In September of 2018, I wrote a post about Roe v. Wade and the possibility that it might be overturned. (It was the time of the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh.) At that time, I said this:
“What people don’t understand in the debate over a woman’s right to choose is that we are not evenly divided between those who support a woman’s right to choose and those who oppose abortion. Actually, views on abortion are divided among four groups: (i) those who oppose a woman’s right to choose under virtually any circumstances; (ii) those who want abortion available virtually without restriction; (iii) those who would allow it in some situations; and (iv) those who allow it in many circumstances.
With the courts making the decisions about a woman’s right to choose, the fight has mostly been between those in group (i) and those in group (ii); i.e., between those with the more extreme views. If we let our legislatures and people decide, which is what would happen if Roe v. Wade were overturned, what you would relatively quickly find is that, instead of the debate being between groups (i) and (ii), it would be between and among those in groups (iii) and (iv). Instead of the argument being between those who absolutely oppose abortion and those who absolutely approve it, the argument would be between those in the middle, those who support a woman’s right to choose, but with some restrictions. The discussion would be over what the restrictions should be, not whether the right should exist.
The result would be that women would still have the right to choose to have an abortion. It might be somewhat more limited than it is now, as it is in countries Europe. Abortions at 24 weeks might not be available on demand. Maybe the time limit would be 18 weeks or 20 weeks. Women under sixteen or eighteen might need to get parental consent for an abortion. I don’t know what the exact age would be, but that’s the point. The rules would be set by the legislature, not the courts. They would be decided by those in the middle, not argued over by those on the extremes. But the right to choose would remain – and there would be less controversy over it and probably more support for it.”
I still think this could happen. The problem is that the people in groups (i) and (ii), i.e., the people who oppose all abortion and the people who want no limits on abortion, have inflamed the issue even more than it was four years ago. How long it will take for responsible leaders to work with the people in the middle to come up with reasonable compromises may be longer than I suggested in 2018. I am particularly concerned about the lack of responsible leaders. It is so much easier to appeal to the activists and extremes (as we have seen with so many Republican leaders still sucking up to Donald Trump). But when we finally get responsible leaders to help us, the great middle of America can and will solve the abortion issue.
Comments