nor is RU-486 (no clinic necessary.) This is easily afforded by the middle class. I could afford this. I’ve been able to afford this for most of my working life. An abortion ban would not stop abortions from happening, especially for anyone middle class and up. And frankly my guess is that an abortion ban would have planned parenthood taking donations for plane flights. Lots of donations. Even many of the poor would not be affected. Technology — jet travel in this case — makes the entire argument moot.
Some abortion foes try to make the case that, well, aside from this being a moral issue, they’ll argue that this is really a state’s rights case. Leave it up to the individual states, they say, and take it from the feds because the federal government shouldn’t be “inventing” new constitutional rights. Damned activist judges, anyhow. And of course they reckon that at the state level they can get the state legislatures to put a stop to it (the two for one special.) Ummm… no. The same rules apply; those wanting an abortion can just drive to CA or wherever they’re legal. When SCOTUS rendered the Roe v Wade decision, smarter and cooler heads knew that all it would take is ONE (1) state to allow it, and all bets are off. And that one state would probably be California. The state’s rights argument is simply impractical.
In short, the pro-life stance has been defeated by technology, and there’s no going back. One would hope that the socially conservative brand of republicans would learn some pragmatism here, that they’re wasting time, money, and political capital on a battle that even if they win, they still lose. There’s little point to owning the moral high ground if a) nobody really gives a damn, and b) ownership means never getting elected. The point of politics is to get elected, after all.
