Photo

Photo

Pages

Thursday, July 24, 2014

Limiting Abortion With Science


The Republican Party is gearing up for the mid terms and part of that is figuring out how to position social issues.  Abortion has been a hot topic for democrats and frankly they out marketed republicans in the last cycle complete with their “War on Women” hashtag.

In the past republicans have run into the corner of the boxing ring to avoid the topic of abortion.  It’s a hot button issue and one which many women voters support the other side.  In the past, the argument against those who are pro-life has been to ridicule them for their religious beliefs, and then to declassify the baby into a “clump of cells.”

The republicans are finally using their “lady smarts,” (a Michelle Malkin phrase) and are planning on beating the democrats at their own game.  They realize they can’t win the abortion debate by making a religious case, they need to win by using science. 

The New York Times just ran an article discussing the republican plan.  See the article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/us/politics/republicans-abortion-midterm-elections.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSumSmallMediaHigh&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0  These republican women are 100% correct.  Most women, when polled, are completely against abortion in later months.  They need to market accordingly.

What has changed?  Why aren’t many women buying the “clump of cells” argument anymore?  Simply, it’s the utilization of ultrasounds, specifically 3D ultrasounds, as well as the advances for babies born prematurely.

Time Magazine ran an article on June 2, 2014 about the advances science has made for the care of premature babies. See the article here: http://time.com/108708/the-cutting-edge-medicine-saving-preemies/

What is amazing is that babies we never thought could survive are able to do so.  According to the article, in 1960 the survival rate for a 3.3lb baby was 28%, in 2010 it was 78%.  Things have drastically changed since Roe V Wade. Some other interesting stats from the article regarding premies: At 22 weeks survival is 5%, at 23 weeks survival is 26%, at 24 weeks survival is 56%, and at 25 weeks survival is 76%.  The New York Times published abortion restrictions by state: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/18/us/politics/abortion-restrictions.html?_r=0    9 states have no restriction on gestational age, 26 states restrict abortion at 24-26 weeks, 8 states restrict abortion at 22 weeks. What this means is that 43 of 50 states allow abortion on babies that have a high probability of surviving outside of the womb. The only difference between the premie babies in the article and the ones which are aborted, are that the mothers wanted them. This is something most pro-choice women can’t even justify.  There is no doubt when looking at these statistics, they are killing viable babies.

Although I disagree with the democrats on mostly everything, I do think they have republicans beat on marketing.  It’s about time that we take a page out of their book and use their tactics against them.  One thing they do successfully is chip away at a little at a time until they eventually get everything they want.  We won’t have the opportunity to make changes in abortion policy without winning the mid-terms.  We need to focus where we can win, and here we can win using science.

 

0 comments:

Post a Comment