(The Root) — National Review Editor Rich Lowry has penned an op-ed at Politico titled “Barack Obama the Abortion Extremist.” The headline jumped out of me because of its hyperbolic nature. An abortion extremist?
What the heck is an abortion extremist? According to Lowry:
From a strictly down-the-middle, neutral perspective, if one side of a debate is “extreme,” the opposite and countervailing side is equally “extreme.” It would never even occur to the media to apply this standard to abortion. Under the guise of upholding abortion rights, Barack Obama could favor denying legal protection to babies after they are born and the press wouldn’t bat an eyelash.
Wait — what?
This definition of “extreme” — and the preceding argument — doesn’t quite come together. In the discussion on a woman’s right to choose, there are those who want to take away that right, to force women to deal with pregnancies no matter what their circumstances. Then there are those who want to force women to have abortions, to create government rules that dictate that all women must have abortions if certain criteria — decided by the government — are met.
Wait — no one actually wants to do the latter. Abortion extremists don’t exist. To attempt to create an equivalency between people who think a woman should carry her rapist’s baby and those who think a woman should have a choice whether she carries her rapist’s baby is preposterous.
You may believe that life begins at conception, but once you desire and attempt to create legislation on those beliefs — to dictate the actions a woman takes with her doctor — you’re extreme. The left side of this argument simply doesn’t have an equal and opposite position. Obama’s stance on what is life or when it begins doesn’t have any bearing on his final position.
Let a woman choose.