My comment on NY Times editorial re: state abortion wars: new criteria to justify/legalize abortions

RE: Two Abortion Wars: State Battles Over Roe V. Wade, January 29, 2010

I disagree with the Times’ support of any “viability standard.” Whose, pray tell, viability are we talking about? Still, if we accept the premises of the “viability argument,” the Times must accept that we will continuously argue about ‘how many weeks.’

The Times now proposes horrific new justifications for abortion: “severe fetal anomalies” and “a tragic fetal diagnosis.” Using the Times’ “logic,” it is permissible to restrict, maybe ban, ‘abortion’ after “viability” of a human person. Except, the Times now wants to permit abortion, i.e., killing people (albeit 24 or 36 weeks old; or, logically, 24 months or 36 years old) with, generically speaking, undesirable disabilities.

The slippery slope of “abortion rights” is starkly before us.

Americans must respond with all our might to oppose outrageous legalization of terminating life because the person has a “tragic diagnosis.”