NYC Letter: 54,559,615 Abortions

Day 1,098 of CHOPE

Sunday was the 39th anniversary of the Roe v Wade ruling. The day was commemorated as it has been every year since Roe by the annual pro-life March For Life.

NEW YORK TIMES IGNORES
MASSIVE PRO-LIFE MARCH FOR
FIFTH YEAR IN A ROW

January 24, 2012 (NewsBusters) - For the fifth year in a row, there was no story in the Times print edition on the annual March for Life against abortion in Washington, D.C., which every year draws massive crowds in unpromising weather on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court's decision legalizing abortion.

... The Times is far more eager to publicize protests in support of liberal causes, no matter how puny. When four protesters marched in support of the doomed Dream Act to grant amnesty to illegal immigrant students, the Times marked the occasion with a 780-word story.

Mixing his liberal triumphalism with an attaboy for the pro-life losers of Roe, Mr. Obama had a few cheering words on the anniversary.

As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right. While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue - no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption. And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.

Only our sons have no rights in the begotten.

Earlier at Hot Air we mused how ironic that people of conscience are the emblems of the civil rights battles of the 1950s and 60s, while the right to abortion has only an anonymous plaintiff and a panel of 7 jurists. Norma McCorvey, the Roe of Roe v Wade, came to regret how her circumstances were exploited to establish a right to abortion and repudiated the ruling in her favor. This of course renders her completely useless for liberal celebrations of Roe v Wade.

So there is no Roe behind the liberal retelling of the heroic battle for a right to abort. No person represents the story of the celebrated ruling. Pro-abortionists are left with only the government to applaud. And 39 years later, Mr. Obama applauds.

A DIY Constitutionalist, Mr. Obama declares abortion "this fundamental constitutional right", but as Justice Rehnquist -- more of a Constitutional Constitutionalist -- argued in his dissent (Part II):

The fact that a majority of the States reflecting, after all, the majority sentiment in those States, have had restrictions on abortions for at least a century is a strong indication, it seems to me, that the asserted right to an abortion is not "so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental," Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 105 (1934). ... To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. Conn. Stat., Tit. 22, 14, 16. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth [410 U.S. 113, 175] Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. ... There apparently was no question concerning the validity of this provision or of any of the other state statutes when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. The only conclusion possible from this history is that the drafters did not intend to have the Fourteenth Amendment withdraw from the States the power to legislate with respect to this matter.

But that, as Mr. Obama might say, is so much insider baseball. It certainly is more argument than Mr. Obama can field.

54,559,615
ABORTIONS SINCE ROE VS. WADE
DECISION IN 1973

January 23, 2012 (Life News) - In a new document, "Abortion Statistics: United States Data and Trends," NRLC [scil., National Right to Life Committee] education director Dr. Randall K. O’Bannon estimates that there have been 54,559,615 abortions since 1973 based on data from both the Centers for Disease Control and the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, a former Planned Parenthood research arm.

The abortion total is greater than any single state population, greater than the entire populations of the second and third most populous states combined.*

On this grim anniversary there is some heartening news.

"After reaching a high of over 1.6 million in 1990, the number of abortions annually performed in the U.S. has dropped back to levels not seen since the late 1970s," NRLC says.

... As abortions have declined, the number of surgical abortion centers has declined as well. According to Operation Rescue, in 1991, there were over 2,176 surgical abortion clinics in America. Today there are 663. Nearly 70% of all surgical abortion clinics have closed in that time.

A right to abortion is not a forever proposition. It is a liberal notion fashioned from the penumbra of law. We doubt Roe will be overturned anytime soon, but Mr. Obama will soon vacate high office and abortionists will lose a powerful advantage.

CHOPE.

The first, the preeminent right -- life itself.

------------------------------------
* №2 Texas 25,145,561 + №3 New York 19,378,102 = 44,523,663

Posted by Damian at January 24, 2012 11:45 PM