If you are pro-choice

….and favor the belief that we should be working to reduce abortions….the logical question is why.

Which Jill Stanek asks here. It’s a conversation starter, because it recognizes as a premise that abortion is not a ‘good’ to be promoted (leaving aside for a moment that many supporters do), but a ‘necessary evil’ (not their words exactly) that (they contend) women must have recourse to out of necessity.

I have wanted for years to generate or hear a dialogue between pro-life people and abortion supporters that starts with the admission of what abortion factually is, and covers what we now know abortion does to women, with 36 years of evidence since Roe. We know what it does to the pre-born human being.

Pro-choice feminist Naomi Wolf wrote a provocative article many years ago about the need for abortion supporters to start admitting that it takes human life, because pro-lifers had so successfully exposed the language of euphemisms pro-choicers relied on, and changed the debate. It was a long and rather wrenching article, sort of a letter to the abortion movement, and I’ve given a copy or two to abortion clinic workers over the years. Hoping they would consider the truths contained in it.

Now this ‘common ground’ meeting arranged by the White House. President Obama understands there’s tension within his own views on the State’s role in private matters…..no limits on abortion, but no freedom of conscience for physicians who oppose it. If, as Jill says, there were only two pro-life groups represented in this teleconference call, that’s regrettable and may constitute token symbolism. But I’m not that cynical. Concerned Women for America and Democrats for Life are very good organizations. It’s a start.

Recognize this is a concession. If America is as pro-abortion as the other side likes to say, there is absolutely no reason to “reduce the need for abortion.”…